Legal
Services
Latest News
| |
Bringing you regular news of key developments in broadcasting regulation.
OFCOM
Ofcom successfully defends judicial review by Jon Gaunt, 13 July 2010
“Shock jock” DJ, Jon Gaunt, has failed in his claim for judicial review of Ofcom’s decision that his live interview of a Redbridge borough councillor on Talksport breached the Ofcom Broadcasting Code. Upholding Ofcom’s decision, the Court held that, although the interview was one where Jon Gaunt’s freedom of expression should be accorded a high degree of protection, his freedom of expression did not extend to “gratuitous offensive insult or abuse” or “to repeated abusive shouting which serves to express no real content”. This is the first time that Ofcom has faced judicial review in relation to one of its decisions under the Broadcasting Code.
Judgment.
Sponsorship: Scottish Government sponsorship of programmes, STV, 2008 and 2009, various dates and times
Following an extensive investigation into 57 programmes sponsored by the Scottish Government, including considering the underlying contractual arrangements and related documentation, Ofcom has found that 18 of those programmes, across five series, breached the Code. The majority of the breaches resulted because the editorial content was too closely linked to the Scottish Government. STV had sought programme funding to create editorial content that conveyed a positive message about the sponsor or its activities, or to portray it in a favourable light. In Ofcom’s view, the programmes that breached the Code were effectively vehicles for promoting the Scottish Government’s interests and, as a result, STV’s editorial independence had been impaired.
Ofcom’s decisions.
Privacy: Complaint by Michael Reynolds, ITV News at Ten, ITV1, 31 March 2010
The filming of the complainant walking along a public street as part of a large crowd of people did not infringe his privacy, nor did the broadcast of the footage ten years later. Ofcom considered that anyone who went out in public had to accept that they would not only be seen by other members of the public, but that they might also be photographed or filmed and that such photographs or footage might be broadcast. Unless there were other factors or aggravating circumstances, individuals would generally have no reasonable expectation that they would not be photographed or filmed while walking along a public street or that such photographs or footage would not be broadcast.
Ofcom’s decision.
Fairness: Complaints by Nestlé, Kellogg’s and Professor Tom Sanders, Dispatches: What’s In Your Breakfast?, Channel 4, 26 October 2009
In two surprising decisions, Ofcom has held that it was not unfair to deny Nestlé or Kellogg’s the opportunity to contribute to a programme which examined the nutritional content of breakfast products and looked at the marketing techniques used by the industry. This was because Ofcom considered that “no significant allegations of wrongdoing” were made about Nestlé or Kellogg’s in the programme. “No significant allegations of wrongdoing” in fact mis-quotes the Code, which sets out that: “If a programme alleges wrongdoing or incompetence or makes other significant allegations, those concerned should normally be given an appropriate and timely opportunity to respond.” It is difficult to understand how Ofcom concluded that no significant allegations were made about Nestlé or Kellogg’s, given that both companies are major breakfast cereal manufacturers and given the programme’s stated aims to “investigate the multi-billion pound industry behind the most important meal of the day”, to “reveal what’s really in your breakfast”, to examine the application of new European legislation intended to “curb extravagant health claims” and to “reveal how big food companies still manage to target sugary cereals at our children – in spite of rules to stop them”.
In a further surprising decision on a complaint by an individual, Professor Tom Sanders, about the same programme, Ofcom held that it was not unfair to deny Professor Sanders the opportunity to respond to a significant allegation made about him in the programme. This was apparently because Ofcom considered the quoting in the programme of extracts of Professor Sanders’ comments to The Times made in 2005 to be sufficient to avoid unfairness to Professor Sanders.
Ofcom’s decisions.
For further information, please contact:
Eleanor Steyn
341
Simkins' early warning bulletins are for general guidance only. Legal advice should be sought before taking action in relation to specific matters. Where reference is made to Court decisions facts referred to are those reported as found by the Court. Please note that past bulletins included in the Archive have not been updated by any subsequent changes in statute or case law.
<< back to articles & bulletins
|
|