Ofcom Discussion

(22-06-2017 00:20 )admiral decker Wrote:  

(21-06-2017 19:37 )babelover48 Wrote:  bring down the Government

Ofcom is independent of Government. It is accountable to Parliament though.

^Officially Yes
Unofficially???

Further to my last post on this thread, Bradley has announced that she will likely concur with Ofcom's findings on the Murdoch deal if she is not swayed by further representations from interested parties put forward over the next two weeks.

https://www.theguardian.com/business/201...authorites
More extensive quotes from Ofcom's report: http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/fo...iew-992690

For anyone who wants a quick precis: Ofcom recommeded a further investigation into the Sky takeover by the CMA on the grounds of "media plurality". During their extended deliberations, Ofcom apparently took a greater time over assessing whether the Murdochs were 'fit and proper' persons to hold the Sky broadcast licence. They also looked at whether the broadcaster would adhere to their standards. They found in the Murdochs favour on these two matters.

The markets are still keen to think that the deal will go through, now that one hurdle has been crossed, but it is judged by them as a 50/50 chance from here on.

Personally, I find it hard not to agree with Tom Watson in that this all has the appearance of going through the familar motions from the government. They want this to be seen as due process but failing a major slip up between now and year end... Other agencies getting involved now will unfortunately not help in laying this firmly at Ofcom's door should the shit hit the fan later on.

Further, Ofcom edged their bets on the now crucial plurality issue somewhat with this: "...remedies that had already been proposed would mitigate the media plurality concerns but could be strengthened." Classic cake and eat it stuff... If you want to allow it they're mitigated, if you don't the remedies need strengthening! That's how to pass the buck and/or allow your paymasters their required upper hand all at the same time!

"appallingly weak”
"serious legal error"
“fundamental failure”
"failed in its duty as a regulator"...

Those are descriptive terms of analysis on Ofcom's recent work for you. They are not my words but those of high level MPs...

Here's a quick summary of latest on the Murdochs and Ofcom:

The extended period for consultation evidence is now over. A decision on whether to refer the Murdoch's second bid for Sky to the CMA is expected next week.

A cross party group of MPs, having put their heads together at the end of June, critised Ofcom for making major errors in the way it judged the scandals at Fox and News Corp and their implications for the take over. The MPs say these have impact on Sky's likely future adherence to Broadcast Standards and say Ofcom should have recommended a straight referral to the CMA! The MPs main aim is to pile the pressure on Culture Secretary Karen Bradley to do just that of course, but it is still a mighty one in the eye for Ofcom.

https://www.theguardian.com/media/2017/j...rofile-mps

The article also highlights profligate Ofcom's latest pay figures. Sharon White took home more than 430K last year, including bonuses - an easy double figure percentage increase. That's nearly three times the pay of the PM! In total her senior management team pocketed £2.5mil (up 200K)! ... Enjoy your 1% pay rise wont you teachers, nurses, policemen, fire brigade...

You know those light hearted bits that used the wipe the arse end of the news on TV... Well, I think someone from up Chesterfield way needs to own up and quick. I bet he's on here! Come on...

http://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/...nkers-song

After several days of rumours in the press the selection of next Ofcom chairman has been formalised: http://www.pressgazette.co.uk/ofcom-name...-chairman/

Hailing from the same government department as Ofcom commander in chief Sharon White (and bringing more experience on the public financies to the regulator) hopefully this guy Burns will allie himself with White's published opinions on internet regulation (she's not keen on Ofcom being given the role). We need to hear more of this sort of thing of late - particularly when the outgoing chairman is yet another official that's been making noises in the opposite direction.

It's also interesting that following Clementi's appointment to the beeb, this move sees the goverment continuing to reward the architects of the BBC's reforms.

(30-11-2017 21:36 )ShandyHand Wrote:  ...hopefully this guy Burns will allie himself with White's published opinions on internet regulation (she's not keen on Ofcom being given the role)...

That would be a no then...

http://www.pressgazette.co.uk/lord-burns...-chairman/

Another official joins the ranks of those wanting to make our internet look like China's.

The much delayed ruling on Fox's full takeover of Sky, refered to upthread, has been provisionally ruled against by the CMA on the grounds of media plurarity. These are the grounds Ofcom passed the buck to the government on in its much criticised report on the buy out.

Fox is putting in further submissions to the CMA in the hopes of changing their mind ahead of the final decision in May.

Full story: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-42785930

On Sky Q boxes they've hidden the adult section do you think this be effecting the babe channels

https://www.sky.com/help/articles/managi...l-settings

(08-03-2018 18:08 )donnafan913 Wrote:  On Sky Q boxes they've hidden the adult section do you think this be effecting the babe channels

https://www.sky.com/help/articles/managi...l-settings

Certainly won't help accrue casual channel surfers who might have previously stumbled across the adult section and got hooked on S66.