Joint report shows audiences want multi-layered broadcasting regulation

Audiences want television and radio content to be regulated, but they can imagine a future in which a 'multi-layered' approach to regulating channels might be possible, according to research published by the BSC, ITC and Radio Authority.
The report, 'Broadcasting Standards Regulation', provides opinions from groups of adults about current regulatory codes for radio and television. The researchers interviewed groups of 20 participants during a series of three one-day participative forums.
Participants consider regulation necessary to ensure acceptable standards and to protect children from offensive or harmful material. Television, in particular, is felt to be a dominant and influential medium, which both mirrors and influences society.
Those surveyed think that regulating broadcasting content is something which contributes to the general good of society. Participants expressed concern that, without regulation, broadcasters would show "what they like, when they like" and said: "If there was no regulation you could have porn movie at nine o'clock in the morning followed by cartoons, followed by something else…" (female viewer, Birmingham).
The area causing most concern is violence, with sexual content and strong language following some way behind. Some participants, especially parents, worry that strong language, in particular, might encourage imitative behaviour. There was concern about radio talk shows featuring strong language or sexual innuendo. A sizeable minority have fears about the breakdown of society and the influence of television on young people, with portrayals of casual sex, drug taking, gang culture and crime.
When asked whether all radio and television channels should be treated in the same way, with the same rules, at first participants agreed. However, over the course of the discussions, they said they could conceive of a future in which a 'multi-layered' approach was adopted, with some differences between expectations of the most popular channels (such as the terrestrial channels, Sky One, etc) and the smaller, niche channels. Similarly, there could be differences between the expectations of national and local radio stations.
Participants feel that radio should be regulated with a 'safe zone' policy priority for all listeners, including children, not to create a watershed but a sense of reasonable expectation from radio stations, so they know how and when to avoid potentially offensive material.
For television, in addition to the Watershed, ideas suggested to complement the current regulatory environment include pre-transmission and on-screen warnings, helping people to make informed opinions about programme content. Sky viewers feel more in control of their viewing, with devices such as locks and PIN numbers to monitor and regulate viewing.
Participants also want to see regulation of broadcast advertising continue, at least as strictly as that for other broadcasting content, since it is unplanned viewing and viewers don't get a choice about whether to see it or not. They were in favour of teleshopping channels having to comply with the same rules as spot advertising - and some consider even stricter rules should apply to teleshopping.
Sponsorship of programmes is tolerated by most, who accept that it is a useful source of revenue for the broadcasters and one which, under current regulation, does not impact on the editorial integrity of editorial content. However, participants do not want to see sponsorship of news, current affairs or investigative programmes allowed, or for more direct relationships between sponsors and programmes.
(GB)