09-07-2014, 02:38
Dont expect consistency, especially from Channel 4 as it exists to target different audiences. One week it will be the blue rinse and set brigade, another week the same crew will use the same slot to target disaffected teens. What one audience tolerates, even requires to stay watching will turn the other off.
There are two problems here, apart from shelf censorship.
One is that there is no way for a broadcaster to test the boundaries without risking a fine. They can repeat a show weekly for 5 years without incident, and then get hit win a Breach notice because one toerag complained.
Ofcom refuse to watch a show in advance and say if it is "legal" or not because "they arent censors". The few times advance guidance has been given it has backfired - Playboy was told something would be OK by a duty officer only to fall foul or the rules. Ofcom said guidance had not been given, and even if it had been it would not have been official, yah boo sucks.
The result is that broadcasters selfcensor, and most will play safe rather than push at the boundary of acceptability. Noone will have reached a senior editorial role by being a dangerous revolutionary who gets their employer heavy fines or loss of licence.
Second there is no mechanism to complain about bland content or not being offended. Its a oneway street. Generally push to stronger content comes from audiences voting with their feet and broadcasters reacting to get them back.
Comedy gets ruder until it gets too hot or a fraction of the audience gets offended and leaves (Frankie Boyle/Mock The Week). Horror and drama get more violent, more aggressive, more threatening if it pulls in audience (True Detective, Whitechapel, Braquo, Penny Dreadful, the Horror Channel). Teen sitcoms get ruder and swearier (The Inbetweeners).
But none of these risk a serious telling off, fine or loss of licence. Its just a question of hitting the commericial sweet spot between pulling in audience who like to be challenged and losing disaffected audience with different tastes.
However when it comes to sexual content Omfoc is intolerant, a small but vocal section of the population are intolerant, a shit stirring paper knows what headlines sell, some MPs will jump on the bandwagon and no MP will stand up and say their constituents like sex.
Result a oneoff minor infringement of a severity that would be tolerated for a different type of material attracts punishment first time.
Swearing at a music festival one daytime TV? Slapped wrist. Violent scene broadcast in daytime, explanation accepted. Dodgy charity collection, dont do it again. Graphic horror, Jew baiting, mocking the disabled, supernatural scariness, nonstop swearing after 9 - all OK with a warning. Wearing a bikini - threaten licence withdrawal, demand a visit to head office to be lectured about compliance.
Offence - complaint mechanism exists
Boring content -> no complaint mechanism -> inconsistency
There are two problems here, apart from shelf censorship.
One is that there is no way for a broadcaster to test the boundaries without risking a fine. They can repeat a show weekly for 5 years without incident, and then get hit win a Breach notice because one toerag complained.
Ofcom refuse to watch a show in advance and say if it is "legal" or not because "they arent censors". The few times advance guidance has been given it has backfired - Playboy was told something would be OK by a duty officer only to fall foul or the rules. Ofcom said guidance had not been given, and even if it had been it would not have been official, yah boo sucks.
The result is that broadcasters selfcensor, and most will play safe rather than push at the boundary of acceptability. Noone will have reached a senior editorial role by being a dangerous revolutionary who gets their employer heavy fines or loss of licence.
Second there is no mechanism to complain about bland content or not being offended. Its a oneway street. Generally push to stronger content comes from audiences voting with their feet and broadcasters reacting to get them back.
Comedy gets ruder until it gets too hot or a fraction of the audience gets offended and leaves (Frankie Boyle/Mock The Week). Horror and drama get more violent, more aggressive, more threatening if it pulls in audience (True Detective, Whitechapel, Braquo, Penny Dreadful, the Horror Channel). Teen sitcoms get ruder and swearier (The Inbetweeners).
But none of these risk a serious telling off, fine or loss of licence. Its just a question of hitting the commericial sweet spot between pulling in audience who like to be challenged and losing disaffected audience with different tastes.
However when it comes to sexual content Omfoc is intolerant, a small but vocal section of the population are intolerant, a shit stirring paper knows what headlines sell, some MPs will jump on the bandwagon and no MP will stand up and say their constituents like sex.
Result a oneoff minor infringement of a severity that would be tolerated for a different type of material attracts punishment first time.
Swearing at a music festival one daytime TV? Slapped wrist. Violent scene broadcast in daytime, explanation accepted. Dodgy charity collection, dont do it again. Graphic horror, Jew baiting, mocking the disabled, supernatural scariness, nonstop swearing after 9 - all OK with a warning. Wearing a bikini - threaten licence withdrawal, demand a visit to head office to be lectured about compliance.
Offence - complaint mechanism exists
Boring content -> no complaint mechanism -> inconsistency