Access key 0 - Accessibility
Skip To Content | Skip To Navigation
 

Home > About Ofcom > Corporate Structure and Governance > Content Board > Notes of Content Board  > 039


19|07|05

Minutes Of The Twenty-Ninth Meeting Of The Ofcom Content Board Held At Riverside House On 18 & 19 July 2005

Present

Richard Hooper Chairman

Sara Nathan Deputy Chairman

Sue Balsom Member

Floella Benjamin Member (minute 2 - 63)

Kevin Carey Member

Jonathan Edwards Member

Pam Giddy Member (minute 2 - 63)

Matthew MacIver Member

Kath Worrall Member

Kip Meek Senior Partner, Competition and Content (Ofcom) (minutes 17 – 63)

Tim Suter Partner, Content and Standards (Ofcom)

In Attendance

[Withheld from published minutes]

Apologies:

Rosemary Kelly Member

Adam Singer Member

Cross Promotion: Update and Proposals for new Content Rules

1. [Withheld from published minutes] and [Withheld from published minutes] presented paper CB 85(05) which advised the Content Board of the work being undertaken by the executive to review the current cross promotion rules, which regulate cross promotion of programmes, channels and related services on commercial television and were issued by the ITC in 2002. Members NOTED that cross promotion was promotional airtime (self and cross) which arose as a result of advertising minutage rules and programme lengths, and that promotions were separate from advertising, i.e. no payment or consideration given. The Content Board NOTED that the current rules did not apply to the BBC , however the executive hoped that the DCMS would be able to use Ofcom’s approach in this area when reviewing the BBC ’s Charter.

2. Members CONSIDERED the current rule that limited cross promotion to where the broadcaster had not less than a 30% shareholding in the promoted channel, and the rule that limited the subject of cross promotion to channels or related services. Members NOTED that the executive recommended that it was no longer appropriate to define cross promotion relationships in this way and considered the reasons for this recommendation . The Content Board then considered two options proposed by the executive. [Withheld from published minutes].

3. Members CONSIDERED the second option [Withheld from published minutes].

4. [Withheld from published minutes]. It was NOTED that the broadcasters had not yet been approached to find out if they would prefer to have guidance in this area. However, Members NOTED that feedback from broadcasters suggested that they were in favour of a deregulatory approach. Members considered the advantages and disadvantages of both options and AGREED to support the recommendation to issue guidance.

5. Members were reminded of the k ey findings of the consumer research, in that generally consumers were not bothered by promotions, found them useful and felt that the current level of on air cross promotions was about right.

6. Members NOTED that the current content cross promotion rules were intended to ensure that advertising and programme content were kept separate; that promotions provided viewers with useful and relevant information; and that viewer irritation caused by ‘clutter’ was minimised. It was NOTED that the executive felt that it was no longer clear that a separate set of rules was required to address these concerns, in that the Broadcasting Code ensured separation between advertising and programmes and allowed references within programmes to other programmes, related services etc, subject to certain conditions (e.g. editorial justification). It was also felt that the level of promotional activity was self-limiting as broadcasters did not want to annoy or alienate viewers. This was backed up by the Ofcom research which suggested viewers found promotions useful and were not concerned by current levels of activity. Members were reminded that Section 10 of the Broadcasting Code did not apply to BBC services funded by the licence fee or grant in aid.

7. The Content Board NOTED that the executive's proposed approach was to rely on the Broadcasting Code in relation to in-programme promotions. Members AGREED with this proposal [Withheld from published minutes]. Members NOTED that there were conceptual difficulties with applying the concepts within Section 10 of the Broadcasting Code to promotions outside programmes in that a promotion almost by definition would seem unduly prominent and would not be in context (unlike references within a programme). The executive recommended that such promotions should be carved out from Section 10 of the Broadcasting Code, and what could be promoted should be limited to broadcasting related products or services. In addition it was NOTED that the Advertising Code would apply in relation to misleading claims within promotions. Members discussed the self-limiting effect that viewing figures would have on the length and number of cross promotions. Members recognised the problem relating to Section 10 and cross promotions outside programmes, but AGREED that the executive should try to identify a way of addressing these problems without affecting Section 10 of the Broadcasting Code, for example through guidance.

8. The Content Board NOTED an update on competition issues. [Withheld from published minutes]. Members discussed the implications of these competition issues. It was recognised that there had to be a robust competition analysis completed in this area, with a high level of evidence needed as there was a possibility of appeal. It was NOTED that the drafting of the consultation document on this area would be critical. Therefore the p ublication of a document had been delayed until September 2005. It was of concern to Members that equal promotion was given to all platform providers to provide consumers with appropriate and adequate choice.

Food Advertising to children: Update and Options for Pre-Consultation

9. [Withheld from published minutes] and [Withheld from published minutes] presented presented paper CB 79(05) which updated Members in relation to the Food Advertising to Children project and proposed a process of pre-consultation with stakeholders on a broad range of policy options. Members NOTED that the project followed the major research project undertaken by Ofcom in early 2004, which had resulted in the publication of a research report “Childhood Obesity – Food Advertising in Context” in July 2004. Members were reminded that the report had concluded that television advertising had a modest direct effect and a probably larger, but unquantifiable, indirect effect on children’s food preferences, and that there was consequently a case for proportionate and targeted action in terms of broadcast code rules to contribute to the national initiative aimed at addressing the issue of childhood health and obesity. In addition Ofcom pointed to research demonstrating that there were many more important factors (e.g. the child’s own taste preferences, price, familiarity, peer pressure, healthiness and convenience) than broadcast advertising in determining children’s food preferences. Members NOTED the progress which had been made by the national initiative, led by the Department of Health (DOH), and Ofcom’s role in the initiative. It was NOTED the Ofcom was reliant on the other parties to complete their work on target to enable Ofcom to progress according to plan. It was NOTED that the Food Standards Agency (FSA) would not be formally launching the nutrient profiling (NP) scheme until the Autumn of 2005, but that Ofcom would continue with its consultation with the assumption that the NP would be launched during the consultation.

10. The Content Board NOTED that the executive proposed to pre-consult with important stakeholders on the range of options available, with the aim of:

• testing the range of policy options on the key players;

• taking on board any strong reactions or suggestions, including suggestions for possible acceptable packages of measures;

• flushing out any gaps in our own analysis and range of options;

• pre-empting some of the strongest public reactions by stakeholders with potentially most to lose, or with the strongest public agendas; and

• updating and gaining feedback from the key players on the planned programme of research.

It was NOTED that Ofcom’s policy preferences would not be revealed during the pre-consultation. Members reviewed the list of stakeholders to be pre-consulted and suggested that the School Dinners Taskforce and the DfES be included. It was NOTED that the Taskforce was part of the DoH, and it was AGREED that the executive would revisit the list of stakeholders in relation to Government departments to ensure that the relevant departments were involved in the pre-consultation. Members NOTED that Scotland was included in some sections of the White Paper but not all of the sections.

11. Members NOTED that following the pre-consultation meetings, the executive would refine the impact assessments and then decide on which policy options would be recommended within the consultation. [Withheld from published minutes]. It was RECOMMENDED that Ofcom should not make proposals which were not evidence based and proportionate, and that Ofcom should make its reliance on other parties delivering their part in the initiative clear to the public.

12. [Withheld from published minutes]:

[Withheld from published minutes]

13. [Withheld from published minutes]

14. Members NOTED the early indications of the impact of those options on broadcasters, the practical constraints to evaluating the benefits of those options, and a possible way forward that could be explored with advertisers and broadcasters. It was NOTED that further work on the impact of options, both by Ofcom and by the DoH, would be important in determining which measures were appropriate. [Withheld from published minutes]

15. Members NOTED an update on the progress of the outcome of the stage 1 research which had been undertaken, prior to initiating the deliberative research. [Withheld from published minutes].

Internet Technology

16. The Content Board NOTED a presentation and demonstration of internet technology given by [Withheld from published minutes] and [Withheld from published minutes].

Minutes of the Meetings held on 20&21 June 2005 (Content Board Minutes 28(05)) and Matters Arising

17. The minutes of the Content Board meeting held on 21/21 June 2005 were AGREED. It was NOTED that Graham Howell was still developing Ofcom Policy in relation to the recording of attributable voting within minutes and would circulate his decision to Members in due course. It was NOTED that [Withheld from published minutes] had been appointed as the Independent Chairman of the National Advisory Committee for Scotland .

Content and Standards Group Report

18. A copy of the new Ofcom organisational chart was tabled for information. Kip Meek updated Members in relation to the key changes to the organisation and reporting lines, including changes to his own remit. Members NOTED the impending retirement of [Withheld from published minutes] presented and [Withheld from published minutes] presented from Ofcom and expressed their gratitude to both colleagues for their support of the Content Board during its first few years. Members wished to extend a Content Board farewell to both colleagues. Members particularly NOTED changes which affected the Content and Standards Group and the Nations and Regions. [Withheld from published minutes]. Tim Suter then updated Members in relation to current Content and Standards people and policy issues. The Content Board NOTED that the Broadcasting Code would come into effect on 25 July 2005 . It was NOTED that the executive were undertaking a series of stakeholder workshops on the Broadcasting Code, to which feedback had been positive. It was REQUESTED that some thought be given to working with Universities in relation to the Broadcasting Code. Members NOTED that the Content and Standards Group had recently conducted an awayday, where colleagues discussed communications issues.

Rolling Forward Plan of Content Board Agendas

19. Tim Suter introduced the schedule CB 93(05) which set out the rolling forward plan of the Content Board agenda to December 2005, the contents of which were NOTED. Members NOTED that at the strategic away day in November it was intended that the Content Board would consider the Board’s performance and plans going forward, and consider new media and citizen-consumer issues. Members were asked to ensure that they arrived in Newcastle on 16 November as the awayday would commence at 9am on 17 November 2005 . Members were pleased to NOTE that an item on the Gaelic Project Group had been planned for a future meeting.

Ofcom Board Meetings of 7, 14 and 22 June 2005

20. Kip Meek reported on the Ofcom Board meetings held on 7, 14 and 22 June 2005 . The main points to note were that :

Members queried whether it would have been possible to have kept the Content Board updated in relation to the review of the financial terms of the Channel 3 and 5 licences. It was AGREED that this would be looked at for the future. It was NOTED that the operation of the Content Board and the Ofcom Board had not been included in the risk review. It was CONFIRMED that both boards would be conducting their own reviews later in the year.

Members’ Interests

21. No Member interests were declared for incorporation into the register of interests.

Radio Licence Format Change Request: CN Group request change of Format to Kix 96 in Coventry

22. [Withheld from published minutes] and [Withheld from published minutes] presented paper CB 94(05) which advised Members of a Local Radio format change request to Kix 96. Members NOTED that Kix 96 was a commercial station for Coventry , competing against heritage station Mercia FM and Classic Gold on AM. It was NOTED that the original award had been made in 1990, and that the Promise of Performance reflected the ideals of a community station in that the targeting was towards West Indian, Asian, and the young and Irish communities. Members NOTED that the station had been acquired by the CN Group in 1999, who had experienced difficulty audience-building, even though the Format which evolved from the Promise allowed for such community content to be spread through delivery within the music.

23. The Content Board NOTED that CN Group had submitted a request to replace the format with a more across-the-board musical approach, allowing a more commercial sound and a better chance of challenging Mercia FM for revenue. Members NOTED that as the executive felt that CN’s proposals would substantially change the character of service of the station, the request could only be consented to if Ofcom was satisfied that one or more of the following three criteria are satisfied:

• The change would not narrow the range of programmes available by way of relevant independent radio services in Coventry ; or

• The change would be conducive to the maintenance or promotion of fair and effective competition in Coventry ; or

• There was evidence that, amongst persons living in Coventry , there was significant demand for, or significant support for the change.

It was NOTED that CN believed that the second and third criteria were satisfied.

24. The Content Board NOTED that the recommendation of the executive was that the request, whilst understandable from CN’s commercial perspective, should be rejected, as the executive did not believe that the CN Group had made a convincing case of satisfying any of the criteria. The executive felt that the change would narrow the range of services available and would constitute a substantial change to the character of service of Kix 96. The Content Board NOTED that in relation to the maintenance of fair and effective competition, insufficient evidence had been provided by Kix 96 in its submission and that Ofcom could not therefore be adequately satisfied that the change of Format would meet this criterion.

25. Members NOTED that there had been a limited response to the consultation; however, those who did respond were unanimously against agreement to the requested change. In addition, it was NOTED that there were no responses from listeners expressing any desire to maintain the service in its current format, despite on-air announcements made to inform listeners of the consultation. Members NOTED the content of the consultation responses accompanying the paper.

26. The Content Board NOTED that there had not been any recent changes in the Coventry radio market. Concern was raised in relation to the competition issues and Members gave consideration to due process in this area. [Withheld from published minutes].

27. Following consideration of all the issues, the Content Board AGREED that it CONCURRED with the recommendation of the executive. It was NOTED that this recommendation would be passed to the Radio Licensing Committee ( RLC ) which would make a decision on the request at its meeting on 25 July 2005 . It was AGREED that prior to circulation to the RLC a section on relevant legal opinion would be included in the paper. It was NOTED that the executive anticipated issuing guidance on format change requests to licensees in September 2005 as part of the format regime paper.

Radio Review: Phase II: Update

28. [Withheld from published minutes] and [Withheld from published minutes] presented paper CB 77(05) which set out an overview of the findings of the audience research for phase 2 of the Radio Review and proposed roles for each sector. It was NOTED that the executive were working towards defining a set of public purposes for radio, which would help to define the overall strategic direction for the radio industry. The Content Board ’s attention was drawn to Ofcom’s statutory duties in this area which were to:

• Secure a wide range of radio services of high quality appealing to a variety of tastes and interest;

• Optimise the use of spectrum;

• Maintain plurality of radio providers;

• Ensure standards via programme codes; and

• Protect local programming and local production.

29. The Content Board NOTED the findings of the audience research into how listeners valued local services. It was NOTED that a wide range of national and local stations increased the range of choice available. Members considered whether there was a decreasing need for intervention. It was NOTED that intervention in the radio market was currently significant and that public funding, via the BBC , accounted for a significantly greater proportion of the radio market than it did in television. Members NOTED that the executive felt that as the market changed, new services would be launched and competition increased, and therefore it was possible that less intervention would be needed to secure the elements of radio to satisfy both consumers and citizens.

30. Members NOTED that prior to considering de-regulation Ofcom needed to understand what the market would deliver and whether, by itself, the market would meet consumer and citizen needs. It was NOTED that the phase 1 analysis of France and the United States suggested that, left to itself, the market would tend to produce less local content than currently enjoyed in the UK and would tend not to produce the range of programming provided by the BBC . The executive had therefore tried to determine what it was about radio that mattered to listeners and therefore what regulation should be trying to achieve. Members NOTED a number of changes in technology and spectrum which would assist in this area. Members were advised of a new system, complementary to DAB , called DRM which would be suited to smaller stations which were not based on a multiplex system. It was anticipated that this system would allow the provision of a digital migration pack. It was NOTED that the timescale for the migration of radio stations would be lengthy.

31. The Members considered the issues raised and information contained within the paper. It was NOTED that the aim of the executive was for a strategic withdrawal from regulation wherever possible, but to regulate in order to protect localness on digital and to ensure plurality and competition. Members considered the nature of the radio market in relation to the trend by larger radio groups to takeover the smaller stations. Members discussed the barriers within the current licensing system to children’s local radio and NOTED that there was the potential for consideration on a National level.

32. Consideration was also given to the availability of service to rural areas, and it was NOTED that the availability of appropriate technology was crucial to the success of a roll out of service to rural areas. It was NOTED that a project to be initiated in September 2005 would look at what could be done in this area. It was NOTED that it was key to ensure that the BBC was supportive of any plans in this area. Members AGREED that Ofcom must consider the topography of the UK to ensure that no one was disadvantaged in the future of radio.

33. Members discussed the plurality of provision and SUGGESTED that if regulation was withdrawn, guidance could be provided to inform, educate and empower local communities to provide plurality of provision locally. It was also SUGGESTED that guidance could be provided to minority applicants when completing radio licence applications. Members also considered the regulation of community radio and how this affected the competition between commercial and community radio. It was AGREED that progress with the appointment of the Chairman of the Community Radio Fund would be investigated.

Production Sector Review: Update

34. [Withheld from published minutes] updated Members in relation to the general progress of the work of the executive on the production sector review. It was NOTED that the review concerned essential aspects of the relationship between television broadcasters and the production sector – focusing in particular on the key production quotas, and the operation of the commissioning system between producers and broadcasters. Members NOTED that an internal working document had recently been presented to the Policy Executive, as a thought piece to ensure that the economic arguments were adequately structured regarding the rationale for intervention. It was NOTED that the paper was very focussed on economic concerns and not focused on the creativity and diversity issues. In addition it was NOTED that the paper was intended to pull together the conceptual thinking and set out the early propositions. It was AGREED that the paper would be circulated to Content Board Members following the meeting. Members were REQUESTED to send comments on the paper to [Withheld from published minutes] and [Withheld from published minutes].

35. The Content Board NOTED that a significant work programme was underway to address the issues which had been identified in this area. The first major comprehensive census of the independent production sector was being conducted, with a view to assessing the current position and key developments in the industry. It was NOTED that the data was expected to be received shortly, and it was intended that the findings would be presented to the Content Board at its September 2005 meeting. It was NOTED that there had been a good response to the survey. In addition a significant interview programme was being carried out in the sector, with discussions taking place with over 30 producers, distributors and finance companies on the key issues being faced by those doing business in the sector. It was NOTED that the executive were attempting to speak to both small and large producers. It was NOTED that this would be supplemented by a further set of discussions and analysis surrounding the operation of the Codes of Practice – to include a review of broadcasters’ commissioning data and an assessment of concerns raised surrounding the Codes. In addition it was NOTED that as the executive viewed consultation and external engagement as critical to the review, they had organised a series of seminars in the Nations and Regions of the UK , and would hold a major industry event in London in September 2005.

36. The Content Board NOTED that it was anticipated that the consultation document would be published in November 2005, with conclusions being made in early 2006. [Withheld from published minutes].

37. Following consideration of the update provided Members expressed their AGREEMENT with the analysis. It was NOTED that the project was considering innovation. [Withheld from published minutes].

Future Funding of Production : Product Placement

38. [Withheld from published minutes] presented paper CB 95(05) which informed Members of progress being made with the project to assess the future sources of funding of television production. Members NOTED that there was an apparent threat to the traditional spot advertising funding model of commercial TV (from PVRs and the potential for delivery of audiovisual content via broadband internet) which suggested a need for Ofcom to investigate and evaluate new potential funding sources and, if necessary, recommend regulatory changes to allow these to develop. It was NOTED that the project had picked up two issues remaining from the Code consultation, which were product placement and future consideration of the issue of appeals for funds from viewers.

39. The Content Board NOTED that the executive were trying to establish how large the threat was to conventionally funded television channels. [Withheld from published minutes].

40. Members NOTED the interim findings from the literature research and data review (US experience), the pre consultation meetings with ‘prop’ placement agencies, advertisers, agencies, media buyers and broadcasters and independent producers. It was NOTED that a debate was ongoing between broadcasters and producers on which party would access this new revenue stream. Also, reactions from advertisers had been mixed. Some advertisers already had products placed for no consideration and therefore were not in favour of relaxing the rules unless accompanied by greater prominence in programmes. [Withheld from published minutes].

41. In addition Members NOTED the interim findings from the audience qualitative research into acceptability of different funding mechanisms and economic analysis/impact analysis. The majority of the respondents felt that they were happy with product placement as long as it was realistic, relevant and not too prominent. It was NOTED that there was some difficulty in establishing what would be considered as “too prominent”. Respondents felt that transparency was vital in relation to product placement, and were not keen on an option of increasing the amount of advertising. Members NOTED that to ensure transparency product placement must be prominent.

42. The Content Board gave consideration to the issues raised and provided feedback to the executive. A number of Members remained to be convinced that product placement would be a positive step forward. It was AGREED that a tape would be compiled for Content Board Members to demonstrate different types of product placement. Members were in AGREEMENT that product placement should not be allowed in news or current affairs programmes. It was NOTED that the TWF consultation document looked to allow product placement for the first time, but to ban product placement in children’s, religious and news programmes. It was SUGGESTED that any relaxation of the rules should ensure a reflection of the UK ’s culture. Members considered the self regulating effect that would be seen if audiences did not like the product placement within programmes. It was NOTED that any complaints in relation to product placement would be within Ofcom’s remit and therefore it could increase the regulatory workload. It was NOTED that the executive anticipated producing a decision paper for consideration in the autumn.

TWF Review: Update

43. [Withheld from published minutes] presented paper CB 96(05) which was intended to be a stimulus for debate of the Review of the EU TWF Directive, considering the Commission’s approach to regulation and the implications for future regulation of content as a whole. Members were reminded that they had received an initial briefing about the Review of the EU TWF Directive in April 2005. It was NOTED that the Ofcom Board had decided to engage with the TWF Directive review (November 2004) because of the impact on UK broadcasting regulation as well as potentially the impact on the regulation of new media services and radio for the first time. Members NOTED that the briefing pack had previously been considered on 28 June 2005 , by the Ofcom Board which had resulted in a wide ranging discussion. Members NOTED that arising from that discussion the Ofcom Board felt that it was clear that the Commission’s proposals to extend the scope of regulation raised significant issues about the approach to regulating content across different delivery platforms. Members NOTED that the Ofcom Board felt that the most effective way of influencing the debate would be to, wherever possible, encourage self or co-regulation (e.g. ISPA and ATVOD) in preference to state-based enforcement of the TWF rules.

44. Members considered whether the scope of a revised Directive should be extended to cover all ‘audiovisual content’ (‘ AVC ’) services. [Withheld from published minutes]. Members AGREED that they needed to be clear on the concepts involved, the extent to which other countries were regulated and in what ways and what the reasons were to regulate over a wider scope.

45. Members considered whether a stricter tier of regulation should apply to ‘linear’ AVC services with a much more basic tier of regulation applying to all AVC services, including ‘non-linear’ AVC services, as proposed by the EU. [Withheld from published minutes].

46. Members considered whether the criteria for deciding jurisdiction over AVC services should be revised. Members NOTED that currently a service’s country of origin determined which Member State had jurisdiction over it and that there was pressure on the Commission to revise the jurisdiction criteria to allow countries of reception to regulate in certain circumstances. [Withheld from published minutes] embers discussed the relative merits of the current situation with the alternative of revising jurisdiction. It was recognised that the current position was better than the alternative and the proposal to tighten up jurisdiction rules was a positive move.

47. The Content Board considered whether the UK should oppose the inclusion of the rule on short news extracts. [Withheld from published minutes].

48. Members considered whether advertising and teleshopping regulation should be simplified and rolled back. [Withheld from published minutes]. Members felt that these suggested changes were good and should be supported. Members discussed whether the UK should consider recommending the removal of all regulation in this area to allow for self-regulation.

49. The Content Board considered whether the production quota rules should be left unchanged. [Withheld from published minutes]. Members were generally supportive of the reduction in regulation proposed in this area.

50. Following discussion of the review the Content Board NOTED that the Commission’s consultation would close on 5 September 2005 and that the Commission intended to introduce a draft Directive by the end of the year.

Media Literacy: Audit Research Headline Findings

51. [Withheld from published minutes] and [Withheld from published minutes] provided Members with an early sight of the findings of the media literacy audit research. Members NOTED that the fieldwork of the main sample had only just been completed and that the results presented were based on a sub-sample of the questionnaires. It was NOTED that the presented results were large enough to identify approximate trends but not large enough to give actual findings.

52. The Content Board NOTED early findings in relation to media literacy as a method of communication, where it was identified that the use of email, internet and text were increasingly used as a methods of communication. In relation to the level of trust respondents had with media literacy, it was NOTED that television and radio news were the most trusted forms of receiving news. Members NOTED a number of comparisons in relation to the usage and accessibility of different forms of media literacy and a number of comparisons in relation to the usage and accessibility of media literacy by children.

53. Members NOTED that the executive would be undertaking a full and thorough investigation of the findings during the summer and would be developing media literacy “typologies” or “clusters” to provide in-depth understanding of the types of media literacy people had and the motivations behind them. Members were REQUESTED to pass their views in relation to further areas to be investigated to the executive. It was AGREED that the executive would investigate whether parental controls in relation to the internet and mobile phones were related to cost considerations. It was NOTED that the Content Board would receive a presentation in October 2005 which would comprise of core report and additional reports on different groups. Members REQUESTED that a considerable amount of time be allowed for consideration of the results at the October meeting. It was anticipated that a further update would be presented to the Content Board in November, with a view to publication of a report in December 2005.

Content and Standards Report

54. [Withheld from published minutes] updated the Content Board on programmes which had been attracting complaints. The Content Board was also updated on the status of current Fairness and Content Sanctions cases. Members NOTED that the executive was arranging for the OCC monthly broadcast complaint report to be circulated to Content Board members. [Withheld from published minutes] presented a number of clips which had been considered by the Content and Standards Group which had arisen from complaints regarding content. Following each video clip the Content Board discussed the issues raised and the outcome of the complaints.

Radio Licensing Committee (4 July 2005)

55. Pam Giddy and Matthew MacIver updated Members on the Radio Licensing Committee ( RLC ) meeting held on 4 July 2005 ; when a decision had been made on the award of the Manchester , Norwich and Ballymena commercial FM radio licences. In addition the Committee had made an initial consideration of the applications for the Solent , Torbay and Swindon commercial FM radio licences. A decision was made on the West Yorkshire Area Community radio licence and preliminary discussions were held on the Greater Manchester Area and the London Area Community radio licences.

Matters for External Communication

56. [Withheld from published minutes] outlined Ofcom’s recent activities and forthcoming announcements.

Any other business

a) Diversity and Ofcom events

57. A request was made that wherever possible Ofcom tried to ensure colleague events did not clash with religious dates.

b) Television sector employment practices

58. Members NOTED that Ofcom had been involved in a meeting to discuss employment practices in the television sector. At the meeting all of the organisations represented had agreed to make relevant documentation available on their websites, which would provide guidance on what information was already available.

c) Broadcasters Equal Opportunities toolkit

59. Members NOTED that the toolkit had been launched and that the launch event had been well attended.

d) Content Board Chairman

60. Members were REQUESTED to pass any views or recommendations in relation to the recruitment for a replacement Chairman of the Content Board to David Currie.

 e) Content Board recruitment

61. Members NOTED that Rosemary Kelly had tendered her resignation as a Content Board member and would be leaving at the appropriate time before December 2005. It was also NOTED that Jonathan Edwards had indicated that he would be stepping down in April 2006, at the end of his three year term. Members NOTED that it was intended that the new Chairman of the Content Board would be involved in the recruitment of new Content Board members.

f) New Ofcom Board member

62. Members NOTED that Stephanie Liston had been appointed as a member of the Ofcom Board as from 1 September 2005 .

Date of next meeting

63. It was NOTED that the next meeting would be held on Monday 12 and Tuesday 13 September 2005 at Riverside House.


Back to top Back to top


Further information

Help

Keep up-to-date