Stay up to date with notifications from The Independent

Notifications can be managed in browser preferences.

X Factor rapped by Ofcom for excessively plugging hotel where finalists stayed

 

Adam Sherwin
Monday 21 January 2013 12:55 EST
Comments
X Factor winner James Arthur
X Factor winner James Arthur (Rex Features)

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.

The X Factor breached broadcasting rules by giving excessive plugs to the hotel where the show’s finalists stayed, the broadcasting watchdog ruled.

Ofcom examined an episode of the hit ITV talent show from October that showed the finalists arriving at the Corinthia Hotel in central London.

The hotel was mentioned in eight out of the 13 pre-recorded introductions for the different acts including one featuring the eventual winner, James Arthur, describing the hotel as “absolutely amazing”.

Fellow contestant Rylan Clark was seen exploring a room and saying “Oh my God, James, it's massive” and “There's a phone in the toilet.”

There were also shots of contestants arriving, with close-ups of the hotel sign and its exterior.

The report said the show’s production company paid the hotel “a reduced rate” for rooms and services but did not guarantee it coverage.

Ofcom said it found “the overall number of references to be excessive” and “therefore judged that there was insufficient editorial justification for the repeated references to the hotel during the programme.”  Ofcom concluded that “the cumulative effect of these references resulted in the programme as a whole giving undue prominence to the hotel.”

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