Resources and analysis on the topic of media regulation, particularly for the A2 Media exam, Section B. Major case studies include the film industry, music video and the press, with major players such as Murdoch, OfCom and the government considered. If using materials from this blog, please credit the source - Dave Burrowes, Media Studies @ St George's School
Exam date
Some key posts and resources
- 2019 and earlier IPSO cases
- 2021 overview
- BBFC historic bans, subjective judgement?
- BBFC Human Centipede 2
- BBFC overview essay style writing
- BBFC overview with vids
- BBFC U/PG cases Postman Pat--Paddington--Watership Down
- Daily Mail IPSO google
- EU press flak
- IPSO arbitration fines scheme
- IPSO children rulings
- IPSO PCC arguments FOR
- Murdoch flak/conc of ownership
- MUSIC RACISM drill musicians criminalised
- Press reg history (website)
- Privacy 2018 summary
- Social media alt to IPSO?
- Social media as alt reg/FAANGS power up to early 2019
- StopFundingHate
- Tabloid Corrections
- Telegraph libel payout AFTER IPSO ruling unsatisfactory
- The Rock Daily Star Insta
Friday, 25 August 2017
ADVERTISER BOYCOTT pressurises Breitbart home of alt-right
Friday, 18 August 2017
MUSIC Islands in the stream - Spotify, YouTube making political bans
I've read lots of right-on, celebratory articles about the announcements of YouTube and Spotify especially this week - both banning a number of far right accounts, channels, artists/tracks.
As with many acts of censorship, it seems hard to forge an argue against this diminution of hateful rhetoric and ideology - but the quartz article outlines the same concern that struck me: this means entrusting these private firms to define political extremism. Not that state definitions are any safer - the public sector BBC takes a very partial stance on Palestinian-linked lyrics, silenced the Pistols' 1977 classic, and refused to reflect the public mood in also banning Ding Dong the Witch is Dead.
Media regulation, including censorship, can often appear incontestably as a good thing - but there's always a counter argument. There's an irony in this case too, the fiercely neoliberal, anti-regulation, laissez-faire free marketeers of the social media giants queuing up to proslytize over President Trump's seeming support for neo-Nazi, quite the U-turn from their customary extreme free speech positions.
https://qz.com/1056140/spotify-by-banning-white-power-bands-is-now-deciding-what-music-is-acceptable/?utm_source=qzfb
Monday, 7 August 2017
OfCom research UK public's swearing ranking
Obviously be sensible where you read this, and be aware that it's topic is strong language which accordingly features throughout the article.
From the research just 3 terms are identified as the strongest swear words. The BBFC undertake similar regular research to gauge public feelings on which terms should be hit with 12, 15 or 18 ratings - and there seems to be some difference, though that could put down to the OfCom research method (using 4 categories of acceptability linked to the watershed rather than more specific age ratings).
Two of OfCom's 3 strongest terms are featured heavily in Working Title's sci-fi/comedy hybrid World's End, with 'the c word' also multiply used - enough to force an unexpected 18-rating on the Ken Loach indie Sweet Sixteen but judged okay for the studio subsidiary's production to get a 15-rating.
https://www.indy100.com/article/british-swear-words-ranked-ofcom-7340446
Here's a short comparative analysis of some American audience research, showing quite a different attitude: http://nofilmschool.com/2017/08/swearing-in-movies-harris-poll