Tory plans for Ofcom

No idea what Cameron or Clegg plan to do about press regulation, but the Leveson report recommends an "independent" regulator supervised by Ofcom. By law any newspaper that does not sign up to the independent regulator will be regulated by Ofcom instead.

So thats all right then.

Ofcom will "recognise" the press standards body

Quote:31. The role of recognition body, that is to say, to recognise and certify that any particular body satisfies (and, on review, continues to satisfy) the requirements set out in law should fall
on Ofcom.

Ofcom will review that recognition every few years

Quote:30. The operation of any certified body should be reviewed by the recognition body after two years and thereafter at three yearly intervals

Quote:72. What would the legislation achieve? ... Second, it would provide an independent process to recognise the new self-regulatory body and reassure the public that the basic requirements of independence and effectiveness were met and continue to
be met; in the Report, I recommend that this is done by Ofcom. Third, by recognising the new body, it would validate its standards code and the arbitral system ...

Who would sit on this new regulator? Independents with experience of the industry appointed (by Ofcom*) through a fair and transparent process.

Quote:58. The appointment of the Chair, and other members, of the body must be independent. In the Report I recommend that this should be achieved through the establishment of an independent appointments panel (which could include one current editor but with a
substantial majority demonstrably independent of the press), and I provide detailed criteria for ensuring sufficient independence from both the Government and the industry. This high degree of demonstrable independence from both political and commercial interests is crucial to a self-regulatory system achieving the public trust that is required.
59. The critical feature of the body which I propose is that its Board and Chair should all be appointed by fair and open process, comprise a majority that are independent of the press, include a sufficient number of people with experience of the industry who may include
former editors and senior or academic journalists, but shall not include any serving editor or member of the House of Commons or Government.

* The report does not say appointed by Ofcom, but who else? The regulator cant appoint its own members, the industry cant if it is independent of industry. Parliament and the DCMS cant if it is independent of politicians. The general public have no representative body, other than Parliament. Unless Watchdog do it.

Quotes from the Leveson Executive Summary

Ofcom Plans for Ofcom

Consultation on Ofcoms Annual Plan for 2013-14 sneaked out on Thursday when it wont get noticed beneath all the Christmas stuff.

Responses should be submitted by 22 Feb.
http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/consult...n-2013-14/

Key Summary points are:
1.4 (Ofcom) will work for consumers and citizens by promoting ... informed choice. ... will provide proportionate protection for consumers and help maintain audiences' confidence in broadcast content ...
To achieve these aims, we will be consultative, transparent and proportionate. We will be informed through high quality research and information ...

1.5 ... Ofcom will operate with a bias against intervention, but with a willingness to intervene firmly, promptly and effectively where required;
Ofcom will strive to ensure that its interventions will be evidence-based, proportionate, consistent, accountable and transparent in both deliberation and outcome; and
Ofcom will always seek the least intrusive regulatory mechanisms to achieve its policy objectives ....

1.6 Strategic purposes ...
Protect consumers from harm ...
Maintain audience confidence in broadcast content ...

Our proposed priorities for 2013/14
1.14 Target licensing and enforcement to ensure effective protection for audiences ...
Develop approaches to future content regulation

The full document includes these:
2.52 The rise in the number of producers and distribution models also presents challenges to the audience protection and assurance model; especially those challenges presented by operators based in overseas locations with different local protection regimes.

3.42 Provide continued protection to audiences through effective delivery of the Broadcasting Code and a strategic review of the way we license and regulate broadcasting services, with a particular focus on protecting children and on restricting content that poses the greatest risk of harm to audiences.

3.71 ... evolving internet architecture and governance models ...

4.45 Despite the evolving nature of broadcasting and content services, there will be a need for continuing audience assurance on content standards on traditional services. In order to provide this ongoing assurance in an efficient and effective manner, we will undertake work in the next year to design and adopt new approaches to targeting enforcement activity.

proposed priorities and outcomes ...
Protect consumers from harm ... (mostly telecoms) ... Measurable improvements in levels of consumer harm caused by each issue

Maintain audience confidence in broadcast content ...
... Strategic Priority: Target licensing and enforcement to ensure continued protection for audiences
.... Interim Outcomes: Licences continue to be issued to suitable persons; compliance continues to be monitored effectively; interventions are tailored and based on potential risk of harm posed by specific content, services or sectors; and audiences are appropriately protected
.... Final Outomes: A protection and assurance framework that inspires high-levels of consumer confidence and provides high levels of protection from harm, with a particular focus on protecting children and on content that poses the greatest risk of harm to audiences
(page 41)

We regularly review regulation to examine whether it is still fit for purpose and to remove burdens that are no longer justified (page 67)

Ofcon in "spouting total bollox" shocker!!

This is a consultation and that usually means they have to publish the responses. At the very least they have to take them into account and there is no reason why they cannot be copied to the Government (DCMS), the Media Select Committee, the Public Accounts Committee and the press. I would be very interested to see Ofcom management defending use of scarce resources on trade disputes (broadcasters stitching each other up) in the absence of any credible complaints from the public at the same time that they soft pedal on very real risk of harm from preachers of hate who call for people to be killed and nutjobs whoadvise people not to take anticancer medicines. Unlike other consultations, responses should not be left to the last minute - the Annual Plan starts from a set date and the it takes time for a large hidebound moralising organisation to change direction.

The more well argued sensible responses there are, the more chance there is of changing things.

Lets be honest. Within about 6 months of being 'in power' the Tories and their 'Liberal' servants had decimated the babe TV genre in the UK. Things were so much better (in terms of content freedoms) under the previous administration. OFCON just do what they are told (and then some) so until we get a shift in government were all fucked... We can go about it until were blue in the dick but its not going to change. OFCON wont change unless their ordered to and the only body that can order them is the government... Please prove me wrong I would love to find another way.

OFCON are all set to fuck up our lives for another year I'm afraid...

Shylok

Really? I am not supporting the LibCons, they are as bad as Labour, but were things that much better before May 2010? Labour created Ofcom. Babestar was banned under Labour. Sport and SEL had massive fines under Labour. Banggate started in June 2009. And I think 241s died a death under Labour. Babe channels were reclassified as teleshopping under the Todems in Oct 2010 but the consultation started in Nov 2009 under Labour, and was the 3rd attempt.

Debating which party is worst wont chanege much, publically putting Ofcom on the spot and making them explain why they treat religious exteremism more leniently that a bit of nudity will.

Check it out - "until we get a shift in government were all fucked" I wasn't suggesting a shift back to Labour. :-) I was thinking for something along the lines of what the Liberals used to say they believed in before they danced with the devil. Its also worth noting that Labour proscribed a number of foreign satellite channels (as did the Torys before them)...

Well before Nov 2010 I used to really enjoy the days shows so YES it was a lot different IMHO.

Hope that clears that up a bit.

Shylok

My bad. A shift might even be possible with this lot. Labour have a puritanical controlling streak about them (try opposing a shop steward). One Labour MP many years ago even said he went into politics to bring about a New Jerusalem, not Sodom and Gomorrah in the context of legalising gay sex. Jack Straw and David Blunkett came across as intolerant control freaks unlike the boy Hunt or mumsy Maria Miller. Looks can be deceptive but heres hoping.

I often found Labour ministers to be 'spiteful'. They would do things that were plain nasty and in some cases even cruel. That's why I was so keen to support the Liberals and look where that got me! I was duped as a Liberal voter and I'll never forget it (along with millions of others Mr Clegg).

I like so many more voters feel very cheated by the 'shift' caused by the Liberal leaderships craving for office. The resulting situation brought about by the last election 'pact'.

I envy your optimism eccles you are of course quite correct. OFCOM must be challenged (and on all fronts) for their complete disregard for personal freedoms. Their bias and indeed clear hatred of the 'babe channel genre' is so very imbalanced and unjust. They are control freaks and undemocratic. OFCOM are intolerant fascists even (enjoying the gravy train ride) and always using the same old arguments about 'protecting children' to justify anything they want.

I sometimes just feel exhausted with fighting the status quo and feel 'the cards' are so heavily weighted in 'the regulators' favor... I will never stop however as freedoms are worth fighting for...

Shylok

Vote for the UKIP. They will be to busy trying to chase Poles out of the country to notice two girls getting it on in a decent 241 in the early hours of the morning.