Comments on: Self-contradictory messages on Ofcom code

By: Garry

Garry — Fri, 27 May 2005 22:09:20 +0000

MW have the Daily Mail and the press release on their site.
Quality!
Do they get many of their ideas from MWW, do you think?

By: Steve

Steve — Fri, 27 May 2005 18:08:32 +0000

"Anyone else think this double-talk has a negative impact on Mediawatch-UKâ€s reputation for providing â€œindependent and principled opinionâ€?" We can but hope!

By: Christopher Shell

Christopher Shell — Fri, 27 May 2005 16:58:53 +0000

As I mentioned, offence is not the point. Offence is merely a subjective reaction. The issue is, rather, whether things which are negative and produce negative statistical patterns are presented in such a manner as to be glorified, or to be mistakenly identified as positive.

By: Dan Factor

Dan Factor — Fri, 27 May 2005 16:51:08 +0000

What motivation? What motivation do programme makers have in producing material that may offend someone?

By: Christopher Shell

Christopher Shell — Fri, 27 May 2005 15:29:38 +0000

Why see it as an emotional matter at all? ‘Offence’ is nothing but an emotional reaction. Why not see it as a rational matter: excluding material associated with negative statistical patterns, which could serve no conceivable positive purpose, leading to doubts about the programme-makers’ motivation.

By: Dan Factor

Dan Factor — Fri, 27 May 2005 14:24:42 +0000

The Daily Mail’s reporting of the new Ofcom code is agenda biased moral hysteria typical of this appaling rag.
As for John Beyer and Mediawatch UK.. they should ask themselves how much they want Ofcom to protect viewers from being offended. Even the most innocent thing can be offensive to some viewers (like the black and white Minstrels for instance), should Ofcom really be regulating against anything which could possibly offend anybody?
It’s job is wider than to investigate trivial complaints about programmes shown at gone 1 in the morning.

By: Christopher Shell

Christopher Shell — Fri, 27 May 2005 14:05:02 +0000

Does it show that they have the ability to see both sides of the issue?

By: Andy L

Andy L — Fri, 27 May 2005 11:02:06 +0000

Must be said though, Ofcom’s code allowing 15 rated movies on pin protected channels, while at the same time restricting R18 movies on the basis that kids can apparently easily find out pin numbers (wonder if there’s anything to back that assumption up), is just plain nonsensical.

The code is completely contradictory.