Ofcom Replacement

If Ofcom has 'got to go' or 'change'.. Any thoughts on these?

What exactly are you going to replace it with? You might solve one problem but create two more. Is that worth it?

Wouldn't replacing Ofcom damage a delicate eco-system that was just unfortunate in its implementation due to the ideologies of the last gov?

What is the maximum fine any broadcaster could be given? Would there be any fines?

Would you be happy if Ofcom is split into two parts? Licensing and Content.

Where do you intend people write their complaints if there is 'no ofcom'? (for the record I've only ever complained once and it wasn't a babe channel)

How are you going to reduce complaints and verify they are genuine? There are regulators that state a 14 day cut off for complaints and also some that state the name of complainant for everybody to see.

How do you tell people to complain directly to a broadcaster first instead of a regulator? Should all broadcasters clearly publish a specific address for complaints?

Is it okay that the Culture Dept. hand out broadcast licences?

Ofcom was born to deregulate the telephone industry.
Before Ofcom all issues of morality was controlled by the censor.

What do they use in the rest of the EU?

(26-05-2010 05:50 )arron88 Wrote:  If Ofcom has 'got to go' or 'change'.. Any thoughts on these?

What exactly are you going to replace it with? You might solve one problem but create two more. Is that worth it?

Wouldn't replacing Ofcom damage a delicate eco-system that was just unfortunate in its implementation due to the ideologies of the last gov?

What is the maximum fine any broadcaster could be given? Would there be any fines?

Would you be happy if Ofcom is split into two parts? Licensing and Content.

Where do you intend people write their complaints if there is 'no ofcom'? (for the record I've only ever complained once and it wasn't a babe channel)

How are you going to reduce complaints and verify they are genuine? There are regulators that state a 14 day cut off for complaints and also some that state the name of complainant for everybody to see.

How do you tell people to complain directly to a broadcaster first instead of a regulator? Should all broadcasters clearly publish a specific address for complaints?

Is it okay that the Culture Dept. hand out broadcast licences?

Replace with a smaller body than the current £142 million they cost the tax payer at the moment, you may have a genuine question, but for a forum that wants the body to be removed and at some point we may see in the near future you are opening a can of worms. Both the Conservatives and Liberals want to remove quangos and I agree as the majority are a wast of money and when you are paying some clown £434,000 a year to run ofcom you seriously need to look at some of the shite that Labour set up, the PM doesnt earn that! There was nothing wrong with the ITC before them, and you ask who do you complain to, well either the body that replaces them or the Minister who has Media under his/her wing. I have emailed the current minister asking for justification to the cost of Ofcom and wait for his reply which once received I will let the forum know of his response.

If Ofcom was replaced with another body I expect that the new body would adopt the same broadcasting code.

Get rid of it and replace it with.... nothing. Its a uneeded layer of buracracy and a waste of tax payers money. A budget of £145 million and they do sod all. They never act on geniune issues of concern regarding shady buiness practices affecting the consumer (Do we see Vodafone been put under scrutiny by ofcom I think not). All they do is act as 'school nanny' to all the taddle talers the majority of which are not genuine complainers with genuine concers. Issue fines to companys like bangmedia who they feel is a easy target because they'd rather pay a fine right now than initiate court proceedings. Most complainers about TV content are other companies trying to put another company out of buiness in a under hand way. If someone has a genuine complaint or concern they can send a letter to the minister for trade and comerce.

Yes completely agree with you BigBen, censership was never this strict in the eighties or ninties, back then you could pretty much show anything, the only person I recall complaining was some white haired old bitch called Mary Whitehouse who was never ever taken seriously, not even by the government. Ofcom have acted disgracefully in imposing such a draconian fine on bangbabes media and the point has been proven that if you give powers to companies such as this they will allways abuse it. Just leave it to the ministry of sport and media to handle but taken into account that ofcom will fine or close down a channel based on the grounds on 2 complaints I can't see him being this petty and would more than likely only look at the complaints if it were overwhelming.

(26-05-2010 10:09 )aaron Wrote:  If Ofcom was replaced with another body I expect that the new body would adopt the same broadcasting code.

I suspect you're right, unfortunately. The British Government do not want hardcore sex on the television & Ofcon are only doing their bidding. Whoever is there will have to do the same unless the code is changed.

a fairly sensible question arron88.
so i will reply,in short the replacements are already in place,meaning we the viewers,we can turnover or switch off are tv,s at any time we choose, there are many channels to choose from.
in recent years this country has become one of wingers and whiners and if you do me wrong i will sue you culture,basically mini america.
before ofcom and the likes there was mary whitehouse,who was just one voice but she got herself in a position where she could dictate what went on our tv and to me she abused that power by telling you what you should watch.[i admit there was only two or three channels then]
and when she died the rules were relaxed a little,but now we are back in the bad old days.
there is more choice than ever before so you have many options.
which for me makes ofcom or a replacement irrelevant,and the money saved would probably run a third world country for a time.

by the way arron88 with you been on some ignore lists they will not see a word you have written,i have taken you off mine for now,so don,t give me a reason to put you back on it.

has anybody tried complaining on the conservatives blogs or twitter (was just wondering) about absurded wages these ofcom are earning, as the government are meant to recouping £6bn, makes sense to cut this ridiculous operation

Does anyone know what european countries use for television control if there is any at all, because we might want to look at what they are doing and incorporate it into this country, or if it is left down to the broadcaster with what they pay on licences and how they control how it goes out to the public.

Why i am asking this because on a french channel i have seen, they show movies and series about lunchtime and frequently there is some form of nudity, maybe topless posing or even full naked, it is an unencrypted channel.

Its not just Ofcom that needs to be changed but our entire view on sex on tv, encryted channels show be allowed to show hardcore films, the films should also be allowed to be bought via mail order and not just from licenced sex shops. If someone under the age buys these channels or purchases hardcore material then it should be the parents that be fined for letting them get hold of this material, this is my personal view on the subject of Tv control, some may disagree with my view and there will be some that agree, we shouldnt be living in the Dark ages, not nannied into what we can watch or cant watch, we as a society are multicultural now and have evolved past this prude and somewhat outdated philosophy, It is down to the average person what they can and cant watch, we are mature enough to decide.