TV News

US TV censors of the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) have proposed to change their rules so as to treat internet TV companies the same as cable and satellite TV providers.

At the moment media companies are not required to offer their programming to Internet TV companies. On the other hand rules requiring traditional cable and satellite TV to carry certain content, like broadcast TV, do not apply to internet TV companies.

Currently consumers without cable or satellite have been unable to get the same breadth of content from Internet-based TV services that they could get from a paid TV provider or in some cases over-the-air TV broadcasters.

It's this difference in regulatory classification that allowed network TV broadcasters, such as CBS, which owns CNET, to deny Aereo access to their programming, even after it offered to pay retransmission fees. Earlier this year, the US Supreme Court said that it was illegal for Aereo to retransmit broadcast TV over the Internet without paying broadcasters a retransmission fee.

Even though he didn't name Aereo outright, FFC head Tom Wheeler said that the existing rules are ultimately hurting consumers who are being denied access to content on alternative platforms. Wheele said in a statement:

Big company control over access to programming should not keep programs from being available on the Internet. Today, we propose to break that bottleneck.

Efforts by new entrants to develop new video services have faltered because they could not get access to programming content that was owned by cable networks or broadcasters.

1. Big Brother - Channel 5 - 3,784 complaints
2. Celebrity Big Brother - Channel 5 - 1,874 complaints
3. Cutting Edge: Going to the Dogs - Channel 4 - 1,805 complaints
4. Benefits Street - Channel 4 - 967 complaints
5. Coronation Street - ITV - 367 complaints
6. The X Factor - ITV - 360 complaints
7. EastEnders - BBC 1 - 316 complaints
8. Emmerdale - ITV - 243 complaints
9. Sky News (20/07/14) - 205 complaints
10. Channel 4 News - 193 complaints

Washington's football team can relax as, TV and radio stations can now say its name without fearing government PC censorship.

US TV censors of the Federal Communications Commission have rejected a petition that claimed the name Redskins violates broadcast indecency rules.

The author of the petition, George Washington law professor John Banzhaf III, claimed that the derogatory racial and ethnic slur is deeply offensive to American Indians. The word amounts to obscenity and profanity, which the FCC bans from the airwaves, Banzhaf said.

But in its ruling, the FCC's Media Bureau noted that it has traditionally banned only words that are sexual or excretory in nature. The agency also warned that banning the name could violate the free-speech rights of TV and radio stations.

Banzhaf's petition had asked the commission to reject the license renewal of WWXX-FM, a radio station owned by Redskins owner Daniel Snyder that had repeatedly said the team's name on the air. Instead, the FCC renewed the license, saying it found no serious violations.

Banzhaf said he plans to appeal the decision to the full commission and, if necessary, to the federal courts.

Turkey's TV censor has handed a record fine to a popular game show for a segment where husbands were filmed dancing with other women as their wives looked on.

The game show, I Don't Know, My Spouse Knows was fined 410,000 Turkish lira ($177,000, 145,000 euros) by the Radio and Television Supreme Council (RTUK). The censor claimed in its ruling that the episode was contrary to public morality and the Turkish family structure .

In the offending show the husbands were shown dancing with other women, said to be foreigners, while the horrified reactions of their wives was also shown in a split screen.

The four wives appeared aghast as they watched their husbands, who danced with little inhibition, with one asking a fellow contestant if the stunt was a joke. When it became clear it was not, their reactions were even more grave. One of the wives, Seval, said: I am going to kill him! When the husbands rejoined the main studio she wagged her finger and told her spouse: You are finished!

RTUK said the show, broadcast by the popular private channel Kanal D, had encouraged men to cheat on their wives and provided an environment to disturb the family peace. It added that women in the program had been reduced to sexual objects.

Pippi Longstocking, a rambunctious, joyful girl strong enough to lift horses, has become a touchstone for generations of children who have read her in 65 languages worldwide.

In Sweden, Pippi is something more: a national treasure and embodiment of the country's egalitarian spirit. So when the Swedish national broadcaster announced this fall that it would edit two scenes that it considered offensive in a 1969 television series about Pippi, including one in which she says her father is king of the Negroes, using a Swedish word now viewed as a racial slur, it hit a nerve.

The series was based on the Pippi Longstocking books by Astrid Lindgren, the first of which were published between 1945 and 1948. Defenders of the decision, including the heirs of Ms. Lindgren, who died in 2002, said the change respected the spirit of the author. Even in 1970, she had called the term outdated and said she had not meant to offend.

But many others, influential opinion columnists and tens of thousands of people who answered a Facebook poll, said they opposed the revision, some accusing the broadcaster, SVT, of politically correct censorship.

Nils Nyman, one of Ms. Lindgren's seven grandchildren and the chief executive of the family company that oversees the lucrative rights to her work, said he was a little bit surprised that the changes had generated so much fuss. He said the family had readily agreed to allow SVT to edit two brief scenes in the program, which will air on national television on Saturday and in a newly restored DVD. He said that not making the changes risked distracting from the books' broader message of girl power before it was known as such.

In one scene, the racial slur has been removed so that Pippi now says, My father is the king! In the second, Pippi no longer pulls her eyelids upward, pretending to be Asian, yet still sings a mock Chinese song.

Indian TV presenter and model Gauahar Khan was left audibly traumatised after a member of the audience at a TV competition she was presenting at got up and slapped her for wearing revealing clothes.

Akil Malik took 'offence' at Khan's cutaway outfit as she presented the grand finale of singing competition Raw Star at Film City in Mumbai. He then got up out of his seat to threaten and assault her live on air. He explained: Being a Muslim woman, she should not have worn such a short dress.

Malik was arrested and charged with molestation.

The BBC has investigated the imaginary character of the lovely Samantha on Radio 4's I'm Sorry I Haven't A Clue , it has been disclosed.

The BBC has privately looked into whether to censor the smutty jokes aimed at Samantha , despite publicly signalling the familiar innuendo will remain part of the long-running show. A number of senior figures at the corporation are said to share the concerns of a complainant, who argued the non-speaking character was referred to only as a sexual object and perpetuated schoolboy, sexist, so-called humour .

As a result, talks have been held to determine how the show can adapt to the modern day, with more female panellists booked to appear on the show and more frequent mentions of Samantha's male equivalent, Sven. It will also endeavour to make sure the audience understands Samantha, a fictional scorekeeper who is never heard on the panel show, is a willing, even enthusiastic participant in the liaisons joked about on air.

The details of the meetings have been published by the BBC Trust as part a regular bulletin from its Editorial Standards Committee , the final arbiter of appeals if listeners and viewers are unhappy with the way their initial complaints have been dealt with by BBC management. On this occasion, it found, the complainant's appeal did not qualify to proceed for consideration because it did not have a reasonable prospect of success. But the report detailed the many steps already taken since the first complaint was received by Radio 4's Feedback in July 2013.

However the true extent of behind-the-scenes discussions has now been revealed, with the complainant claiming the public statement contradicted the actual correspondence she had with the BBC. A letter from a member of the Editorial Complaints Unit had instead told her there had been:

Lengthy and detailed discussion between senior managers with a number of senior figures share, at least in part, your concerns about the manner in which Samantha in portrayed.

The report published by the BBC Trust states:

The complainant explained that she had also had further correspondence with the show's producer who acknowledged that a high-level meeting had taken place and outlined the changes that were planned for the show including booking female panellists, featuring Sven (the male equivalent of Samantha) more frequently and making sure the audience understood Samantha was a willing even enthusiastic participant in the liaisons and stress that she was often the initiator in these relationships to avoid the suggestion that she was being taken advantage of.

China's State Administration of Press, Publication, Radio, Film and Television (SAPPRFT) have issued new censorship rules governing the use of language in China's television shows and advertisements. The new rules require all TV shows and ads to stick to standard Mandarin words and expressions, and forbid them from using internet slang terms.

The new regulations are aimed at stopping the use of internet slang that appropriates or imitates standard colloquial expressions, and particularly the Chinese language's four-character chengyu sayings. The internet has invented or adapted many new chengyu for its own uses, but SAPPRFT's new regulations ban the use of any of that creative language on television.

The regulations order China's television content producers to do a thorough self-investigation and to strengthen oversight and inspection efforts to assure that non-standard language and internet slang doesn't sneak its way into any future television programs.

And before you thinks this is another example of imaginative censorship peculiar to a repressive regimes, I seem to remember a more or less the same edict being issued in France not so long ago, whingeing that English language modern world jargon had become more popular than the French language equivalents.

Back in 2012 Comedy Central was banned for ten days for airing supposedly obscene and vulgar words and being derogatory to women. The offending programmes were Stand Up Club and Popcorn.

The order issued by Delhi High court claimed that the programme showed a stand up comedian mouthing supposedly vulgar words accompanied by obscene and suggestive gestures and gyration.

Jokes during his performance supposedly denigrated women, indecently and crudely referred to sex organs of men-and women and the sing-song rendition by the man sought to pornographically describe male lust, whilst depicting women as a commodity of sex.

The broadcaster appealed against the censorship and the result has just been announced.

The court found no merit in Comedy Central's appeal, and dismissed it. The court also imposed INR20,000 costs and ordered the remaining six days of the channel's original ten-day ban should begin at 12.01am on 26 November 2014.

A few easily offended Argentines got wound up by a joke during the filming a Top Gear special.

Locals took offence at the H982 FKL number plate on a Porsche driven by Jeremy Clarkson, believing it was a reference to the 1982 Falklands conflict.

Argentina's ambassador to the UK, Alicia Castro, complained about the joke but the complaint was turned down by the BBC. Now she has resumed her torade against the joke by writing to the BBC Trust expressing discontent with how the number plate fiasco was handled. She claimed Clarkson's behaviour fell well below BBC's editorial values and standards and called for a fresh investigation.

In an interview with the Radio Times Richard Hammond said:

In society as a whole, we love to be offended and have a scapegoat. But at Top Gear we're the first to put our hands up and say we pitched it wrong. We have apologised. We're not in the business of genuinely upsetting or offending anyone. We're in the business of entertainment, and if it fails to entertain, it's wrong. If the public says we stepped over the line, then we have.

The Parents Television Council is denouncing the FX network for airing the most sexually explicit content the PTC has ever documented on basic cable. The November 11th episode of Sons of Anarchy opened with approximately two and one-half minutes of graphically depicted sex among several couples. The explicit content, of the type previously available only on a la carte premium networks or pay-per-view, aired as early as 9 pm in half of the country.

Media Post described this scene like this :

This sequence ... featured seven couples in the act of intense lovemaking. ... For the record, this sequence left nothing to the imagination. It was probably the rawest sex I have ever seen depicted on TV outside of HBO and Showtime -- and that's saying a lot.

PTC President Tim Winter spouted:

Last week's episode of 'Sons of Anarchy' opened with the most sexually explicit content we've ever seen on basic cable, content normally found on premium subscription networks like HBO or Showtime.

Federal Communications Commissioner Ajit Pai said in a speech at an awards event that he disagrees with recent efforts to ban broadcasters from using the word Redskins when referring to the Washington, D.C. NFL team. He said:

If the FCC took these steps, we would be squelching public debate about an issue of public concern. We would be standing in the way of media outlets reporting the news. And we would be prohibiting speech simply because we disagree with the viewpoint that is being expressed.

Pai went on to say public officials shouldn't sound an uncertain trumpet when oft-offended opportunists urge us to undermine the First Amendment. He said he thinks the FCC should heed the words of Voltaire:

I may not agree with what you have to say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it, adding. Anyone who takes seriously the Constitution--scholar or layman--knows the petition is meritless. The FCC should dismiss it tout suite, as Voltaire might have said.

The BBC described its programme, This World: Rwanda's Untold Story:

Twenty years on from the Rwandan genocide, This World reveals evidence that challenges the accepted story of one of the most horrifying events of the late 20th century. The current president of Rwanda, Paul Kagame, has long been portrayed as the man who brought an end to the killing and rescued his country from oblivion. Now there are increasing questions about the role of Kagame's Rwandan Patriotic Front forces in the dark days of 1994 and in the 20 years since.

The film investigates evidence of Kagame's role in the shooting down of the presidential plane that sparked the killings in 1994 and questions his claims to have ended the genocide. It also examines claims of war crimes committed by Kagame's forces and their allies in the wars in the Democratic Republic of Congo and allegations of human rights abuses in today's Rwanda.

Former close associates from within Kagame's inner circle and government speak out from hiding abroad. They present a very different portrait of a man who is often hailed as presiding over a model African state. Rwanda's economic miracle and apparent ethnic harmony has led to the country being one of the biggest recipients of aid from the UK. Former prime minister Tony Blair is an unpaid adviser to Kagame, but some now question the closeness of Mr Blair and other western leaders to Rwanda's president.

But it was all a bit too much for Rwanda. The government has suspended all BBC radio broadcasts in Rwanda's most common language to protest against the news organisation's recent documentary about the 1994 genocide in the country.

The Rwandan TV censor announced the suspension of the BBC's broadcasts in the local language, Kinyarwanda. The board said it took the action because it has received complaints of incitement, hatred, divisionism, genocide denial and revision from the public.

President Paul Kagame's government, members of parliament and genocide survivors have expressed their anger at the BBC over the recent documentary that suggested the country's president may have had a hand shooting down his predecessor's plane, a crash that triggered the mass killings.

Its hour-long documentary, Rwanda, The Untold Story, also quoted US researchers who suggested that many of the more than 800,000 Rwandans who died in the 1994 genocide may have been ethnic Hutus, and not ethnic Tutsis as the Rwandan government maintains.

SpongeBob SquarePants, the Nickelodeon cartoon character who works as a fry cook at the bottom of the sea, corrupts the young minds of children and promotes hooligan behavior, according to Kazakhstan's education ministry.

the New York Daily News reported that the country regards the character as a bully, who regularly inflicts violence on others in his community and seems to enjoy what he does,

Zabira Orazalieva responsible for children's rights at the Kazakh Education and Science Ministry, said:

SpongeBob beats up his neighbor, misbehaves and enjoys that. This hooligan behavior stays in the child's minds. They [see SpongeBob] as a role model and try to re-enact [his behavior] in real life.

She went on to blast cable channels like Nickelodeon and France's TiJi for running cartoons that promote a substandard educational message, as well as parents who let children watch the cartoons unsupervised.

With his penchant for mooning and blurting out risque spoonerisms, Crayon Shin-chan has delighted Japanese children, and infuriated their parents, for more than two decades.

But now the precocious five-year-old is being taken on by Indonesian TV censors, who have declared his antics as borderline pornography and warned broadcasters to censor images of his bare buttocks, scantily clad women and other indecorous scenes.

The Indonesian broadcasting commission has told TV channel RCTI to either cut supposedly indecent parts of the programme or show it later when children aren't watching. A member of the commission claims:

The character fools around with his bare bottom exposed. He also noses around people [when they are] on dates. The show features a lot of female characters in seductive garments that emphasise their cleavage. It is essentially pornography.

A joint episode of The Simpsons and Family Guy is set to air on the Fox network in the US on Sunday. The trailer has revealed a joke featuring the politically correct no-no, the word 'rape'. It has got America's moralists up in arms. The Parents Television Council have called for the joke to be cut.

The gag is about baby Stewie misunderstanding the nature of Bart's prank calls. First, Bart calls Moe's Tavern and asks if there's anyone there with the last name Keybum and the first name Lee -- causing the bartender to call out for a Leaky bum . Then an excited Stewie tries his version of the wind-up, and blurts out: Hello, Moe? Your sister's being raped.

The Parents Television Council have claim that the joke, playing on the different sense of humour between the family-friendly Simpsons and edgier Family Guy, is 'inappropriate'. President Tim Winter spouted:

Rape is never a laughing matter. Never. It is simply indefensible for a broadcaster to use the publicly-owned airwaves to make tasteless and senseless jokes about rape.

He also claimed that the joke could have a devastating impact... on countless past, present and future victims of sexual assault . The group says it will lobby advertisers on both shows to ask if rape jokes reflect their corporate values .

MacFarlane famously once said that getting Parents Television Council complaints were:

Like getting hate mail from Hitler. They're literally terrible human beings. I've read their newsletter, I've visited their website, and they're just rotten to the core. For an organisation that prides itself on Christian values -- I mean, I'm an atheist, so what do I know?--they spend their entire day hating people. They can all suck my dick as far as I'm concerned.

As always the BBC is showing old episodes of Dad's Army. But the choice of the latest episodes shown has raised a few additional chuckles.

A Yes campaigner noted:

A total of 80 episodes of Dad's Army were made by the corporation -- and which one does it choose to show on the Saturday ahead of the vote? The one in which Frazer -- played by John Laurie -- tells Mainwaring that he can run the platoon better than him, is put in charge and then makes a total mess of things. Thank you very much, Auntie Beeb.

A BBC spokesman insists that episodes are always shown in a specific order and adamantly denies there was ever any political intent in scheduling the Frazer episode ahead of the vote.

There is an amusing news story doing the rounds that the Colombian women's cycling team have been showing an unfortunately coloured strip. The flesh coloured midsection gives an illusion of nakedness.

However there is of course a possibility that this was an ingenious publicity stunt to thrust the ladies into the cycling world limelight. But either way, there certainly was no actual nudity.

But of course that did not stop BBC censors getting out their black pencil.

Ireland's TV censor has had a whinge at a slightly sexy dance performance on the talent show, The Voice of Ireland.

The performance accompanied contestant Danica Holland's rendition of Lady Gaga' s single Do What U Want on Sunday, March 23. Around 521,200 people watched the programme which aired at 6.30pm, of which about 12% were under 18s.

The complainant was appalled that RTE would sanction such a dance routine at the time in question, and stated that when one of the judges likened the routine to a scene from Basic Instinct , it reinforced her opinion of the programme.

The Broadcasting Authority of Ireland (BAI) partially upheld a complaint from a woman who had been watching the programme with her young children. In its ruling, the BAI said both the dance routine and song:

Included clear sexual overtones and in particular there were significant sexualised elements dealing with adult themes such as sexual submission, both emotional and physical.

It considered these inappropriate for children and adolescents , some of whom it claimed are not likely to have the maturity to assess and negotiate the boundaries of appropriate sexual behaviour , and added that the programme did not demonstrate due care .

The religious morality campaign group, One Million Moms spout:

USA's new program, Satisfaction , has a name that says it all. I suppose the name Unsatisfied didn't sound as attractive. Like a revamped soap opera, spouses get themselves tangled in a web of lies and hurt the ones they love. Satisfaction airs on Thursday evenings at 10:00 p.m. ET/9:00 p.m. CT.

The tagline for the program is: They have everything but are still not satisfied. The show focuses on attempts to find satisfaction by having an affair, paying for an escort or getting paid for sex. A show full of adultery, cheating, drugs and lies is the last influence our society needs. Even though the program airs a little later in the evening, it is not late enough since the bedroom scenes are soft porn and the previews are aired earlier in the day.

Satisfaction centers around a married couple who have no regrets and feel no remorse about committing adultery with someone else - or cheating on their own spouse. Infidelity is the new trend sold as normal by USA.

To put it on a scale, Satisfaction is more pornographic than the show Mistresses. This program consists of so much nudity and erotic sexual content that it probably is the worst show we have seen since Nip Tuck. Hollywood is continuing to push casual sex, sometimes with multiple partners, as acceptable.

A few parents have complained about ITV for showing a violent scene from the 12A rated movie, Dawn of the Planet of the Apes. The trailer went out at half time during the semi-final of the World Cup. The advert featured a computer-animated chimpanzee viciously shooting a man with a machine gun was screened at around 10pm, well after the watershed.

Some viewers said they had let youngsters stay up late to watch Holland play Argentina and thought the advert was inappropriate .

Inevitably the Daily Mail trawled Twitter for a few example whinges:

Furious at @ITV for shocking my children (and me) last night. After 9pm maybe, but during the football?? Poor show.

In the clip, the monkey is shown performing acrobatics as it enters a room where two armed men are sitting on a sofa. After drinking with them and smiling, the animal suddenly turns angry, picking up a machine gun and firing at one of the men, killing him. The advert ends with the ape pointing the gun at the other man, who is shown pleading with the creature to spare him.

A spokesman for the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) said:

I can confirm that we've received around 100 complaints overnight about the TV ad for the film Dawn of the Planet of the Apes, which appeared on ITV yesterday at around 10pm.

Complainants are concerned that the ad shows an ape grabbing a gun and shooting a man with it, during the broadcast of the World Cup semi-finals, which children would have been watching.

We're logging these complaints, we'll access them before making a decision as to whether we will investigate or not.

Update: ASA dismisses the whinges

10th September 2014. See article from asa.org.uk

A TV ad for the cinema release of the film Dawn of the Planet of the Apes , was seen on ITV during World Cup Semi-Final coverage at approximately 9.50pm.

A voice-over stated, And now an exciting look at the must-see movie of the summer, Dawn of the Planet of the Apes, hitting cinemas next Thursday. The following scene showed an ape approach two men who were sitting on sandbags drinking from metal cups. One man pointed a gun at the ape and he held up his arms in a surrender pose in response before tumbling into forward rolls and clapping as though in a performance. The following exchange between the three characters began good-naturedly, but ended with the ape stealing an automatic weapon from one of the men and shooting the other dead. The remaining man held up his hand with a fearful expression on his face while the ape, now baring his teeth and holding a threatening stance, aimed the gun at him. The ad closed with on-screen text giving the film name as gunfire resounded in the background. The voice-over stated, That looks incredible. Tell us what you think. Hashtag DawnofApes ... Issue

The ASA received 119 complaints:

• 1. the majority of the complainants, who believed the ad was inappropriate for children to see, challenged whether the ad was scheduled responsibly;

• 2. some viewers, who believed the theme and content of the ad was unsuitable for juxtaposition with a mainstream sporting event, challenged whether it was scheduled appropriately;

• 3. a large number challenged whether the ad was overly violent and distressing; and

• 4. the remainder of the complainants challenged whether the ad irresponsibly condoned violence and firearm use.

ASA Assessment

1. & 2. Not upheld

The ASA considered that care must always be taken to ensure that ads were suitable for a viewing audience and noted the BCAP Code specified that relevant timing restrictions must be applied to ads that, through their content, might harm or distress children of particular ages or that were otherwise unsuitable for them. In addition, broadcasters must exercise responsible judgement to avoid unsuitable juxtapositions between ads and programmes.

It was clear from the outset in this example that the ad contained an extract from a forthcoming film and the title of the film was given in voice-over and on-screen text. The opening scenes, involving the clowning antics of a chimpanzee-like character, seemed innocent. The scene quickly developed, however, to the point that there was the threat of gun-use together with atmospheric background music, which built a level of tension and indicated that the content was not as light-hearted as might have first appeared. Despite the escalation of menace, the shooting dead of one of the men was unlikely to have been anticipated and therefore likely to have caused shock to viewers. The ad closed with an ominous scene of the snarling ape purposefully pointing a gun directly at the body of the remaining man, who was seen to be in some shock and fear, and the sound of gunshots, indicating his killing. We considered that the tension of the ad, and the scenes of shooting and personal threat, meant that it was unsuitable for young children.

The film had been categorised as 12A, which meant that it contained material that was not generally suitable for children under 12 years of age. However, children younger than 12 were admitted to a 12A film in a cinema when accompanied by an adult, at the adult's discretion. It was important to recognise, however, that those who chose to visit the film at the cinema were likely to be acquainted with its theme and adults could exercise choice about whether that material was suitable for under-12s in their care, whereas not all TV viewers who had chosen to watch the World Cup Semi-Final would necessarily be aware of, or expect, the content of the ad.

Clearcast had applied a post 9 pm scheduling restriction in recognition of the level of violence in the film clip and we considered that, under ordinary circumstances, this was likely to be acceptable. Audiences beyond 9 pm were likely to be aware that they could be exposed to material, both in programming and advertising content, that was intended for adult viewers and the content in this example, although shocking, in our view was unlikely to cause harm or distress to adults when broadcast at that time. However, the circumstances of this ad were not usual; it was broadcast during a world sporting event, likely to be of more general interest than, for example, regular football fixtures.

The World Cup attracted a large TV audience, but the child audience index did not demonstrate that the Semi-Final had been of particular appeal to children, that is, those under 16 years of age. Within the parameters of child viewers, significantly more appeal was demonstrated to those over 10 years of age than to those under 10, but the number of children viewing in either age group did not compare to the proportion of adult viewers at the time.

While it was unfortunate that any distress was caused to younger viewers who did see the ad, we considered that the scheduling restriction in place, together with the time of broadcast, 9.50 pm, meant that it had been directed away from younger viewers. Older children, although likely to be shocked by the unfolding story of the scene, were likely to understand the extract within the context of the pending cinema release, the content of which had been certified as suitable for over 12s. The match had not demonstrated particular appeal to children of any age and the overall content, which was tense and menacing rather than gory or overly explicit, was unlikely to cause harm or distress to older children watching at that time.

We acknowledged that some adults who were watching the Semi-Final had found the ad to be too graphic even for an adult audience who had chosen to watch a sporting event. While we understood that they were likely to be similarly shocked by the ad's twist, we considered that, in view of the overall content and the brevity of the closing scene, they were unlikely to be distressed by it.

We concluded that the ad had been responsibly scheduled.

3. & 4. Not upheld

The ad built suspense throughout its 70-second duration and contained a 5-second scene at its close that involved an ape shooting two men at close range. The images might have been unnerving, given that they were unexpected, and seemingly at odds with the notion of how an ape might behave. However, while there was an element of terror, the shooting scene was brief and inexplicit. Although our view was that the ad was unsuitable for very young viewers, the level of action and violence it contained was unlikely to cause distress to others, providing that it was broadcast with an appropriate timing restriction. The ad was given a post 9 pm restriction and broadcast at 9.50 pm.

Guns were involved in the entire storyline of the ad. The action was clearly set in a fictional environment and the khaki clothes of the men plus the sandbags on which they sat gave the scene a military feel. We understood that some viewers had found the depiction of firearms in the ad to be irresponsible. However, given the context of the ad as an extract from a fantasy film, we considered that viewers were unlikely to relate the ad to actual crime and real world behaviour.

We acknowledged the reaction of viewers who had found the ad difficult to watch. However, given the content and the timing restriction applied, we considered that it was unlikely to cause undue distress or to be seen as condoning violence or irresponsible firearm use.

This week, Egypt's first X Factor -style belly-dancing show titled al-Raqisa (The Dancer) was scrapped after just one episode, following demands from the country's religious authorities.

Egypt's Dar el-Ifta, a wing of the justice ministry that issues non-binding religious edicts, claimed al-Raqisa would destroy the moral structure of the country. Shortly after, producers of the show, hosted by Egypt's pre-eminent belly-dancing star, Dina, gave way to the pressure and cancelled the programme.

Egypt's government has waged a year-long crackdown on the Muslim Brotherhood and seeks to stamp out religious extremism. But in reality officials have no wish to upset religious 'sensibilities' in a country where Islam is deeply entwined with public life.

Members of the dancing community nevertheless say that things are still slightly better than they were under the Brotherhood. Randa Kamel, a well-known Egyptian dancer, says that before the Brotherhood's fall, she was dancing just twice a week, as the economic crisis and increased conservatism that accompanied the Brotherhood's tenure prompted venues to curb their dancing expenses. Now Kamel is back to dancing every night, even if audiences still have not reached their pre-revolution peak.

The BBC has edited out a beheading from a fight scene in this weekend's episode of Doctor Who, featuring Robin Hood, as a mark of political correctness following the murder of two US journalists.

The BBC has decided to edit the climactic fight scene between Robin Hood and the sheriff of Nottingham to remove a beheading sequence. A BBC spokeswoman said:

In light of recent news events, we have made an edit to episode three out of respect.

A Game of Thrones actress has reportedly been banned from showing her breasts during filming on location. Producers of the hit US TV series have been prohibited from filming a pivotal topless scene at its planned location in the Croatian city of Dubrovnik, according to TMZ.

The magazine says the program's crew applied to the local film commission to shoot the scene in which Cersei Lannister, played by Lena Headey, undertakes a walk of penance through the streets of King's Landing.

But the request was reportedly rejected because the city's Church of St Nicholas has a hardline stance against public displays of sexuality. Advertisement

It's understood the iconic scene, will be shot elsewhere because of its importance to the storyline.

Update: Negotiated peace

3rd September 2014. See article from indiatvnews.com

The nude walk was in jeopardy as the Church of St. Nicholas, where the scene would be filmed, banned public nudity.

The film commissioners, however, have now changed their initial ruling, giving permission to filming on the streets of Dubrovnik as long as Lena Headey, who plays Cersei, doesn't film it at the church.

The show's producers, thus, have to compromise with the new term set by the film commissioners. Headey will now shoot the nude scene on a fake church set.

UK TV censor Ofcom has received six complaints following a lesbian kiss on Doctor Who, reports Gay Star News.

The complaints came after a scene in which Madame Vastra helps to keep her wife Jenny alive in response to a threat from droids that only move when they can sense breath.

A few worthless tweets were also dredged up.

Update: Ofcom will not investigate the whinges

28th August 2014. From strangethingsarehappening.com. Thanks to Nick

A spokesman for TV censor Ofcom has now responded to the complaints:

Ofcom can confirm it received six complaints about a kiss broadcast in an episode of Doctor Who on Saturday 23 August.

Having assessed the complaints, we can confirm that they do not raise issues warranting further investigation. Our rules do not discriminate between scenes involving opposite sex and same sex couples.

Update: Censored in Asia

31st August 2014. See article from dailymail.co.uk

The BBC cut a lesbian kiss scene from Doctor Who to avoid offending audiences (and TV censors) when it was screened in Asia.

The feature-length edition was broadcast to viewers in Hong Kong, South Korea, Taiwan, Thailand, Indonesia, Malaysia and Singapore last Monday. BBC insiders say the scene, which lasted just a couple of seconds, was cut to avoid falling foul of a broadcasting code in Singapore which says programmes should avoid any content that could justify homosexual and lesbian lifestyles.

George Dixon, BBC Worldwide's global editorial director, said:

When preparing shows for international transmission, we occasionally have to make edits to ensure we're not breaking any local broadcasting rules.

Gay rights campaigner Peter Tatchell was not impressed. He said:

The BBC should not bow to censorship demands from other countries. If these countries are bigoted and are not willing to show same-sex love, they have no right to demand that the BBC conforms to their standards of prejudice.

Thailand's military dictators have allowed 12 banned satellite channels to resume broadcasting. The channels have been off the air since the May 22 coup. However the channels have been forced to sign a declaration to not air political news.

Some of the channels are well-known political-oriented satellite stations, such as the yellow-shirt ASTV, Democrat Party-backed Blue Sky and red-shirt Asia Update, said they were satisfied by the terms and conditions laid down by the junta.

Most of them even agreed to change their name in a move to end memories about previous political stances.

The channels allowed to start broadcasting also include MV5, DNN, UDD, P&P, 4 Channel, FMTV, Hot TV, Rescue TV and Student and People Network for Reforming Thailand Channel.

ASTV, which will now be known as News TV, still plans to focus intensely on news, albeit now censored.

The broadcasting committee of the National Broadcasting and Telecom-munications Commission announced conditions for the 12 satellite TV channels to apply for a new licence to resume broadcasting next week. The channels will need to apply for a new licence as Pay TV and comply with the NCPO's condition that they would broadcast no content that affects national security and the social divide by signing a memorandum of understand with the NBTC.

THE BBC has apologised for broadcasting a trivial Irish joke on its flagship Scottish news programme.

The joke was broadcast on BBC1's Reporting Scotland news show during a pre-recorded segment about the funniest joke at this year's Edinburgh Fringe Festival. It involved a reporter asking members of the public about what they find funny. Among the contributions broadcast:

Two Irish guys look in the mirror. One goes: 'I know that guy.' The other one goes: 'I know you do, it's me you stupid guy.'

One family told The Irish Post they were gobsmacked to hear the quip:

I thought it was absolutely disgusting to see that your own national broadcaster would allow this to happen. To see comments like that about your own ethnic group on the news is so disheartening.

Responding to the complaint, the BBC apologised for broadcasting the joke. A spokesman said:

During a series of vox-pops a member of the public told a joke which may have offended some viewers.

OfCom, the UK TV censor, has received around 200 complaints over this past Sunday's on-air live segment where reporter Colin Brazier went through a Malaysian Airlines crash victim's suitcase.

OfCom's Elliott Ball told iMediaEthics:

There are 201 complaints, relating to coverage on Sky News on 20 July from 12pm and throughout the day. These are being assessed. A decision has not been made yet as to whether there will be an investigation.

Sky News apologized shortly after Brazier's segment. Brazier also penned a column this week apologizing for his actions.

Update: Meanwhile the BBC grovels to a few easily offended viewers

28th July 2014. See article from bbc.co.uk

N ews at Ten,
BBC One, 18 July 2014

Complaint

We received complaints from some viewers who felt the images and descriptions used in a report on flight MH17 were too graphic and upsetting.

Response from BBC News

We appreciate that Daniel Sanford's report from the site of the Malaysian Airlines crash contained images and language which would be distressing to some viewers. With this in mind, we included a warning prior to the report. We must stress that this piece was not intended to sensationalise the crash, but to give a powerful sense of the extent of the tragedy that resulted in the loss of so many lives.

The report on the News at Ten was one of the first reports by a British broadcast journalist from the crash site of the MH17. This was an extremely harrowing scene, which was reflected in the images and descriptions used within Daniel's report.

BBC News is always aware of the need to report with sensitivity, whilst also maintaining our principles of accurate, factual and impartial news coverage.

One Million Moms is a christian morality campaign. The group writes in a 'call to action':

The late night programming on the Cartoon Network, known as Adult Swim, plans to air the non-animated show Black Jesus portraying Jesus as a black guy living in the hood. The show depicts him living in Compton Gardens and makes a mockery of our Lord. The foul language used in the trailer, including using the Lord's name in vain, is disgusting. In addition, there is violence, gunfire and other inappropriate gestures which completely misrepresent Jesus. This is blasphemy!

Black Jesus is set to premiere on August 7 at 11:00 pm ET/ 10:00 pm CT, unless we intervene. Adult Swim plans to blaspheme Jesus on a weekly basis. This mockery will be similar to South Park and Family Guy , but much worse since the entire program will be based on lies about Christianity.

1MM will defend our Savior because He is Holy! Adult Swim is obviously not a family network, and this program is set to air later in the evening when children should be asleep, but that is no excuse. Adult Swim has crossed the line by belittling the Christian religion with foul jokes.

We need to send a loud and clear message to Adult Swim, its owner Turner Broadcasting System, Inc. (a Time Warner Company), and all potential advertisers of Black Jesus that this kind of programming is insulting and completely unacceptable. Adult Swim is not ridiculing any other religion currently and wouldn't dream of mocking Mohammed or Muslims.

If we speak with one voice now, we can keep this program from ever seeing the light of day. Christians must take a stand and not be silent. Networks like Adult Swim continue to mock Christianity, and we will not stand for it. Christians should no longer sit idly by and allow this blasphemy to continue without speaking up in protest. Black Jesus is another attempt to distort the truth about Christianity. There is power in numbers! Forward this to everyone you know in a fight to keep this show off the air.

Update: Even worse than feared

12th August 2014. From onemillionmoms.com

Black Jesus was even worse than its promotions portrayed in the trailer leading up to the broadcast. In the 30-minute premiere, Jesus is recruited by his friend's mother to buy a block of "weed" for a party. This first episode was entitled Smokin', Drinkin', and Chillin' and included:

• 88 profanities are used, including God's name in vain (MA-L rating).
• Jesus uses the f-word multiple times, uses God's name in vain.
• Jesus smokes marijuana and complains about having to share it.
• Jesus is arrested when a drug deal he is leading goes bad.

The Jesus character irreverently refers to God as "Pops," himself as "lord and savior," and is continually obsessed with alcohol and drugs.

The Parents Television Council is a US moralist campaign group. It writes in a press release:

The Parents Television Council has warned parents and advertisers about the premiere of VH1's Dating Naked series, a reality show with contestants who date each other in the nude, and which begins on Thursday, July 17 at 9/8 Central. Previews for the series show contestants naked on camera for the whole show, with the nudity being partially obscured through pixilation. PTC President Tim Winter said:

The core of the TV show's premise -- people dating in the nude -- should be troubling for most parents, and it should absolutely land the show on any responsible advertisers' do-not-buy list. VH1 obviously thinks this is an 'edgy' show, perhaps even groundbreaking, but what's clear is that this is the kind of TV programming that is an affront to most families.

Because of the forced-bundling of cable network programming, every cable subscriber in the country must pay VH1 for this sordid material. Parents should not be required to underwrite this program with their subscription dollars, and advertisers should be mindful not to associate their hard-earned brand reputations by sponsoring it. Corporate sponsors should heed the market research showing how brands were perceived negatively when their ads appeared alongside explicit content.

The PTC is sending an urgent call of caution to parents. We will be holding publicly to account any companies and products that choose to advertise on the premiere of this program and on any subsequent episodes. And we will cite the actions of this Viacom-owned network in our comments supporting Cablevision's antitrust lawsuit challenging the legality of Viacom's network-bundling scheme.

UK TV Censor

It was truly a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity, the chance to see the Monty Python troupe live in their final show at London s O2 arena.

But just minutes into the show, which started at 7.30pm, an hour-and-a-half before the television watershed, chunks of dialogue were rendered inaudible by a beep. Not just any beep, either, but the shrillest, whiniest, most grating beep you'll ever hear in your life. The picture clumsily cut away to a long shot of the venue, presumably lest lip readers could see the colourful, but ludicrously banned, strong language

One routine was obliterated entirely when the broadcast cut away to a pre-recorded item featuring Michael Palin in drag, explaining why the television audience weren't allowed to see it.

Ofcom (or "effing Ofcom" as it was briefly renamed in our house) decided some of the show's content breached its pre-watershed guidelines. If Gold had refused to kowtow to its demands, it would have been heftily fined. The post-watershed second half of the show was broadcast without interference. While the censoring didn't completely ruin the whole evening, it certainly marred our enjoyment.

Gold repeated the show last night, with the missing content reinstated, but that's hardly a substitute for the thrill of of being part of a live communal TV event.

...Read the full article

Ofcom writes in a press release:

Ofcom has published research on consumer attitudes and trends in violence shown on UK TV programmes.

The research supports Ofcom in its role in protecting TV viewers, especially children. It looks at how violence on TV has changed since Ofcom issued guidelines to broadcasters in 2011 to avoid programmes being shown before 9pm that might be unsuitable for children.

The research comprises two separate reports. The first study focused on public attitudes towards violence on TV among people from a range of ages and socio-economic groups.

The second was an analysis of four popular UK soap operas, which looked at instances of violence, or threats of violence, and people's views on them. Research findings

The first report, on the views of audiences, found that different demographic groups showed subtle differences in their views about violent content. However, all agreed that children should not be exposed to any sexual violence on TV before and straight after the watershed.

People considered the time of broadcast to be the single most important factor in determining the acceptability of violent content on TV. Viewers were prepared to tolerate moderately violent scenes before the watershed; however, all agreed that strong scenes with a vulnerable victim were unacceptable before 9pm.

The research also found that viewers have a sophisticated ability to analyse contextual factors when assessing whether violent scenes were acceptable. Many people said they watched violent content for a number of reasons. Some said it made genres, such as action or drama, seem realistic and provided tension, therefore contributing to their TV viewing experience.

The study of soap operas not only looked at violent scenes, but also measured those with menacing or threatening behaviour, and violence that was implied off-screen.

It found that violence in soaps was usually clearly indicated in advance, so viewers were unlikely to be surprised when it took place. The research showed 79% of violent scenes were judged credible and rarely surprised viewers. Broadcasters have also used violence in soap operas to help raise awareness and generate public debate around social issues such as domestic abuse.

Instances of strong scenes, portraying violence that might make the viewer uncomfortable, were very infrequent, at 6% overall. Depictions of terror during violent scenes, such as the imbalance of power in a fight, near fatal violence and post-traumatic stress flashbacks, varied between 3% and 5% in the soaps covered.

The report also found that the amount of violence, or threats of violence, has varied over the years. EastEnders has shown a decline from 6.1 violent scenes per hour in 2001/2002 to 2.1 in 2013.

The level of violence in Coronation Street has remained fairly steady, at around three scenes per hour over the same period. There was an increase in Emmerdale, from 2.5 to over 4 scenes per hour, while Hollyoaks has also shown a rise, from 2.1 scenes per hour between 2001 and 2002 to 11.5 scenes per hour in 2013.

The moralist campaign group writes:

The Parents Television Council is calling on its members and other concerned citizens to file indecency complaints to the FCC over a recent episode of CBS' Reckless that contained explicit sexual content.

The TV-14 (SLV)-rated episode aired on June 29, 2014, at 9 pm ET/PT and 8 pm CT/MT and included these scenes: The episode opened with a woman being pulled over by a police officer and handcuffed to a fence while the officer and the woman had sex. Another scene showed a male attorney watching a video of a woman who was purportedly drugged and then undressed and sexually assaulted by four men on the hood of a police car. In another scene, the same attorney and a female attorney watch the same video of the sexual assault together and subsequently talked about how it turned them on.

PTC President Tim Winter said:

We believe these sexually explicit scenes on CBS' 'Reckless' constitute a violation of the broadcast indecency law due to the patently offensive sexual content airing when children are likely to be in the audience. It is even more troubling that CBS chose to rate the episode as appropriate for 14-year-old children. This is just the latest example of the strained credibility of the TV content rating system.

CBS must be held accountable for using the publicly owned airwaves to beam to every home in the nation repeated graphic depictions of a woman ostensibly being sexually assaulted. As such, we are asking members and others concerned about how TV impacts children to file FCC indecency complaints over this episode.

The BBC responded to a few complaints about a football commentary but were too PC and whimpy to explain what was being complained about:

Complaint

We received complaints from some viewers unhappy with a comment made during coverage of the Argentina v Switzerland match.

Response

We acknowledge that the remark by commentator Mark Lawrenson about Switzerland's Josip Drmic' was inappropriate and we apologise for any offence caused by it.

In fact Lawrenson came under fire for a comment about Switzerland striker Josip Drmic's weak shot at goal. Lawrenson commented that Drmic should have put a skirt on .

This resulted in triggered 172 complaints to the BBC claiming it was offensive and sexist .

Ofcom writes:

The watershed is 50 years old this month. In July 1964, Parliament passed the law that led to measures to protect children from seeing harmful or offensive material on TV in the evenings.

Fifty years on, new Ofcom research shows that most adult TV viewers are aware of the 9pm watershed as a valued way of indicating what is suitable for young viewers.

Ofcom's research shows that 98% of adults in the UK watch TV. Among TV viewers, 94% are aware that the watershed requires broadcasters only to show programmes unsuitable for children after a certain time (compared to 91% in 2008).

Today, more TV viewers believe the watershed is at about the right time (78% in 2013 compared to 70% in 2008), Ofcom's report on UK audience attitudes to broadcast media shows.

In the past five years, there have been falls in the number of viewers saying there is too much violence (35% of adult viewers in 2013, down from 55% in 2008), sex (26% in 2013 versus 35% in 2008) and swearing (35% in 2013 versus 53% in 2008) on TV.

One reason for this is a change in attitude among older viewers. The number of viewers over 65 who believe there is too much swearing (78% in 2008 compared to 55% in 2013) and violence (75% in 2008 compared to 52% in 2013) has fallen over the past five years.

Among those adults who had been offended by something on TV in the last 12 months (18% of adult viewers), nearly four times more people are likely to continue watching the programme than in 2008 (5% in 2008 versus 19% in 2013) and less likely to turn off the TV altogether (32% in 2008 compared to 19% in 2013). Protecting viewers in the future

While on-demand TV is estimated to account for only 2.5% of TV viewing, Ofcom recognises this poses new challenges.

Ofcom is working with Government, other regulators and industry to ensure that children remain protected if they choose on-demand TV over traditional broadcast TV, where Ofcom's strict watershed rules apply.

This would mean that consumers have a clear understanding of the protections that apply on different platforms and devices, and know which regulatory body to turn to if they have any concerns.

Of course the moralist campaigners are not impressed by the decline in whinges.

Pippa Smith of Safermedia said the report showed x-rated content has become normalised and viewers are desensitised to it.

Christian moralist group writes:

ABC Family Channel's new program Mystery Girls does not involve innocent detectives fighting crime as parents might hope, but instead is just another show primarily about sexual encounters.

The show airs during primetime when children are likely watching. The season premiere aired Wednesday evening at 8:30 p.m. ET/7:30 p.m. CT, and with a 14 DL rating it is not suitable for young viewers.

The majority of the content in this nonfamily channel program is adult oriented and includes sexual references and innuendos. The first episode centered on the search for a lost sex tape, which involves forgotten identity of the partner in the tape, not remembering all past sexual partners and a fake funeral.

Mystery Girls is not the Nancy Drew type detective program one might expect on a family network. This show is inappropriate for any network but especially for a family channel. This program is vulgar and vile and needs to be removed from the air immediately.

The christian moralist campaign group whinges:

Warning to parents! ABC Family Channel has introduced yet another sex laden adult sitcom. The Young & Hungry premiere aired Wednesday evening at 8:00 p.m. ET/7:00 p.m. CT and, with a 14 DLS rating, is not suitable for young viewers. The show is airing at a time when children are likely watching. Not only is the program broadcast during primetime, but it will attract a young audience with the title and with the main character being played by the same actress who played the best friend of Disney's Hannah Montana .

The show includes sexual references, innuendos, foul language, homosexual attraction, one night stands and excessive alcohol consumption. Specific examples of content aired during the new thirty-minute family channel sitcom are below.

• Main character, a young personal chef, gets drunk and sleeps with her new boss after the boss's girlfriend breaks up with him
• Discussions about sex preferences and experiences during majority of the episode
• Boss and girlfriend both admit to sleeping with someone else the night before
• Boss and girlfriend make up and sleep together
• Girlfriend is mentally unstable and extremely selfish, with bizarre behavior and unhealthy relationships
• Crude humor about utensils used during an OBGYN visit

This program is obscene for any network but especially for a family channel. This show is indecent and offensive and needs to be removed from television immediately. Young & Hungry is a kiddy version of the lewd show Two and a Half Men .

No doubt moralist campaigners will now be calling for an 11pm watershed for all TV deemed to be made for an adult audience.

Perhaps something missing from the ASA analysis is that considering a range of ages from 10 must surely distort the analysis. Surely 10 year olds go to bed an awful lot earlier than 15 year olds so considering the average is likely underestimate the amount of kids staying up at the higher end of the range. I would suspect that it may be 11pm to 12pm before the teenagers turn off.

The ASA challenged the scheduling of 576 alcohol ads that were broadcast after 9 pm on the seven Box TV music channels in the period February, March, April 2013. In total, the ASA found that the scheduling of 268 ads breached the BCAP Code and the scheduling of 308 ads did not.

Rule 32.2.1 of The UK Code of Broadcast Advertising (the BCAP Code) states that alcohol ads should not be shown in or around programmes commissioned for, principally targeted at or likely to appeal particularly to audiences below the age of 18.

Broadcast Committee of Advertising Practice (BCAP) guidance recommends the use of audience indexing, a statistical tool, to determine the representation of children in relation to the audience as a whole. BCAP guidance states that an alcohol restriction should be applied in programmes where the 10- to 15-year-old audience, indexed against the total audience of all individuals over four years old, produces an index of 120 or more. An index of 120 would mean that 10- to 15-year-olds are 20% over-represented in the programme audience compared to the audience as a whole. Presumably an index of 100 would mean that the program is viewed by an average cross section of all ages.

There were 576 alcohol ads broadcast in programmes on the following channels licensed to Box Television Ltd in the period February, March and April 2013:

1. 4Music (126 ads); described on the 4Music website as a channel that brings you closer to the hottest artists right now .
2. Heat (22 ads); described on the Heat website as a channel that brings you the best in entertainment and celebrity news .
3. Kerrang (138 ads); described on the Kerrang website as the music channel for the world's biggest selling rock magazine .
4. Kiss TV (93 ads); described on the Kiss TV website as the beat of the UK on TV .
5. Magic TV (43 ads); described on the Magic TV website as offering feel good favourites twenty four hours a day .
6. Smash Hits (69 ads); described on the Smash Hits website as hits now and always .
7. The Box (85 ads); described on The Box website as providing fresh music first .

There were 219 ads broadcast between 9 pm and 9.59 pm; 143 ads between 10 pm and 10.59 pm; 102 between 11 pm and 11.59 pm and 102 ads broadcast after 12 am.

The ASA Compliance team challenged whether it was appropriate to schedule alcohol ads in the programmes on these channels because the data indicated that many were likely to appeal particularly to audiences below the age of 18.

ASA Assessment: Complaints upheld in parts

1. 4Music

The ASA acknowledged that the audience figures for 4Music were low and agreed that a time slot based restriction was a reasonable scheduling approach when attempting to comply with the spirit and intention of the Code.

In accordance with the advice of the statistical expert as to the potential for the audience indexing score to be useful to some degree, we noted that the average index score in the 9 pm to 9.59 pm time slot on 4Music varied from 134 to 136. After 10 pm the average index dropped to 95 to 97 and remained below the 120 cut-off point for the rest of the night in every weekly period.

We considered that a 10 pm restriction would have been more appropriate based on the spirit and intention of the rule, based in turn on the hard audience information available and knowledge of the audience profiles.

2. The Box, Smash Hits and Heat

• The Box: average index score 9 pm to 9.59 pm: 121 to 141
• The Heat: average index score 9 pm to 9.59 pm: 140 to 158
• Smash Hits average index score 9 pm to 9.59 pm: 143 to 154
• All fell to under 120 after 10pm (but this still means a lot of kids are watching)

We considered that a 10 pm restriction for alcohol ads on The Box, Smash Hits and Heat would have been more appropriate.

3. Kerrang

• Average index score 9 pm to 9.59 pm: 219 to 241
• Average index score 10 pm to 10.59 pm: 172 to 196
• The average index score continued to exceed 120 until 00.59 am

We therefore considered that an 11 pm restriction would have been more appropriate.

4. Kiss

• Average index score 9 pm to 9.59 pm: 132 to 169
• Average index score 10 pm to 10.59 pm: 133 to 148 some week, under 120 others
• Fell to under 120 after 11pm

We therefore considered that an 11 pm restriction would have been more appropriate.

5. Magic TV Complaints not upheld

• The average index score for the preceding 52 weeks did not exceed 120 in any time slot.

We therefore concluded that the third party had demonstrated that the decision to allow alcohol ads from 9 pm on Magic TV was a reasonable scheduling decision.

Censors in China have banned online video sites from showing popular American TV shows as repressive censorship rules are extended to streaming services.

The Big Bang Theory, The Good Wife, NCIS and The Practice have all been removed from sites including Youku.com and letv.com.

A spokeswoman for Youku said that the State Administration of Press, Publication, Radio, Film and Television (SAPPRFT) did not give a reason for the censorship.

Broadcasters in China have had repressive rules about showing Western content, but until recently the rules were not as strict for online streaming sites.

Match of the Day
BBC One, 31st August 2013

A complainant contacted BBC Audience Services on 2 September 2013 to complain about a comment made by Gary Lineker on Match of the Day on 31 August 2013.

Gary said:

The two signings that Ian Holloway talked about are ... have confirmed Jimmy Kebe the winger from Reading and also from Huddersfield the right back Jack Hunt - have to be very careful with that one. Next, Manchester City versus Hull City...

Gary stressed the letter H on the word Hunt, apparently in order to avoid the possibility of a mis-interpretation of the word Hunt , which, following the word Jack , might have either been heard by some viewers as a verbal use of the word 'cunt'.

The complainant felt that for Gary to say he had to be very careful with that one was a crude and inappropriate comment about Jack Hunt's name on a family show .

Audience Services responded on 12 September 2013 saying that it was most definitely not the case that Gary Lineker had made an offensive comment . They noted that no laughter had accompanied the comment be careful with that one , and that nothing had followed which could be interpreted as crude or inappropriate . Audience Services apologised if the complainant had found the comment unacceptable, but said there was certainly no intention to cause offence .

The complainant was not satisfied with the response and made a follow-up complaint on 8 October 2013 and then escalated his complaint to the Trust. He said that it was indisputable that Gary Lineker was: making a reference to the worst word in the English language. He said that the sentence had no purpose other than to emphasise the potential c word trip-up .

The BBC Editorial Complaints Committee Decision

The Committee considered the response of Audience Services in relation to Match of the Day and noted that Audience Services had apologised for any offence that had been caused, but had assured the complainant there had been no intention to cause offence and Gary Lineker had not used offensive language. Trustees noted that the complainant had watched with his teenage son and regretted any embarrassment he may have felt. However Trustees considered that the comment made by the presenter was elliptical and would be within the expectations of the audience of the very well established programme.

The Committee therefore decided that this appeal did not qualify to proceed for consideration.

Mr Selfridge
ITV3, 30 September 2013, 20:00

Mr Selfridge is a fictional drama series loosely based on the lives of the London department store founder Mr Selfridge, his family and fictional characters representing various members of staff in the department store at the start of the twentieth century.

The series was originally broadcast on ITV at 21:00. This episode was part of a repeat of the series broadcast from 20:00 on ITV3, which specialises in repeats of programmes of contemporary and classic dramas.

A complainant alerted Ofcom to a sex scene broadcast at 20:15 which featured the character Lady Mae Loxley, a London socialite, and Victor Colleano, a waiter at Selfridges & Co. The complainant considered it to be unsuitable for broadcast before the watershed. The scene in question took place in Lady Mae's bedroom and was approximately ten seconds in duration. It started immediately after the end of the first advertising break in the programme with sounds of heavy panting. It showed Victor on top of Lady Mae having sex and the couple reaching a sexual climax. During the sequence the couple were shown naked from the waist up, with the rest of their bodies covered by a duvet, and with Lady Mae's long hair fully covering her breasts.

Ofcom considered Rule 1.20 of the code which states:

Representations of sexual intercourse must not occur before the watershed (in the case of television)...unless there is a serious educational purpose. Any discussion on, or portrayal of, sexual behaviour must be editorially justified if included before the watershed...and must be appropriately limited.

ITV said that this period drama had very little content that would be problematic for children and was expected to appeal to adult viewers rather than children. Although ITV accepted that the scene was briefly sexual it considered it was editorially justified by the context because it revealed a turning point in the relationship between Lady Mae and Victor. ITV said that the scene was post-coital...and neither character was shown nude . It also considered that despite some sexual content the scene was sufficiently brief and that there was no explicit depiction of intercourse . However, ITV apologised for the offence caused and said it had reconsidered the content in light of the concerns raised. Consequently, the Licensee said it would edit the scene for any future scheduling before the watershed and would reserve the original version for 21:00 transmission only.

Ofcom Decision

Rule 1.20 states that any representations of sexual intercourse must not be broadcast before the watershed unless there is a serious educational purpose, and that any portrayal before the watershed of sexual behaviour must be editorially justified and appropriately limited. We noted ITV's comments that the scene was briefly sexual and that there was no explicit depiction of intercourse . Although the sequence was brief and only showed the characters' naked bodies above the waist, it clearly depicted the couple having sex and reaching a climax.

Given that this scene was featured in a period drama series for general entertainment, there was clearly no editorial intention for this scene to be considered as having a serious educational purpose as required by Rule 1.20. Further, it was Ofcom's view that, although this scene had some editorial justification in the context of this period drama, this was not sufficient (and nor was the sequence appropriately limited) to justify its broadcast in this programme at 20:15.

Ofcom took into consideration however that this scene was relatively brief, limited to some extent in what it showed, and was scheduled on ITV3, which typically broadcasts dramas with a greater appeal to adults. Ofcom also took into account that ITV would edit the scene for any future showings of this programme before the watershed. We therefore concluded that this matter should be resolved.

The Parents Television Council is calling on its members to file indecency complaints over an episode of Fox Broadcasting's Dads , which featured an implied depiction of and references to semen, and references to masturbation. The episode was rated TV-14 and aired at 8 pm Eastern/7:00 pm Central on January 14.

The following are the sexual scenes that were featured in this episode:

• Veronica: You don't have a caring bone in your body.
  Eli: Yes, I do. My bone cared for her twice last night. And a bendy third time.
  
• Warner uses a UV light to disinfect Veronica's desk.
  Warner: These things are amazing. It even lights up semen.
  Warner's dad enters, waving "Hi" to everyone. The UV light picks up traces of semen, presumably, on his hand.
  
• Camila tries to watch television with David and Crawford nearby.
  Camila: What about that show "Girls"?
  David: Hey, I'm trying to get erections, not lose them.

PTC President Tim Winter said:

We are urging members of the public to file a formal FCC indecency complaint over this episode of 'Dads.

Parents who have been told repeatedly by the entertainment industry to rely on the TV content ratings system have been fooled once again given this episode's very low TV-14 rating. How is a semen scene appropriate for 14-year-old children?

If parents can't rely on the television ratings system to give them accurate and consistent information about the programs their families might be watching, then the system is worthless -- serving only to give the networks cover as they continue to push the limits of what is deemed acceptable for the broadcast medium.

We urge the FCC to investigate this 'Dads' episode on behalf of families across the nation.

A Russian television station that made its name covering massive street protests against President Vladimir Putin has been taken off the air by three television providers in a move the channel's chief said was censorship.

Dozhd (TV Rain), an independent-minded television station with a strong online presence, has aired aggressive reporting critical of Russian authorities and even-handed broadcasts on Ukraine's anti-government protests.

General Director Natalia Sindeyeva said three providers had dropped the channel in and around Moscow. The station was still available on two major providers in the Moscow area.

The Dozhd has been under pressure since it ran exposes on expensive property owned by high-ranking Kremlin officials. And more recently Dozhd has faced criticism after poking old wounds by asking if Leningrad, now St Petersburg, should have been given to Nazi Germany to save lives during a 872-day blockade during World War Two.

Putin's spokesman Dmitry Peskov told Russian agency Interfax that the survey was beyond what was acceptable from the moral and ethical point of view of our people .

The complainant wrote to the BBC Trust following the decision of the Head of Editorial Compliance and Accountability, BBC News, not to uphold his complaint about BBC news reporting, which he felt was pro-immigrant and pro Muslim .

He referred, first, to a story which he said was reported by the BBC as being about three Lincoln men being jailed for the theft of lead, when the men had, in fact, been three Latvian immigrants.

The second story he referred to in his appeal was, he said, the Oxford sex case , in which the defendants had been referred to as Asians , when, in fact, there were seven defendants from Pakistan and two from North Africa. This, he said, was an insult to Thai, Chinese, Malays and all other Asians.

BBC Initial Decision: Complaint not upheld

The Trust's Senior Editorial Complaints Adviser (the Adviser) replied to the complainant explaining that in reports of this nature, the Adviser considered that it would generally be good practice for BBC reporters to stick to the facts as presented in court. Clearly, where an individual's nationality was relevant to the case, and was highlighted as such in court, it would be a different matter. But, as far as she could see from her research on other cases of lead theft from churches, this did not seem to be a peculiarly Lithuanian (or Latvian) or, indeed, immigrant crime. The Adviser thought that, for these reasons, the Trustees would be unlikely to find that the BBC's report on the lead theft had breached any of the guidelines.

The second case in the complainant's appeal referred to use of the term Asian , when defendants in the sex grooming case in Oxford had, said the complainant, been from Pakistan and North Africa. The Adviser considered that the Head of Editorial Compliance and Accountability, BBC News, had given a full account of references in the Oxford case which had demonstrated that the BBC had reported the men's origins on some relevant occasions. She also noted the references at Stage 2 to coverage of the Rochdale sex rings, the fact that it had been a feature of the case that there had been no agreement on the part of the authorities as to the role played by race and religion, and the BBC's exploration of these issues.

The Adviser considered there was no reasonable prospect of the Trustees finding the reports complained about had been in breach of the Accuracy and/or Impartiality or any other Guidelines, and the appeal would not, therefore, be put before the Trustees.

The complainant requested that the Trustees review the decision not to proceed with his appeal.

BBC Trust Editorial Complaints Committee Decision: Not to proceed with appeal

The Committee was not of the view that evidence had been presented which would be likely to lead it to conclude that BBC News reporting was in breach of Guidelines with regard to the original appeal, which cited the Lincoln and Oxford criminal cases.

The Committee did not believe the complainant's appeal had any reasonable prospect of success but joined with the Adviser in hoping the complainant would be reassured that this was an area the Trustees had given some thought to and would be discussing further with the BBC Executive.

The Committee therefore decided that this appeal did not qualify to proceed for consideration.

The christian moralist campaign group, One Million Moms has called for sponsors to withdraw from the Disney Channel show, Good Luck Charlie . The group spews:

Alerting all parents! If Good Luck Charlie goes through with introducing LGBT content, then the floodgates will be opened for all programs on the Disney Channel - a trend that will be almost impossible to stop.

Disney Channel has very few sponsors and advertisers on its network. Care.com was the only Disney Channel sponsor that was promoted during the January 19, 2014, newest episode of Good Luck Charlie. Care.com often sponsors programs on the Disney network.

An upcoming episode in this last season of Good Luck Charlie will feature a family with two moms, a first for Disney Channel. Because Good Luck Charlie is coming to a close, the characters are only expected to appear in one episode. However, one episode is enough, especially since the network repeatedly airs reruns of all its programs.

One Million Moms launched an email campaign in 2013 that urged Disney officials to abandon their plans to corrupt the children's network with LGBT content. However, Disney officials have not responded to the thousands of emails protesting their plans. Disney has decided to be politically correct instead of providing family-friendly programming. Disney should stick to entertaining, not pushing an agenda.

The Indian government has decreed that the international movie channel, WB (Warner Brothers) will have to shut down for 1 day as punishment for nota applying 31 cuts to the PG-13 rated US comedy, It's a Boy Girl Thing .

The film is rated as UA in India which is a parental guidance rating. The Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) had stipulated 15 voluntary cuts and l6 compulsory cuts in the film for TV broadcast, but these were not implemented.

The film channel had apologised and said that the broadcast was a mistake but the state censors had got very heavy with the film channel claiming:

The Visuals shown are very offensive and obscene as the private parts of male and female are focused upon. The portrayal of the sex change is in bad taste and is indecent. The visuals are not fit to be viewed by children and also not suitable for unrestricted public exhibition. These visuals also denigrate women.

The winter season premiere of The Fosters aired this past Monday on ABC Family Channel. The 14-D (the D is for suggestive dialogue) rated show is packed full of inappropriate content for what is supposed to be a family program.

The controversial plot includes a lesbian couple raising children together, but that is only the beginning of the not family-friendly content in this program. But because family is a misleading part of the network's name, we thought another warning was needed for anyone who continues to watch the channel.

ABC Family's show The Fosters is about two women attempting to redefine marriage while also raising foster, adopted and biological children. New episodes will continue to air on Monday evenings at 9:00pm ET/8:00pm CT. In addition, frequent promos are airing for this series during primetime and during G rated programs on multiple channels. These promos include the two women nude in bed together while hugging and kissing, teen with a bloody face and teen bashing in a car windshield with a baseball bat.

Unacceptable content in the season premiere included:

• Lesbians on their honeymoon lying naked in bed together while hugging and kissing
• Grandmother admits to staying with a past boyfriend she did not really like only because she loved his bed
• Engaging in casual conversation with prostitutes and asking for their help
• Female teen shares a bed with a guy at a hotel
• Teen steals with the goal of getting arrested
• Runaway teen
• Teen breaks probation