Page:Bailey Review.djvu/34

The 'Wallpaper' of Children's Lives

29.

Clearly television cannot be indifferent to popular culture or turn its back on pop music, comedy or other popular entertainments. Nor are we suggesting that pre—watershed dramas should not deal with difficult issues. Yet it appears to be the case that many parents are concerned about the content of certain programmes shown before the watershed and that pre—watershed programming can be unexpectedly difficult for parents. We believe that parents do not accept, for example, that if a variety show features a pop musician with a reputation for delivering highly sexualised performances that the broadcaster has licence to sail as close to the edge of compliance with the Broadcasting Code as possible. It appears from a recent ruling that Ofcom agrees with this: in response to over 2,800 complaints from viewers about the live performances of Rihanna and Christina Aguilera on the X Factor final show of 11 December 2010, Ofcom found that while the content of the programme did not breach the Broadcasting Code:

"Ofcom will shortly be issuing new guidance about the acceptability of material in pre—watershed programmes that attract large family viewing audiences. We will also be requesting that broadcasters who transmit such programming attend a meeting at Ofcom to discuss the compliance of such material."

Ofcom, 2011(1)

30.

We think that this is a helpful decision. It is clear that all broadcasters want, for a variety of reasons, to show programmes that have a mass appeal. Often, generating that appeal means developing programmes which whole families can watch together. With that desire to build a mass audience comes a responsibility to those who commission, make, broadcast and regulate television to ensure that their concept of what constitutes family viewing aligns closely with the values and concerns of the families watching. However, it appears that the broadcasting industry needs to do more to connect with families whose attention they want to hold. Further, we do not believe they should simply rely on audiences 'voting with their remote controls' to determine what audiences would find acceptable: the onus is on broadcasters to show acceptable content in the first place, not to react to audience complaints after the event.

31.

We fully respect the editorial independence of broadcasters. We also know and welcome the fact that they undertake research with their audiences, including parents, some more formally than others, but would like to see this becoming a regular and routine activity across the whole industry. The industry needs to act on that research and other feedback from parents, and in the case of pre—watershed family viewing, take a slightly more cautious approach than is currently the case. Building the confidence of parents will mean broadcasters not only listening to their concerns but being seen to have listened and to have acted on what they heard. Connecting with parents and earning their trust will mean broadcasters not only complying with the letter of the Broadcasting Code, but also working proactively within its spirit.

31