An internet news website the UKColumn have pulled all their news videos rather than submit to censorship and fee extortion from ATVOD. Brian Gerrish and Mike Robinson discuss the attempted ATVOD regulation/censorship of the UK Column in a
non-television-like way.
The video is available for download here . Please feel free to distribute as far and wide as you can,
including your own Youtube channels.
See video from YouTube
See ATVOD determination [pdf] from atvod.co.uk
Update: ATVOD: A Major Risk To Freedom of Speech on the Internet
27th June. See pree release [pdf] from
ukcolumn.org
The UK Column have issued a press release outlining their case against ATVOD:
The UK government has finally moved to directly regulate Youtube content and internet freedom of speech.
On the 2nd February 2014, the UK Column received a letter from ATVOD, the Authority for Television On Demand. ATVOD is a
subsidiary of Ofcom, the UK government's communications regulator. The ATVOD letter gave notice to the UK Column that as the result of a Statutory Instrument amendment to the 2003 Communications Act, the UK Column was required to notify ATVOD that it was
running an on demand programme service , to pay a fee, and to submit to regulation.
ATVOD mainly chooses organisations to regulate based upon whether or not they are perceived to produce television-like programmes .
In several television conversations between the UK Column and ATVOD, an ATVOD representative admitted that there is no fixed standard for what constitutes television-like video content, and that their determinations are made on purely arbitrary
opinion.
When asked by the House of Lords Select Committee on Communications Inquiry on Media Convergence and Its Public Policy Impact on the 5th February 2013 if [ATVOD] had trouble defining [television-like services], Ruth Evans
Chairman of ATVOD replied, yes. It is an evolving art.
It is on the basis of the evolving art statement that ATVOD's claims of a light regulatory burden should be seen. At present ATVOD claims to exist in order to prevent
harmful material becoming available to children and to prevent hate speech. It is clear, though, that anyone submitting to the current light regulatory framework joins a fluid and evolving regulatory framework with potentially draconian financial
penalties. The penalties allowed for through the Communications Act 2003 amount to 5% of the regulated organisation's turnover or £250,000, whichever is the greater amount.
Following discussion with ATVOD, the UK
Column made the decision that ATVOD's requirements would be detrimental to our freedom of speech and expression on the internet, and we would not submit to regulation by ATVOD.
ATVOD subsequently issued an enforcement notice
giving the UK Column ten working days to comply with their demands. Having carefully considered our options, we decided to cease the activity which ATVOD describes as an on demand television service, and removed all UK Column video on demand content from
the internet.
UK Column co-editor Brian Gerrish says:
This represents an immediate and dangerous attack on free speech on the internet and should be of massive concern to all Youtube users, as
the government seems to be moving to censor individuals directly, putting them on the same regulatory footing as global corporations like the BBC and CNN. As a government agency, ATVOD's clearly flawed working practices and their alignment to the
corporate media pose a direct threat to our personal liberty and freedoms.
UK Column co-editor Mike Robinson says:
It used to be that to produce high quality studio based video
content, the financial barrier to entry was very high. Today, with television studios in a box costing as little as a few hundred pounds, ATVOD seems to be attempting to extend its remit to even the one man band producer operating out of his bedroom.
This is a dangerous road to tread.
