dom.blog

Ofcom

Well, me and 64 others who waited 10 months to be told we were right. Still, at least the system works. Albeit slowly.

The Programme Code states that commercial products must not be promoted in programmes. The initial banner message inviting viewers to find out how to obtain extra channels appeared on screen simultaneously with programming. While accepting that it may be necessary from time to time to inform DTT customers of new ‘free-to-air’ channels they can view by resetting their boxes, the purpose of this message was clearly to promote Top Up TV – an additional service which requires a subscription fee to view the extra channels offered. It was not transparent to viewers that the message formed part of an advertising communication until after they had clicked the red button. We consider that the banner message indirectly promoted a commercial service within programming and was therefore in breach of the Programme Code.

The inclusion of the banner advertisement during programmes was in breach of Section 8.1 of the (ex-ITC) Programme Code.

Captain Jack

Captain Jack to get his own series in new Russell T Davies drama for BBC THREE

Russell T Davies is to write a sci-fi paranoid thriller in a major new drama commission for BBC THREE, it was announced today by Stuart Murphy, Controller of BBC THREE.

“Torchwood is a British sci-fi paranoid thriller, a cop show with a sense of humour,” says Davies.

So Captin Jack gets his own TV show, in an anagram of Doctor Who Wonderful!

Hmm… 26 weeks of Doctor Who-related material… that’s half a year’s worth!

More from BBC News and The Independent and hear all about it straight from Russell T Davies himself in mp3.

In December 2004, the station formerly known as Channel 5 screened a promotion for a certain ‘Top Up TV’ overlaid on top of their regular programming. It was crass, it was intrusive and it just happened to contravene a healthy selection of regulations which Five is bound to obey by virtue of its licence. The nation was outraged (well, they would have been if there had been anything worth watching underneath the advert anyway) but were comforted by their white knight – Ofcom! – riding to the rescue and promising to investigate.

Since then, we’ve had decisions on a new Pope and an old Prime Minister. Ofcom, however, took a more leisurely approach to life. In March 2005, 3 months later, they had worked tirelessly and succeeded in having “written to the broadcaster”. I know, because they were kind enough to write another letter and tell me so. I even blogged it.

But never fear, because good things come to those who wait. More specifically – a second letter! And this time, they have the kind heart to enthuse about the “interesting” nature of my complaint. Oh Ofcom – flattery will get you everywhere.

But let’s not get carried away. After all, Ofcom have a difficult task here. Wading through complex legalese, such as “specific promotions for any particular platform service provider… will not be permitted, outside of paid for advertising minutage” and “no interactive icon present during the course of editorial programming may be commercially branded” can be interpreted in many different ways. To a layman, it may appear to ban a commercially branded interactive icon for a particular platform service provider occuring outside of paid for advertising minutage. But I wouldn’t want to jump to any conclusions. Ofcom certainly don’t.