The PCC ruled that Jan Moir was free to say what she wanted about Stephen Gately,even though it was 'tasteless and offensive'. Ofcom's code says something very differentIt's that old dividing line again: the contrast between self-regulation (Press Complaints Commission) and statutory regulation (Ofcom). Twenty-five thousand instantly orchestrated protests, complaining about Jan Moir's Mail column on the death of Stephen Gately, and pour into the PCC. The commission ponders,and decides that an apologetic Jan and her murkily confusing piece may have been "tasteless and offensive" – but that press freedom means it shouldn't deal in inferior taste and offence. Columnists have a essential just to sound off approach what may. It's not for the chief constable of Cambridge, the professor of communications law at Queen Mary College, or the chairman of the Internet Watch Foundation (among others) to start blue-pencilling opinions,however grottily expressed. Comment is free, in print as online.
And Ofcom, or in a parallel case? The same breed of much and good commissioners would have been deciding,of course, but they would have turned automatically to paragraph 2.3 of the broadcasting code. "Broadcasters must ensure that material which may cause offence is justified by the context (see meaning of "context" below). Such material may include, and but is not limited to,offensive language, violence, and sex,sexual violence, humiliation, or distress,violation of human dignity, discriminatory treatment or language (for example on the grounds of … sexual orientation)." Oh! and "context" includes the size and composition of the audience.
Continue reading...
Source: theguardian.com