OFCOM, the 'Office of Communications" provide a largely hands off regulation of broadcasters in the United Kingdom. Actually finding hard and fast rules among their guidelines can be tricky. Many guidelines are heavily open to interpretation, and are presented in such a way to allow for freedom of expression. Some examples are listed below.
- A remit for plurality and addressing the needs of a variety of different audiences
- An insistence on inclusion. Broadcasters in the UK must include adequate representation of a range of protected lifestyles and characteristics, for example LGBT representation, representation of disabled people and a "commitment to the Welsh Language"
- Impartiality rules, for example not 'plugging' large organisations
- Avoiding discrimination against protected characteristics
- Material must attempt to minimise harm to vulnerable audience (example: "if you have been affected...")
- Broadcasts must not damage equipment or trigger epileptic seizures (for example the Aphex Twin video 'Collapse' has been banned from UK TV, but can be viewed legally online...)
So how effective is the regulation of broadcast media in the UK? Arguably not very! It's an advisory set of guidelines that can often be wriggled out of. Additionally, as with all regulation of media products, digitally convergent media practices have undermined any attempt to regulate broadcast media, with social media platforms allowing biased, partial and often blatantly racist dissemination of ideology in the very comments section of a BBC article!
However, if the rules were any more strict, would it impinge on freedom of expression? Or should we just do away with regulation altogether? These are things you must consider when presenting a detailed argument in your exam!