- representation of age, gender, race, disability, religion
- Protecting Under 18 year olds
- Using off the record information
- Power to influence public opinion
- Anything that could cause offence or harm
- Intruding on individuals privacy
- Interviewing vulnerable people or children
A case in the media when ethical issues were brought up was the radio shows hosted by Russell Brand and Jonathan Ross back in 2008, when they were meant to have a guess on the BBC radio 4 talk show. The Russell Brand Show prank telephone calls row, sometimes colloquially referred to as "Sachsgate", concerned a series of voice messages that comedian Russell Brand and TV presenter Jonathan Ross left on the answering machine of actor Andrew Sachs, which were labelled obscene by many media commentators and politicians. It followed a BBC Radio 2 broadcast of an advance-recorded episode of The Russell Brand Show on Saturday 18th October 2008. In the show, Russell Brand and Jonathan Ross left lewd voice messages for Andrew Sachs, including comments about his granddaughter, Georgina Baillie. The two originally called Sachs as a guest to interview on the show, and after he failed to answer the telephone, Brand and Ross left the messages on his answering machine.
Brand and Russell pre-recorded the show on the Thursday, for it to be aired on the Saturday, so during that time, it gave the productions plenty of time to listen back to the show and decide whether it was suitable to be aired. So on the Thursday after the show was recorded, the producer got in touch with Andrew Sacks explaining the situation. But the producer gave false information to Sacks, as Sacks believed that he was agreeing to go in for another interview to replace the current one, but the producers took the yes as Sacks giving his permission for the original recording to the aired. So the shows was then aired on Saturday night, which opened with a warning: "The next programme contains some strong language which some listeners may find offensive." But then by Sunday, the BBC only revived 2 complaints about Russell Brands Show. By the Monday 27th October, the BBC had received a further 1,585 complaints about the show. So during the space of 8 days, more people who did listen to the show, and even people who did not tune in to the show, but heard about it in the news and read the transcripts found it offensive and wrong.
After all of this, the BBC fired Russell Brand and suspended Jonathan Ross after they both fully apologised the Andrew Sachs and his grand-daughter Georgina Baillie. But people argue about who's fault it actually was, Russell and Jonathan's or the show producers In my opinion, they all had their own part in it, Russell and Jonathan for continuing the leave offensive messages to Andrew Sacks, but mainly I think that it is the producers of the shows fault, because he was responsible for what went broadcasting out. He could have prevented the huge up-raw by not letting it air, and let the matter be sorted out not in the eye of the public where everyone would be oblivious too what happen.
In this one radio show, there was at least 3 offences against the ofcom broadcasting act. In Section 2, harm and offence, 2.1 and 2.3 where both relevant the situation, because 2.1 says 'provide adequate protection for members of the public from the inclusion in such services of harmful and/or offensive material' , but Andrew and Georgina and the public were all offended with what was broadcasted.
2.3 says 'broadcasters must ensure that material which may cause offence is justiļ¬ed by the context. Such material may include, but is not limited to, offensive language, violence, sex, sexual violence, humiliation, distress, violation of human dignity, discriminatory treatment or language' and Russell and Jonathan used offensive language, disgust sexual relations, and caused humiliation for Georgina, as it was her sexual relationship with Russell Brand.
Nothing in the show was in the public interest, but quite the opposite and because of this it was an act against section 8, which is Privacy of the broadcasting act.
.jpg)
Brand and Russell pre-recorded the show on the Thursday, for it to be aired on the Saturday, so during that time, it gave the productions plenty of time to listen back to the show and decide whether it was suitable to be aired. So on the Thursday after the show was recorded, the producer got in touch with Andrew Sacks explaining the situation. But the producer gave false information to Sacks, as Sacks believed that he was agreeing to go in for another interview to replace the current one, but the producers took the yes as Sacks giving his permission for the original recording to the aired. So the shows was then aired on Saturday night, which opened with a warning: "The next programme contains some strong language which some listeners may find offensive." But then by Sunday, the BBC only revived 2 complaints about Russell Brands Show. By the Monday 27th October, the BBC had received a further 1,585 complaints about the show. So during the space of 8 days, more people who did listen to the show, and even people who did not tune in to the show, but heard about it in the news and read the transcripts found it offensive and wrong.
After all of this, the BBC fired Russell Brand and suspended Jonathan Ross after they both fully apologised the Andrew Sachs and his grand-daughter Georgina Baillie. But people argue about who's fault it actually was, Russell and Jonathan's or the show producers In my opinion, they all had their own part in it, Russell and Jonathan for continuing the leave offensive messages to Andrew Sacks, but mainly I think that it is the producers of the shows fault, because he was responsible for what went broadcasting out. He could have prevented the huge up-raw by not letting it air, and let the matter be sorted out not in the eye of the public where everyone would be oblivious too what happen.
In this one radio show, there was at least 3 offences against the ofcom broadcasting act. In Section 2, harm and offence, 2.1 and 2.3 where both relevant the situation, because 2.1 says 'provide adequate protection for members of the public from the inclusion in such services of harmful and/or offensive material' , but Andrew and Georgina and the public were all offended with what was broadcasted.
2.3 says 'broadcasters must ensure that material which may cause offence is justiļ¬ed by the context. Such material may include, but is not limited to, offensive language, violence, sex, sexual violence, humiliation, distress, violation of human dignity, discriminatory treatment or language' and Russell and Jonathan used offensive language, disgust sexual relations, and caused humiliation for Georgina, as it was her sexual relationship with Russell Brand.
Nothing in the show was in the public interest, but quite the opposite and because of this it was an act against section 8, which is Privacy of the broadcasting act.
No comments:
Post a Comment