|
home : best of bloggerheads : photoshopping : rupert murdoch : mps and weblogs : email tim ireland : search engine optimisation : viral marketing : weblog marketing |
|
| Bloggerheads Archives :: welcome to the hard shell | |
|
to front page to date archives to category archives national service © Tim Ireland 2004-2006 Design by Wibbler RSS | RSD | Atom |
|
|
« Rejoice! | Main | Recommended reading » March 31, 2005Jerry Springer: sticking a fork in itGuardian - BBC rejects Springer complaints: BBC governors rejected a record 63,000 complaints from viewers over the decision to broadcast Jerry Springer - The Opera yesterday, prompting renewed criticism from offended Christian and "decency" campaigners. The governors' programme complaints committee was split on the wisdom of allowing the show to go ahead in January, but ruled by a majority of four to one that the decision was not in breach of internal guidelines... John Beyer, the director of the pressure group Mediawatch, said the decision was "yet another example of the BBC's stupefying arrogance". Pwhahahahahahahaha! Yes, John Beyer not arrogant. Stephen Green not arrogant. BBC arrogant. :o) Media Watch Watch - BBC rejects Springer complaints: The only member of the Committee to disagree with the decision not to uphold complaints was Angela Sarkis, a former Vice-President of the African Caribbean Evangelical Alliance. Stephen Green has called it "a black day for British broadcasting". The full report can be downloaded by clicking here (PDF) Passage of note: One recurrent paragraph in many of the complaints referred to the opera containing "8000" expletives and the reported comments by Roly Keating, Controller of BBC Two about the programme pushing "back the boundaries of taste and decency". The committee covered two important points that were also raised here (quite a few times): But it was these two false claims - combined with the disgraceful opening paragraph ("The Sikhs have made a stand - but will Christians?") that made the email circular that prompted most of the complaints so 'potent' (see below). And we still don't know who started it off. This was one of the reasons why I made a FOI request to the BBC to get more details about the complaints. This request was denied, BTW: Your further requests for copies of all complaints sent to the BBC, the breakdown and information on threats to BBC staff are also outside the scope of the Act. Information about BBC programmes, content and their production is not covered by the Act. (Schedule 1 of the Act says that the BBC is covered in respect of information held for purposes other than those of journalism, art or literature). I wanted to see these complaints in detail in order to: Sadly, the trail has now gone cold, so we'll probably never know who was behind the original email. Or exactly how potent it was. Linky-dinked timeline follows (most comprehensive/important entry is in bold): UPDATE - As the Guardian article notes, Ofcom will be making their own ruling shortly. They state here on their website that: In accordance with our guidelines, we have requested a formal response from the BBC. Because the Director-General has declared that, in his view, the programme was suitable for broadcast, the BBC's response to Ofcom will be the Governor's Programme Complaints Committee view on the matter. As soon as we have received the BBC's response and reached a decision, we will notify complainants and make our Finding available on our website. Posted by Manic on March 31, 2005 9:29 AM in the category Christ... Pings (Trackback)For trackbacks, this is the URL: Comments Post a commentThanks for signing in, . Now you can comment. (sign out) (If you're new to Bloggerheads, you may need to be approved by the moderator before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.) | |