Ofcom’s explanation for undermining their own ruling
July 25, 2008
Wed 23/07/2008 17:16
From Andrew Morgan, Ofcom
Dear Dean,
Ofcom notes your comments on the reporting of its decision into The Great Global Warming Swindle and the wording in the notification email issued by Ofcom.
Ofcom distributes email notifications with the aim of alerting interested parties to the publication of specific Ofcom documents. As such, it is not always possible in these emails to include all the detail and relevant information behind announcements.
You state that Ofcom did not refer within the notification to specific guidance supporting Rule 2.2 of the Broadcasting Code. This states that the rule is designed to deal with content which materially misleads the audience so as to cause harm or offence. Nevertheless, the notification did state:
“….while Ofcom had concerns about aspects of the presentation (and omission) of facts and views within the programme, it did not believe, given the nature of the programme, that this led to the audience being materially misled. As such, Channel 4 has not been found in breach of Rule 2.2 of the Broadcasting Code.”
This paragraph of the notification focuses on the specific Rule set out in the Broadcasting Code which states:
“Factual programmes or items or portrayals of factual matters must not materially mislead the audience”.
Ofcom could reasonably expect seasoned media correspondents who reported on the Finding to appreciate the significance of the words ‘materially misled’ in the notification and the meaning attached to them under the Code and its guidance.
It is also worth noting that the guidance you discussed was set out in the full findings within Broadcast Bulletin No. 114. In addition, please be reassured that Ofcom’s Media Office communicated this guidance in full to any journalists who contacted Ofcom regarding the outcome of its investigation.
Ofcom takes on board your comments, however in this case Ofcom will not be issuing a correction given the reasons detailed above.
Yours sincerely
Andrew Morgan
How can OFCOM say that misleading interviewees as to the purposes of the programme, not to mention inventing academic titles for at least one of them, does not cause offence? Some of them sounded pretty offended.
The problem you will have now though, is getting OFCOM to admit they were wrong. And even if you do, the lie has gone round the world and established itself as truth in the minds of many, who now think that Corbyn is an accurate weather forecaster, the “Swindle” graphs werr accurate etc.
“The Great Global Warming Swindle” was a classic piece of making-shit-up tabloid journalism. And OFCOM has said this is fine.