The purprose of a regulatory body is to require restrictions, impose conditions and set standards as an organisation and enforcing such regulations where needed. Some regulatory bodies are self regulating in the creative media sector for instance the free press in the United Kingdom and the British Board of Film Censors are both self regulating bodies adhering to their own set of standards, use of ethics and legislation.
It is imperitive for these regulatory bodies to bring a legal mandate to a profession in order to enforce legal constraints against those who wish to breach media and property laws. However not all regulatory functions work in the interests of those with regulated professions such as a recording artist or an author. There are government regulatory bodies that provide services for sole registered traders in businesses and limited companies. Futhermore there are regulatory bodies for unregulated professions such as charted surveyors (RICS).
PCC as a
Regulatory Body
The Press Complaints Commission are a self-regulatory body, that has been operating as the Britishing free press for over 50 years. The body first existed as the voluntary Press Council in 1953 with an aim to promote and maintain high ethical standards for journalism in this country. However by the 1980's publications had failed to work to their code of practise, abandoning even basic ethics for journalism. Parliament hadn't let this gone unnoted, many members of the press were said to have lost confidence in the Press Council. Some members of the press believed a better solution would be to introduce new privacy laws.
After these serious implications the government proposed a Departmental Committee under David Calcutt QC, his objective was to “to consider what measures (whether legislative or otherwise) are needed to give further protection to individual privacy from the activities of the press and improve recourse against the press for the individual citizen”. David Calcutt published a report in 1990 calling for a new Press Complaints Commission in place of the Press Council and instead of further statutary controls.
After these serious implications the government proposed a Departmental Committee under David Calcutt QC, his objective was to “to consider what measures (whether legislative or otherwise) are needed to give further protection to individual privacy from the activities of the press and improve recourse against the press for the individual citizen”. David Calcutt published a report in 1990 calling for a new Press Complaints Commission in place of the Press Council and instead of further statutary controls.
The press responded enthusiastically to the report and the Press Complaints Commission was an official legally enforced act by early 1991. For the first time in journalistic history ,a group of highly experienced regional and national editors composed a code of practise for the PCC to publish. The code included 16 clauses covering accuracy, discrimination and the right to privacy. Ammendments were later made throughout the nineties and the 2000's most notably the definition of private property, child protection in cases of abuse and any breaches of the code will require a full adjudicaition from the publisher. This adjudicaition would include a detailed explanation as to why they breached the code with intentions to serve in the public interest and with how and whom they made breaches to the code of practise.
However the PCC have since received heavy criticism from well known authority figures, media personalities and politicians particularly leader of the opposition Ed Milliband due to its petty attempt at handling the News of the World phone hacking scandal. Christopher Meyer was the chairman of the PCC at the time however the PCC do not have legal power to prosecute any member of the press or press officials who are guilty of any legal or ethical misconduct in the press. The conclusion of the Leveson inquiry lead to Lord Justice Leveson calling for an independent press watchdog that would tighten the restrictions and reduce the chances of anything like the phone hacking scandal happening again.
Prime Minister David Cameron recently announced that there had been a breakdown in communication between the three main political parties, Cameron ultimately deciding to pull the plug on cross-party talks to come to a conclusion on new independent press regulation. However it is said that Cameron is grandstanding on the subject, as he has stated to both deputy prime minister Nick Clegg and labour leader Ed Milliband he wishes to implicate no press laws on the current free press.
However the PCC have since received heavy criticism from well known authority figures, media personalities and politicians particularly leader of the opposition Ed Milliband due to its petty attempt at handling the News of the World phone hacking scandal. Christopher Meyer was the chairman of the PCC at the time however the PCC do not have legal power to prosecute any member of the press or press officials who are guilty of any legal or ethical misconduct in the press. The conclusion of the Leveson inquiry lead to Lord Justice Leveson calling for an independent press watchdog that would tighten the restrictions and reduce the chances of anything like the phone hacking scandal happening again.
Prime Minister David Cameron recently announced that there had been a breakdown in communication between the three main political parties, Cameron ultimately deciding to pull the plug on cross-party talks to come to a conclusion on new independent press regulation. However it is said that Cameron is grandstanding on the subject, as he has stated to both deputy prime minister Nick Clegg and labour leader Ed Milliband he wishes to implicate no press laws on the current free press.
Key Issues the PCC regulate...
- Provides a free and accessible 24 hour helpline to the public
- Providing a code of practise for the publishing press to follow correctly
BBFC as a
Regulatory Body
The BBFC (British Board of Film Classification) is a non-governmental organisation funded by the film industry, they specialise in cencorship it enforces statutary requirements to classify the age certificates/ratings for cinema, videos, DVDs and a portion of video games.
The BBFC were first established in 1912 by the film industry as an indepdent regulatory body, the organisation's main goal is to manage censorship and to unite the classification of film nationally. Statutory powers do remain with local councils which have the power to overrule any of the BBFC's decisions passing films they reject, banning films they have passed, and even waiving cuts, instituting new ones, or altering categories for films exhibited under their own licensing jurisdiction. However after the introduction of the Licensing Act of 2003 proprieters are responsible for what is shown in their venue. This independent body helps to regulate the classification of films and some video game media. Studies show that more money is being invested in video game animation and consumer demand for more and more videogames continues to increase. This shows that films are proving less popular in the 21st century.
Their classification for a theatrical film release, is dictated by a group of atleast two examiners who will rate a film according to the BBFC guidelines which are often ammended accordingly. The final decision is made by a Senior Examiner, but if a decision can't be met or if policy issues arise, the film that is to be certified will be seen by other members of the board including the board of Director and the presidential team. They will often correspond with external legal advisors for any specialist advice for the legal acceptability of film content. Examiners will examine the theme and behaviour of a film, the language used, nudity, sex, violence and sexual violence.
The BBFC will rate films under the following categories, depending on the film's content and target audience, U (all ages) PG (Parental Guidance) 12A (Accompanied by an Adult) 15, 18, Restricted 18 (Adult Films) and finally the E (exempt) classification, these are films with no formal legal obligation.
The BBFC will rate films under the following categories, depending on the film's content and target audience, U (all ages) PG (Parental Guidance) 12A (Accompanied by an Adult) 15, 18, Restricted 18 (Adult Films) and finally the E (exempt) classification, these are films with no formal legal obligation.
Key Issues the BBFC regulate...
- Film Classification
- Video Game Classification
Mechanical Copyright Protection
Society as a
Regulatory Body
The Mechanical Copyright Protection Society was first established in 1924, it is a non-profit organisation its purpose was to collect royalties from the gramophone companies at the time and pay them to their clients who were registered musicians under Phonographic Performance Limited. Some years later the MCPS merged with the long established Perfoming Rights Society merging their collective efforts as one organisation.
Key Issues the MCPS regulate...
- Regulating piracy
- Issuing registered clients/musicians with royalties under the The Copyright Designs & Patents Act, 1988
PRS as a
Regulatory Body
PRS (performing rights society) is a self regulatory body that protects the rights and copyright ownership of recording artists, songwriters, classical composers, TV and film score composers and library music creators. Members of their organisation exist all over the world from well known and distributed musicians to those who provide music in advertising, TV, film, fashion and the video games industry. Their current membership capacity consists a total of 95,000 members. The PRS ensure their members receive royalties for their music that has or is being used by a media producer or in advertising.
The organisation was first ebstablished as the Performing Rights Society in 1914 its first purpose was to collect money from those who were performing live from sheet music, this became popular with composers in particular, for example Edward Elgar, Ray Davies, Elton John, Eric Clapton, Mick Jagger and Keith Richards are all members.
The body works as a switchboard for companies or venues that wish to use a musicians music for specific events, or global event organisers. This way PRS make it easier for both parties, the musicians don't get inundated with requests from organisations or venues to use the desired music, and the organisers don't have to contact the musician directly which could result in numerous discrepencies between recording artist and the proprieter.
The PRS deal with a number of daily complaints their is a code of conduct established by Ombudsman concerning members of the PRS and licensees they have a number of teams on hand to answer queries and resolve any issues before they become a major problem.
When joining PRS a members rights are transferred to them, these rights are:
- the right to perform the music in the public (concerts, pubs, shops etc)
- to communicate the music to the public (including broadcasting, broadcasting on demand and use of music on the Internet interactive services, including satellite and cable transmissions)
Key Issues the PRS regulate...
- Copywright issues with owner and media producer
- Forging alliances to legislate copywright administration in the UK and overseas
ASA as a
Regulatory Body
ASA (advertising standards authority) is a relf regulatory body it is not supported by the government of the United Kingdom but in fact supported by a levy in the advertising industry. It does not have the power to make legislation however its code of advertising practise clearly reflects legislation they work to investigate false advertising (of all media), offensive material, breaches of data protection, internet advertisements and banner links (that apply to their remit) falsified sales promotions etcetera.
Their website seems to promote themselves as an organisation bound on values and principles, they seem to be in touch and up to date promoting their twitter account. Their goal is to regulate the content of advertising, sales promotions and direct marketing successfully. Their values are instilled on reliability and providing a fair and ethical, accessible and helpful, open and accountable service to the public.
They also publish rulings and cover bad publicity of their sanctions towards advertising, marketing and falsified sales promotions. A company can appeal successfully against the ASA if there is any flaws in the ASA's investigation. A company may also file for appeal under the grounds of any probable explanations to a lack of evidence on the company's part during an investigation, as long as the ASA are met with the correct evidence. However this will be reviewed by an indepedent reviewer and such appeals against a adjudication must be 21 days within that adjudication.
The ASA regulate under a contract with Ofcom and are funded by advertisers from an "arm's length arrangement" to certify their indendence they have a seperate funding mechanism so the ASA are unaware of which advertisers are funding them and the ammount they contribute. This anonymity helps stimulate independence and encourages a will to remain bias when regulating the advertising industry.
Their complaints procedure requires that you give your personal details in correspondence the Data Protection Act of 1998 these details are never disclosed, they are only disclosed if a consumer complains about no receival of goods or wishing to be removed from a company database. If the complaint comes from a rival competetor they require the company to be named, this helps limit the number of reactionary or petty claims made to the ASA. To make a complaint a member of the public may address one online via their website under the 'consumers' section of their webpage:
They also publish rulings and cover bad publicity of their sanctions towards advertising, marketing and falsified sales promotions. A company can appeal successfully against the ASA if there is any flaws in the ASA's investigation. A company may also file for appeal under the grounds of any probable explanations to a lack of evidence on the company's part during an investigation, as long as the ASA are met with the correct evidence. However this will be reviewed by an indepedent reviewer and such appeals against a adjudication must be 21 days within that adjudication.
The ASA regulate under a contract with Ofcom and are funded by advertisers from an "arm's length arrangement" to certify their indendence they have a seperate funding mechanism so the ASA are unaware of which advertisers are funding them and the ammount they contribute. This anonymity helps stimulate independence and encourages a will to remain bias when regulating the advertising industry.
Key Issues the ASA regulate...
- Protecting Consumer Choice
- Formally investigating any legal or ethical breaches of the UK's Advertising Code
OFCOM as a
Regulatory Body
OFCOM (the office of communications) is a government approved regulatory body that monitors the ethics and practises of the broadcasting, postal service and telecommunication industries and also operate wireless device companies.
This office of communications was established first in 2002 and received full authority after its establishment from the Communications Act 2003.
After this act was established Ofcom could now make use of their powers to step in and take action in order to benefit citizens and consumers. They make use of their powers by encouraging competition or resolving disputes between communications providers and their consumers.
This was quoted from their website:
'We also enforce comsumer proction law, protect and manage the radio spectrum and encure viewers and listeners are prottected from offensive and harmful material and treated fairly they have three enforcement teams that deal with complaints from the general public.'
'We also enforce comsumer proction law, protect and manage the radio spectrum and encure viewers and listeners are prottected from offensive and harmful material and treated fairly they have three enforcement teams that deal with complaints from the general public.'
The consequences for not adhering to content standards in television and radio Ofcom will prepare a preliminary view provide it to the broadcaster and request representations in 10 working days once Ofcom receive the broadcasters’ representations on the preliminary view Ofcom will reach a final decision and inform the decision. Before Ofcom publish their decision they will send a copy to the broadcaster in breach of content standards, they will then publish the decision.
Depending on the severity of the misconduct they may decide to issue a statutory sanction against the broadcaster "Procedures for the consideration of statutory sanctions in breaches of broadcast licenses" will apply. They also have the ability and financial resources to fine you in a court of law for not adhering to the content standards or any breaches of The Broadcasting Act of 1990.
Key Issues Ofcom regulate...
- Protecting the under 18's (under section 1 of the Broadcasting Code)
- Harm and Offence (Section Two)
- Crime (Section Three)
- Religion (Section Four)
- Due Impartiality and Due Accuracy and Undue Prominence of Views and Opinions (Section Five)
- Elections and Referendums (Section Six)
- Commercial References in Television Programming (Section Nine)
- Commercial Communications in Radio Programming (Section Ten)
R
No comments:
Post a Comment