Right of Reply: Stephen Whittle

The director of the Broadcasting Standards Commission replies to criticism of its latest report

Sunday 30 May 1999 18:02 EDT
Comments

Your support helps us to tell the story

From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.

At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.

The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.

Your support makes all the difference.

THERE IS always room for debate about acceptable standards of taste and decency on television without fear of reprisal. But your article on Thursday, highlighting five out of 108 findings reached by the BSC, fails to recognise a number of significant facts.

Firstly, the members of the Commission are appointed by the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport after open competition. They are chosen to be reflective of the audiences to broadcasting, rather than the broadcasters or direct regulators. Contrary to your headline, they do not decide "what we see on TV". Their role is to offer independent advice on where the line of acceptability currently runs in the light of detailed audience research conducted each year by the Commission.

Secondly, that research consistently shows that audiences expect broadcasters to respect the conventions of the watershed. Three of the five programmes you highlight were broadcast before the watershed. The Commissioners who saw them considered that they had breached the expectations of the audience, and in one of the cases, Newsround, the BBC agreed.

Channel 4 also apologised to those who felt that the scheduling of The Omen on Christmas Night was offensive. The Commission concluded it had been insensitive.

The Commission has been asked by Parliament to offer advice covering all broadcasters, both public and private, and across all delivery platforms, in what is a difficult and constantly shifting territory. It is a challenging role, especially at a time when technology is providing an explosion of choice and society is changing almost as fast. But it is also an important contribution towards an accountable media.

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in