United Kingdom
[GB] Authorities fight sex and violence on various fronts
IRIS 1996-1:1/26
David Goldberg
deeJgee Research/Consultancy
The Radio Authority, acting in virtue of Section 90 of the Broadcasting Act and its own Programme Code, has fined Talk Radio UK £5,000. S.90 provides that every licensed service must not include anything in its service that '... offends against good taste of decency or is likely to encourage or incite to crime or to lead to disorder or to be offensive to public feeling'. The Radio Authority's Code has rules on 'Bad Taste in Humour' and on 'Religion', which require that licensees avoid humour which offends against good taste and decency and that licensees avoid abusing the religious views and beliefs of those belonging to a particular religion of denomination. The offensive item involved a guest comedian pretending to be Jesus Christ's brother. The level of the fine took into account the prompt action taken by the station and its generally improved editorial control and direction.
The British Board of Film Classification issued its Annual Report, which indicated that 6 out of the 3,500 videos submitted during the previous year had not had a classification certificate issued and that 6.5% of videos had had cuts made at the BBFC's request, including True Lies .
The Secretary of State, acting in virtue of Section 177 of the Broadcasting Act after the Independent Television Commission notified the Heritage Department that the channels' service was unacceptable, issued a proscription order against XXXTV (formerly TV Erotica ), by which it is a criminal offence to supply decoding equipment or to advertise or provide information about the channel (including programme listings). The channel is American owned and based in Sweden. Similar action is pending against the French-based Rendez-Vous channel. The UK Government based its case on the provision of the 'Television Without Frontiers' Directive, which aims to protect minors.
References
- British Board of Film Clasification. Annual Report for 1994-5
This article has been published in IRIS Legal Observations of the European Audiovisual Observatory.