Yesterday, Ofcom circulated a confidential email to broadcasters signalling its intention to increase the strength of its censorship regime. This has been provided anonymously to Sex & Censorship, and is published in the public interest.
Ofcom is better known as the UK’s media and communications regulator, but it is also the UK’s media censor. It is hugely powerful and well funded, formed by the merger of multiple earlier regulators covering various sectors of TV and radio. It has always applied ludicrously stringent censorship, often driven by compaints from a handful of individuals, and it throws out huge fines for the smallest of infringements. Its power began to be eroded by the rise of the internet, broadband, and streaming services, but it has long signalled that it intends to extend it remit over all forms of communication.
Ofcom not only censors the British media, but actually writes its own censorship policy – surely something that should be done by government with parliamentary oversight, rather than an unelected body. British (small-L) liberals have long worried about Ofcom’s power. David Cameron, possibly the most liberal of all Tory leaders, signalled his intention to drastically reduce Ofcom’s power before the 2010 election. Presumably, his wrist was slapped by the establishment, and his pledge was never heard of again.
Yesterday’s email reads as follows:
From: Ofcom Standards Team <[email protected]>
Sent: 18 November 2019
Subject: Note to Broadcasters – Daytime chat and adult chat television services
We would like to draw your attention to the Note to Broadcasters featured in Issue 391 of Ofcom’s Broadcast and On Demand Bulletin which was published today.
The note reminds broadcasters of daytime chat and adult chat services of Ofcom’s guidance in this area and puts these broadcasters on notice that it will be commencing a targeted monitoring exercise of these services. [my highlight]
Standards and Audience Protection team
The linked document is worth reading, because it gives an insight into the tight level of monitoring to which broadcasters are subject. Ofcom has the power to levy fines of hundreds of thousands of pounds, without recourse to the courts. For smaller broadcasters (and streaming companies), these would be impossible to bear. Broadcasters have no option but to tightly self-censor, or be put out of business.
As an afterthought, consider in this context the Labour Party’s recently announced plans for a state-owned, free broadband service. It is unimaginable that the government-run broadband service would allow this to function like a normal ISP that allows full access to the internet, including sexual material or open discussion of difficult issues related to race, sexuality or gender. Given the Tories’ recent attempts to censor the internet, I am deeply distrustful of both major parties with regard to civil liberties, and am keeping my fingers crossed for a hung Parliament.
3 thoughts on “BREAKING: Ofcom Signals Switch to Stronger TV and Streaming Censorship in Leaked Email”
It is unimaginable that the government-run broadband service would allow this to function like a normal ISP that allows full access to the internet, including sexual material or open discussion of difficult issues related to race, sexuality or gender. REALLY try private FACEBOOK or AMAZON for censorship…. if it is state controlled and run then it is possible to control through the ballot box. But the argument has to be made. But with the private companies there is no democratic control
Britain currently has a diversity of ISPs. Some can make their content “family friendly” if they like, but others can choose not to. This happened when Cameron introduced the broadband filters, and some ISPs refused to implement them. Competitive markets allow for resistance against state censorship. Monopolies are disastrous. Whether they’re state-run or private is irrelevent. State media monopolies are not controlled by the ballot box. When did you ever see Ofcom’s censorship of TV being an election issue?
п»їAmy admired Maria, an elegant, confident 34 year old who always looked after her employees
Comments are closed.