<html><head><style type="text/css"><!-- DIV {margin:0px;} --></style></head><body><div style="font-family:arial, helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:10pt"><DIV>Little guy, scant resources, makes a mistake and broadcasts a few "f" words, apologises,tightens up procedures, found in breach.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Big guy, resources coming out of its ear, makes a mistake and broadcasts a "f" words, apologises, tightens up procedures, not found in breach.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>In the end in both instances the listener got a few "f" words. Effect on ears the same from both. As a complainee do I care what they'd done before or after the incident? - no I don't, I just care that my little Johnny has been traumatised.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>And what are the mitigating circumstances that got big guy off? - a complex and auditable procedure that didn't work!</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>So maybe the lesson here is to put in a large, complex and auditable procedure, make sure that all documents, tick boxes, email etc are filled in and stored for posterity and then relax. Because as long as you've followed it you'll be safe when it doesn't stop you breaking the broadcast code.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>I fell foul of the Black-Eyed peas myself once. As the track concerned was on the playout system I assumed it was ok. After about 30 secs the fader got rapidly retracted just as the Station Manager flew in through the door. As the office was in the next door building I was well impressed with how fast he got there!.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Seriously though, any "honeymoon period" there may have been for Community Radio with Ofcom is good and over. There is (to my mind anyway) a definite move towards tighter regulation of CR now and we've just got to accept it and work with it.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>I think Ofcom are overreacting on offensive language anyway, its not like its a huge problem. They'd be better concentrating on gettig through the rest of the third round applications.....</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Roger</DIV>
<DIV><BR> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT-FAMILY: arial, helvetica, sans-serif; FONT-SIZE: 10pt"><BR>
<DIV style="FONT-FAMILY: times new roman, new york, times, serif; FONT-SIZE: 12pt"><FONT size=2 face=Tahoma>
<HR SIZE=1>
<B><SPAN style="FONT-WEIGHT: bold">From:</SPAN></B> Two Lochs Radio <tlr@gairloch.co.uk><BR><B><SPAN style="FONT-WEIGHT: bold">To:</SPAN></B> Julian Mellor <julian@10radio.org>; CMA-L <cma-l@commedia.org.uk><BR><B><SPAN style="FONT-WEIGHT: bold">Sent:</SPAN></B> Thursday, 22 September, 2011 11:56:54<BR><B><SPAN style="FONT-WEIGHT: bold">Subject:</SPAN></B> Re: [cma-l] Offensive language on radio - how to avoid the pitfalls<BR></FONT><BR>Extremely well said, Julian. Thanks for taking the time to set what I think is broadly the most sensible take on the subject.<BR><BR>Your comments re the setting of entry bars etc by larger players are pertinent. <BR><BR>Another example of a field where that sort of thing happens is in standards committees (BSI et al) where the big players with the margins and market to absorb the overheads push for standards that are fine and valuable if treated as an aspiration and ideal target, but can be
counterproductive and antisocial/anticompetitive if applied to 100% of cases with legal force.<BR><BR>Let commonsense and decency rule!<BR><BR>Alex<BR><BR><BR></DIV></DIV></div></body></html>