Pros and Cons of Media Regulation

 

Pro’s and Con’s on Media Regulation and key terms By Elisha Fincham In this document I will be debating about the pros and cons of broadcasting and film regulation. I will also be using examples to back up my theory . At the end of my document I will be giving a outline conclusion as to whether media regulation is needed to protect the audience, using broadcasting and film as case studies. Broadcasting in Britain

In the 1920’s the first experimental broadcasts from f rom Marconi’s factory in Chelmsford began. Two years

later a group of radio manufacturers formed the British Broadcasting Company, the BBC. This broadcast continued until it’s licence expired at the end of 1926 so the company became British Broadcasting

Corporation, which was a non-commercial organisation. The BBC stood alone in broadcasting for about 30 years until the development of ITV which back in 1995. ‘The origins of ITV lie in the passing of the Television Act 1954, designed to break the monopoly on

television held by the BBC Television Service. To prevent any commercial network reverting to the 'vulgar' nature of US commercial networks at the time, the act created the Independent Television Authority (ITA) to heavily regulate the industry and to award franchises. ’ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ITV_(TV_network)  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ITV_(TV_network)  The Broadcasting Act began the process of adding a fourth to go along with BBC1 BBC2 and ITV. So in 1982 Channel 4 was created. 9 Years layer Channel 5 followed on. th

On the 30 Feburary 2013 Analogue TV was switched off making Digital television the only way to access BBC1, BBC2, ITV Channel 4, Channel 5 and other developed channels. Analogue TV was switched off for two main reasons, one, there was only enough space for a limited amount of channels and two by turning it off the frequency band could be used for new digital services. The broadcasting act 1990 is a law of parliament; it was enforced to reform the structure of British broadcasting and British television. It lead to the abolition of the ITA replacing ITC (Independent Television Commission) and Radio Authority, which later got replaced by Ofcom which was established by the Office of the Communications Act 2002. The communications Act gave Ofcom its full power in enforcing the Broadcasting code; it also lifted lif ted many restrictions on cross-media ownership. The broadcasting code sets standards for television and radio shows which broadcasters have to follow. fol low. One common rule that the public are aware of is the 9PM watershed, this was a rule Ofcom enforced on all broadcasters, this rule protects viewers (children) from harm and offence. Ofcom in a way enforce censorship through the code on broadcasters and programs. ‘Britain's TV companies were found guilty of censorship yesterday for refusing to screen a party political

broadcast featuring 'shocking' abortion pictures. Three Appeal Court judges ruled that the BBC and independent channels including ITV and Channel 4 had acted illegally in blocking a film by the anti-abortion ProLife Alliance. The broadcasters argued the decision was taken on grounds of 'decency and good taste'.’

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-105104/Judges-condem 04/Judges-condemn-TV-censoring-abortionn-TV-censoring-abortion-film.html film.html   http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1051 This is an example of how seriously censorship is taken in the UK. Because the broadcasters breeched the rules by blocking the film unauthorised, each got found guilty and will wi ll now have to pay a penalty.

 

An article I found relating to the abolishment of Of Ofcom com by the conservative party, said ‘Said Mr Cameron: "Give Ofcom, or give a new body, the technical function of handing out the licences

and regulating, lightly, the content that's on the screens. But it shouldn't be making policy, it shouldn't have its own communications department. "The head of Ofcom is paid almost half a million pounds. We could slim this body down a huge amount and save a lot of money for the taxpayer."’  A con of the broadcasting code is that it needs an a n enforcer to work alongside with the public in order to ensure structure within broadcaster, although Ofcom does that, it costs tax payers a huge amount of  money. David Cameron is looking to abolish Ofcom but who will ensure structure when it’s gone?  The broadcasting code enforces censorship throughout channels and programs, this is to ensure no offence or harm is caused to the public viewers, this can be a good and bad thing. The good part is, it does prevent harm and offence but a bad part is for programs and channels it limits freedom of  expression, things such as documentaries which are created to tell facts about culture and life in general have to abide by the broadcasting code therefore some aspects of life and parts of the film have to be censored the most common censor used is the bleep, when someone is swearing. It limits the effectiveness of the documentary. Many people find this particular censor to be very annoying when watching a show like Jeremy Kyle, most contestants swear up to 3 times per 10 seconds so it can be hard to follow what they say. A pro about Ofcom in a case I found f ound studying The Broadcasting Act was that Ofcom fined the BBC £400,000 for ‘deceiving viewers’ The fine was imposed in relation to eight phone-in competitions on TV shows. In all these cases Ofcom found that production staff that made up the names of winners or even posed as contestants themselves tricked viewers. This comes back to me point about who would deal with these complications when Ofcom is abolished? A con of British Broadcasting in general is Dumbing down. This describes the diminishment of the ‘intellectual level’. Because producers need to aim their focus on all audience segments it is vital they

create programs that everyone on some level will understand to keep up viewings, this tends to happen a lot in News. It is proven to be a bad thing because vital information cannot be expressed well enough therefore the quality of content is only satisfactory because some viewers will not understand that is why they have to ‘dumb down’ the content. Film

The history of film began in the late 1880’s when the first movie camera was invented. One of the first

technological prototype of film was the pinhole camera. The first ever colour cartoon movie was Snow White And The Seven Dwarfs, which was then followed by the first ever colour movie, The Wizards Of Oz. Two of the main film production companies to this day are Disney and Time Warner (Warner Bros.) Both have made huge success and history in film. The Obscene Publications Act 1857  An  ‘An Act to amend the law relating relating to the publication publication of obscene obscene

matter; to provide for the protection of literature; and to strengthen the law concerning http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ob ia.org/wiki/Obscene_Pub scene_Publications_Act_ lications_Act_1959 1959   Back then it was pornography.’  http://en.wikiped pornography.’ targeted towards obscenity in books because the motion picture wasn’t invented until the late 1880’s, it was only until 1977 erotic films were covered as well as written material.  Production of erotic films commenced in almost immediately after the invention of the motion picture. The earliest surviving film was made back in 1896.

 

In 1984 Parliament passed the Video Recordings act, which was an act to make ‘provision for regulating http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Video_Recordings_Act_1984  The act the distribution of video recordings’.  recordings’. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Video_Recordings_Act_1984 states that video recordings offered for sale or hire commercially in the UK must be classified by an authority. This is when the BBFC was put into place. The BBFC is a non-government organisation that rates released films, video’s vi deo’s and video games regarding it’s content and appropriateness. The age ratings prevent anyone underage from buying unsuitable

content and watching unsuitable films (Cinema). When the BBFC was first formed in 1912 to bring structure to the cinema industry, it was called the British Board of Film Censorship, that changed in 1984 when they changed their name to British Board of  Film Classification to replicate that classification plays a larger part in the BBFC’s work then censorship.

An article i found in the Guardian states this, ‘Britain's film censors have commissioned new research into public attitudes to depictions of sadistic and

sexual violence in the wake of films such as a s The Bunny Game and and  The Human Centipede 2 which push, if  not cross, boundaries of what is acceptable on screen.’  ‘David Cooke, director of the British Board of Film Classification (BBFC), said focus groups had already

started watching some of the more extreme films. "We are asking the public on a fairly in-depth basis to look at some of this difficult diff icult material," he said. "We're really trying to get their take on whether the things they are seeing seem to them to be harmful or not."’ 

The Human Centipede II was banned and denied rating by the BBFC due to concerns of sexual violence, graphic gore and a possibility of breach of law relating to Obscenity, after 32 cuts were made the BBFC agreed to rate it 18. Directors in the filming industry have the right to self-censor the films they directed. In the United States A Clockwork Orange was rated X in its original release form. The director, Kubrick voluntarily replaced 30 seconds of explicit footage from two scenes for an R rating which was then released in 1973. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Clockwork_Orange_(film)#American_censorship http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Clockwork_Orange_(film)#American_censorship   Film has become an on developing media entertainment that has a big part in many people’s lives weather it’s working in film or watching it. The British Academy of Film and Television Television Arts is a charity that ‘supports, promotes and develops the art forms of the moving image.’

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Academy_of_Film_and_Television_Arts  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Academy_of_Film_and_Television_Arts  Many of us today knows this organisation as the BAFTA awards. Since 1948 BAFTA have presented awards for cinema television video games and children’s entertainment regarding the quality and taste. ‘The Academy identifies, rewards and celebrates cel ebrates excellence at its internationally-renowned, annual BAFTA annual  BAFTA  Awards ceremonies whilst providing many opportunities for the public – as well as industry practitioners and emerging talent – to find information and inspiration through its year-round programme of events, initiatives and activities.’  http://www.bafta.org/about/ 

Another charity organisation that supports film similar to the BAFTA’s is the British Film Institute (BFI). Instead of praising individuals for their success, the BFI generally encourage film and television throughout the United Kingdom. A popular public event the BFI host is the London Film Festival. The festival showcases some of the best of world cinema  to victor creativity, originality, vision and imagination. 

A huge con that was produced in the early stages of film f ilm is the development of pornography and sexual scenes. Time and time again I will be watching a film f ilm on TV just gone water shed hour and I come across explicit scenes of a sexual nature, that completely mislead sex. It’s not realistic therefore it doesn’t hold much appeal making it boring to watch. A pro about film is the entertainment it has provided for us and the amount of creative opportunities it offers. Film has helped develop the creativity within us which makes us who we are. My opinion is,

 

without film today not only will I always be bored but I wouldn’t be as visually creative and in a way as knowledgeable about everyday life. Film for me is a way of learning; all films hold at least one fact that can help you through day to day basis. The BAFTA’s and BFI are a major contribution to the awareness of  film success.

A con about film is although al though it can be creatively inspiring, there have been many violent cases which  judges and government are starting to point towards the violent nature of some films and the the effectiveness it is having on viewers. An example would be in 1972 British Authorities considered the sexual violence of A Clockwork Orange to be extreme when a prosecutor accused a fourteen year old of  manslaughter of a classmate, referred to the film, telling the judge that the case had a ghastly relevance to the film. So it could be a matter that film is influencing us too much. So the big question is do we need regulation to protect us? My first thought when writing my introduction was no, we didn’t need regulation to protect us simply because, we have the power over the

television remote and we have the power over what we watch. As I started to research more about Broadcasting and film regulation i learned how about how much we are being protected from and I started to think about those who are more simple minded about how much something will affect them such as children and people with disabilities. Ofcom is an a n organisation that i think is vital to broadcasting bro adcasting and protecting us, they enforce the broadcasting code making sure rules aren’t breached and the fact

that David Cameron and the Conservative Party is looking to abolish this organisation due to how much it costs tax payer is outrageous considering it’s to protect the tax payers from harm and offence. Ofcom was specifically designed to deal with complaints and breaches within w ithin the broadcasting code, it was made to listen to the public audience and what they want and to make sure that was enforced on broadcasters, if Ofcom was to be abolished who and what organisation will be responsible of such matters? Regarding film, regulation protects us from a lot of disturbing scenes that could potentially cause mental issues in give bad influences. One of the main issues being discussed that films cause is violent influence. There have been cases regarding breaches in the law that have been pointed towards the influence violent films have, i agree that violence in films can influence people but not all. Many have the common sense and knowledge that fighting scenes are nothing like a fight in reality, but some of us don’t, and a nd by

some I am mainly talking about children. In modern times most 12-14 year olds are still watching television after 9PM therefore they are exposed to explicit films that should only be watched by ages 15 and above. There are also films with violence in that are a re only rated 12. Anyone can be influenced especially children and teenagers, which is why it is important that the BBFC are very cautious in how they rate films and why they rate them. Without media regulation it means there is no structure, although many would argue structure is control and no one likes control, Control is needed within the media sector purely just to protect people from harm and offence.