Reply to topic  [ 3 posts ] 
Mark Thomas filesharing show contained inaccuracies 
Author Message
Legend

Joined: Sun Apr 26, 2009 12:30 pm
Posts: 45931
Location: Belfast
Reply with quote
The BBC has admitted that parts of a controversial Culture Show report by comedian and political activist Mark Thomas on filesharing were inaccurate, but denied a complaint by UK Music chief executive Feargal Sharkey that it was "biased and prejudicial".

Thomas's Culture Show report, which aired on the BBC2 show in February this year, examined the digital economy bill which was then going through parliament and its attempt to crack down on illegal downloading.

The comedian, who opposed that part of the bill – which has since become law – said on the show that it enabled film and music industry bodies to cut off people's internet access on the "bare minimum of evidence".

Sharkey, who spoke in favour of the bill on The Culture Show, said in his complaint to the BBC that Thomas's report was "not only grossly misleading and inaccurate, but also misinformed the audience in a bias [sic] and prejudicial manner, thereby contravening the BBC's editorial guidelines relating to accuracy and impartiality". His complaint was part upheld with regard to accuracy and not upheld with regard to impartiality.

Sharkey, who had demanded an on-air retraction and apology, took his complaint to the BBC's highest arbiter, the BBC Trust's editorial standards committee, after his initial concerns were largely rejected by the corporation's management.

The trust committee, in its ruling today, said Thomas's report was an "authored" piece and was "not to be taken as if it were a report by a BBC presenter or reporter".

But it admitted it "might have been better for the introduction to have more clearly indicated that the report was authored".

The ESC said the "section of the report on the likely effects of the new bill had given the audience an inaccurate description of how the process of disconnection would work", adding that in "attempting to paraphrase the legal complexities of the bill the report had not been sufficiently precise and had been inaccurate".

"Use of the word 'criminalise' in the introduction to the report was inaccurate but that this aspect of the complaint had been satisfactorily dealt with by the programme at the earliest opportunity," the committee added.

The report had also "not retained a respect for factual accuracy ... with regard to the implication given that the secretary of state had unfettered discretion to amend the law on copyright without parliamentary scrutiny".

Critics of Thomas's report claimed he had given much more time to opponents of the bill – 8 minutes and 20 seconds out of a total of 10 minutes, according to Sharkey – than its supporters.

But the BBC Trust committee ruled that the programme had not breached BBC guidelines on impartiality.

"While Mark Thomas had expressed strong personal opinions in his links to camera, this was permitted by the guidelines on authored programmes. All the main views, including those that contradicted Mark Thomas's, were reflected," the committee said.

"Bias on a controversial subject had been avoided and ... impartiality had been achieved in a way that was adequate and appropriate to the output," the ESC added.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2010/oc ... aring-show

_________________
Plain English advice on everything money, purchase and service related:

http://www.moneysavingexpert.com/


Tue Oct 26, 2010 11:51 pm
Profile
Legend
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 24, 2009 2:02 am
Posts: 29240
Location: Guantanamo Bay (thanks bobbdobbs)
Reply with quote
Quote:
Critics of Thomas's report claimed he had given much more time to opponents of the bill – 8 minutes and 20 seconds out of a total of 10 minutes, according to Sharkey – than its supporters.

But the BBC Trust committee ruled that the programme had not breached BBC guidelines on impartiality.

Impartiality only really applies to political debate.

_________________
Do concentrate, 007...

"You are gifted. Mine is bordering on seven seconds."

https://www.dropbox.com/referrals/NTg5MzczNTk

http://astore.amazon.co.uk/wwwx404couk-21


Wed Oct 27, 2010 12:08 am
Profile
I haven't seen my friends in so long
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 24, 2009 1:03 pm
Posts: 5041
Location: London
Reply with quote
Amnesia10 wrote:
Quote:
Critics of Thomas's report claimed he had given much more time to opponents of the bill – 8 minutes and 20 seconds out of a total of 10 minutes, according to Sharkey – than its supporters.

But the BBC Trust committee ruled that the programme had not breached BBC guidelines on impartiality.

Impartiality only really applies to political debate.


As the Bill was going through parliament and was supported by some parties and opposed by others one could say that it was a political issue and so needed some level of impartiality

_________________
John_Vella wrote:
OK, so all we need to do is find a half African, half Chinese, half Asian, gay, one eyed, wheelchair bound dwarf with tourettes and a lisp, and a st st stutter and we could make the best panel show ever.


Wed Oct 27, 2010 10:53 am
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic   [ 3 posts ] 

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 10 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
Designed by ST Software.