there is many reasons why the media sectors need regulated, different sectors are regulated by different companies, that help things stay in order, it goes from making sure films and TV are suitable for certain ages and regulating the radio.
The reasons we need these kind of things is to keep children save and to keep everyone in order, from different kind of sectors such as the radio and TV, if they do not keep them in order, everything would be crazy, certain people on the radio for example could say whatever they want and nothing would be able to be done about it and they could just carry on with it. But because they are there, if someone does something breaking one of the rules.
they will be punished, you can be punished in different ways, this can go from going to prison to prison and doing a fair amount of years, if you have a career on the radio or film, you can be suspended for a certain amount of months or year, without pay and you can also get a fine, but when you get the fine, it does not just effect you and your career, sometimes it can effect the public because of what the person which broken one of the rules has said. I will show some examples from certain parts of the media sector, further down in this blog post.
Firstly I am going to start with the BBFC
British Board of Film Classification
The BBFC is a huge part of the film industry, they are the ones which give films certain ratings, depending on the scenes which are in the film. Before any film actually gets released in the cinemas, to the public, it has to go through them.
when they rate films to be a certain age, they might need to ask the maker of it to make cuts to the movie to fit a certain age rating or the age rating will go above, it will move to a PG, this is the same for the rest of the age ratings also, they must follow the guidelines for their films to fit a certain age rating
They do this in a certain way, because at certain ages you are only permitted to have a certain kind of content in the film for that age
as you can see in the image, they have 7 different kind of ratings, which all have films that fit one of them ratings but may not fit another
Firstly I will talk about U (Suitable for all)
U is for anyone, anyone can watch it, no matter what age, the usual films which are U
what I have found that there is not many films which are rated U it is just mostly childrens cartoons such as Pingu, this is because it is friendly and has no violence in it, just the odd falling over penguin or something, but there are limits to what you can put in films for them to be rated U such as.
As you can see in the video, it shows very mild violence in it, it is just snowballs and if the snowballs do hit them there is really no bad outcome of it, it reassures them at the end of the scene
the BBFC is very clear on violence, there can be very short fighting scenes but the end must be reassuring, also they must be very quick,
In some cases, you can also show threat, like something bad is going to happen, but that must be over fast and the end must be good, have no reference to what would of happened if it went the wrong way.
they must not show any reference to drugs, the only way they can do this is if it is educational purposes to it
The films which pass at U must always have an happy ending to it so it reassures the children which may be watching it
PG (Parental Guidance)
Parental guidance is kind of like U but a little less strict.
PG is if a child wants to go the cinemas to watch a film such as frozen, they may have to go with there parents, this is because they are there to reassure them and also it is required
it is required for many reasons such as
they are little more lenient with the language which is used throughout the film, like you can say certain words such as 'shit', but for this, it all depends on how it is delivered, it what kind of manner, if the character is angry and he says this in a very aggressive way the age rating may go up to 12a or 12, may be higher, this is because it is not showing it in a good light, if they said it in a comical way it may be allowed in certain cases.
they may allow sex references but it can not be detailed, so the child does not understand it that much and it must not be a frequent thing throughout the whole movie, this is because it will be less of an impact on the child and the less it is, they will not understand it as much
they may also show drug references throughout it but these also have to be very mild. As it says on the BBFC
website "
There might be innocuous or passing references to illegal drugs or drugs misuse in a PG work"
they will not allow behaviour which looks like it can be copied and used in a bad light, such as bullying
for example in this scene from frozen, you can see there is very mild violence throughout it, no one really gets hurt, they come close to it but they do not get hurt, they may show threat that someone is going to get hurt but it never happens, this is one of the reasons why it was allowed to pass for a PG
but overall in some cases, if your movie may still make sense or you have time to change the scene, they may ask you to cut it out a scene which may not be suitable or just replace it, in some cases your film may just get rated to the next age rating
12A and 12
12a and 12 are different in a way because 12a stands for accompanied with an adult if that child is under the age of 12, if the staff of the cinema let a child in under the age of 12 without an adult there is a chance that they might loose their licence.
12 is not so much for the cinemas, this is for retailers, films which are not in the cinemas any more but are rated 12, for example if a child wanted to buy a film which was rated 12 and they were 10, they can not buy it but if they were over 12 they may be able to purchase it
with films which are rated 12a and 12 you can not really have a film which is in the dark, has a dark story line to it because of how it will effect the audience and obviously the children may understand bits of it and it can effect them in a bad light
you can use certain swear words throughout it such as 'f***' but they can be used in an aggressive manner such as PG, but you can use more language such as that in 12a and 12, but it all depends in the manner with which it has been said
in certain cases, horror films can be passed as an 12a and 12, you can use violence but very moderate and also you may show threat throughout. They can not be very frequent throughout the whole movie, just once in a while throughout it
There can be no anti social behaviour because of children which may copy. you can have references to suicide but in very little detail because of children may try to replicate it
they have a strong opinion on drugs, they can be drug misuse throughout it but it can not be frequent or used in a positive light because this can give children a reason to copy it.
for example this scene from Captain America, Winter Soldier.
Throughout the scene there is violence and explosions but no where in the scene, do you see a severe amount of blood and someone being fatally killed in it, they keep it to a limit.
The whole scene is violence but it is not very bad violence it is mild, but not anything to make children want to replicate it and do it there self.
15+
this age rating is much more open than the ones which are below it, this is because you can show much more violence and sexual acts through it, even drugs but drugs still should not be promoted in any way at all
the sex can be portrayed throughout the movie but it can not be in strong detail but in can be in some detail
there can be also strong violence in it, but it still has a limit, can not dwell on the infliction of pain throughout it, also very strong and sadistic violence and gory images are highly not going to be accepted for this age rating
you can also see the use of drugs but it should not be promoted throughout it because this leaves the risks of teenagers copying it
for example this scene from the women in black, the child dies but it does not dwell on it and drag it out, its very simple, they just get it over with fast this is why it was rated 15+
if they dragged it out and focused it much more on the death of the child then most likely it would be dragged up to a 18 age rating just because of that
here is another scene from the women in black that shows real threat throughout it but it does not get that dangerous throughout, this by its self would of most likely made the 15 because of how scary it is.
18 and R18
What sort of issues might I find in an 18 film or video?
18 works are for adults and can contain strong issues such as:
- very strong violence
- frequent strong language (e.g. 'f***') and / or very strong language (e.g. ‘c***’)
- strong portrayals of sexual activity
- scenes of sexual violence
- strong horror
- strong blood and gore
- real sex (in some circumstances)
- discriminatory language and behaviour (Reference)
The reason the issues are different that are accepted is because 18 is a legal age and you are not exactly a child anymore so much more is accepted in this
the film can include sex throughout it and also full nudity is acceptable, they are also no constraints on non-sexual or educational context. But the film can not be a sex works movie, this is pretty much a movie which has a main purpose of sexual acts and no story behind it
drugs can be shown strongly throughout the movie but like in all the other ages it can not be promoted at all throughout it
for example, you have the human centipede which is banned in multiple countries and in some places, it is aloud but a lot of the scenes had to be cut from it.
in some cases over 30 scenes from this film had to cut and still in some cases it was not allowed to be shown in certain countries even after that many cuts that were made
there is nothing really to say about movies which are rated r18 films, they are films which are just aimed for the purposes of sexual acts, with professional actors which star in that part of the industry, to show these kind of movies in the cinema you need a special licence for it, but in most cases these kind of films just go straight online to sell or in a sex shop which has a licence to sell them
OFCOM
"
Ofcom is the communications regulator in the UK. We regulate the TV and radio sectors, fixed line telecoms, mobiles, postal services, plus the airwaves over which wireless devices operate."

what they do is, they regulate these in a way that if anything wrong which happens or has been said and people do not agree with it in anyway, this can be with protecting under eighteens to things such as religion, they handle all of this, if someone is offended and they have a right to be OFCOMS broadcasting code they would complain to them.
The reason it is like this, why people have to complain after is because OFCOM can not watch every single show and radio broadcast, even if it is pre recorded or live, so they do it this way.
The way it works is if, the person which has been offended and their complaint comes through, the person convicted of it can face a fine or a suspension of their job. Usually the company which have allowed that certain show or radio broadcast to go onto air may also face a fine.
each one of them work differently, some of them you can get fined more if you brake them,
There is a majority of different codes which they have in place to stop the media industry from doing whatever they want and offending a lot more people. I am going to talk about and show examples for two of them which is religion and harm and offence
Harm and Offence
Harm and offence pretty much speaks for it self but this is if, for example something is said which can harm anyone's life in any way, so make an impact on it without that persons permission to do so, depending on the scale of what it is and what show it is. Offence is pretty much the same thing, if you offend someone, by saying something about their appearance or how they live, this is classified as offence
top gear are usually in the news a lot for doing a lot of controversial stuff on the show, this is usually when they travel the world
they went to a different country and the challenge which they had was to build a bridge, which they built in the end. An Asian man was walking across this bridge and as he walked across it, Jeremy Clarkson referred the Asian mans face as a slope, comparing it to the bridge which they built
this case has been going on for around a year, it is still controversial if Jeremy Clarkson should of been sacked or not, but at the moment he is not working for the BBC, but he is not sacked, he is threatening to sue them if they sack him
(Here)
this case is still going on, the one about the bridge
There is many things which would of helped them with avoiding this such as warning Jeremy Clarkson because he does these kind of things a lot on top gear this would of helped a lot if they did this, they probably did but he probably did not listen. The producer says it was a light hearted joke which some people took too seriously than they should of took it
Relgion
there was an argument on big brother in 2014, with 2 girls and one of them was catholic, Here is a quote from the article about what was said
"
The furious argument, which was aired on Tuesday, involved Helen telling Danielle - who says she lives by strong Catholic principles - to ‘stop s******g Jesus’." (Reference)

this got lodes of complaints about it, it was labelled as blasphemy, racist, swearing and bullying. this was seen by over 1.3 million people at once and they were forced to pull the repeats which were on throughout the following day off because they had a numerous amount of complaints and after the first week they had over 200 complaints because of this
this effected the producers of the show in numerous ways, they had to go through all the trouble to get the show cancelled for the following day and that meant less views and also they most likely had to apologise for this
there is ways which they could of stopped this but I think it was made harder to stop because of the personalities of the people which they allowed to be on their show at that time.
But they should of stopped it by doing a background check on the people which they were allowing on their show and briefing them about what they can say and what they can not say when they are on it.
More Here on this
IPSO
At first it was not the IPSO, there was something else which was closed and that was called the PCC, it was closed under certain circumstances, the leveson inquiry, this was about the news of the world being blamed for phone hacking, this was huge and it was closed on 8th September 2014
The IPSO are the OFCOM of the newspapers and also magazines. it works so everything which people may take offence to in a certain way such as harassment for example, it would go through them, you would complain to them, but this is the UK only
The way which they do this, see if your complain is viable, they work by the editors code of practise which is on their site, its a bunch of rules which editors must abide by, I will write about some and also examples of them
one which is a bit obviously known, editors have to respect the public's privacy, they can not just go ahead and walk into someone's life, if they do happen to do this they have to justify why they did this otherwise there will be consequences
there is more which they have that are about what kind of information which they use in their magazines or newspapers, these were that they could not just use any kind of information that they did not have any solid back up behind it before they let it out.
they can not try to talk to a child which is under the age of 16, in any case without having the permission of a parent/guardian
The sun where in a small case but at the same time it was big in the complainant's eyes because of what it was,

they written an article which was about a local lady which had complained about an article which was about a local guy killing his wife and then taking his own life, this was under two different rules which they broke and that was the one which was Clause 1 and 12
in some cases such as this one here The Sun were able to apologise through a personalised letter to the person which they offended
also for example there was another case which was resolved in a different way than the other one was resolved,
but in this was there was a lady and she claimed that the news paper company called Islington tribute was breaching her privacy, the information which they had was not accurate and and also by clause ten which is pretty much, they can not get information from technology such as hidden camera or or by intercepting phone calls and text messages, Also something called clandestine devices, these are hidden voice listeners. There is also something which is called subturfuge, which is getting information by using deceit to achieve what they want
This was resolved in a different way, the company which published it denied that they used hidden voice listeners to obtain the information of the article. The newspaper company reached an agreement with the PCC (This was just before its closure) that the article had to be edited so the name of the person and also any information which is guided towards that person had to be removed.
ASA
The ASA are the ones which regulate ads, but they do not watch every single ad before it is released because that will take too much time, they expect the makers of the adverts to respect the rules and not brake them
they have multiple rules which make sure people do not offend anyone or offend something, Here are sanctions which are put in place and i will explain some of them, why they are put in place and also some examples of them being broken
there are more rules which are put in place, I will link them.
Here
there was a Call Of duty ad which had violence of it, a guy getting grappled and then punched, this broke two different sanctions because of the reasons I will explain below. They broke 1.3 and 4.2
It appeared on an advert in the middle of a game called 'Planet Of Cubes', the game was for four year olds and call of duty was for 18 year olds.
1.3 was a rule which was that it must abide by the law and broadcaster must make that a condition of acceptance. Pretty much be suitable for where the ad was based

and 4.2 was about violence, in the rule it says it must not show wide spread violence that is serious and in this case it was serious.
the company of the ad responded by saying, the ad was placed on there by an external company, which they did not know and also the reason it was on there is because it places ads by what the persons search history is of games and that it why it was placed on as an ad on the device
In the end ASA decided that the violence was mild and that it did not breach any of the codes despite the violence in it
Poundland were found to have a misleading ad on their site because they state that everything has to be a pound and some customers found that some items but not many items were over that price on their site
they broke three points in one rule, these were
"
Advertisements must not materially mislead or be likely to do so." this was because the item was not £1 it was more, this is the reason why this one was broken,
"These rules apply regardless of any substantiation presented in support of the claims.
Advertisements must not explicitly claim that the advertiser’s job or livelihood is in jeopardy if consumers do not buy the advertised product or service."
The last one which they broke was
"Advertisements must not falsely imply that the advertiser is acting as a consumer or for purposes outside its trade, business, craft or profession. Advertisements must make clear their commercial intent, if that is not obvious from the context." this is because the advertisement was not clear of what they were doing, the items which you buy for over a pound you could only buy at the cashiers desk, when they offer you something.
in the end Poundland had to take the ad down and the only way they were allowed to put it back up is if they changed it so it is represented properly
Freedom of information
Freedom of information was first introduced in 2005, it was to let people have access to certain information which is appropriate from public authorities, a little example is that, if someone gets robbed and there is video take footage, people can access that just by asking.
this is very useful in the media industry, in the news part of it, this law lets them get access to certain information and use it freely on the news with obviously not being biased with what they are saying. I will show some examples of what I am talking about below.

for example there was a time, it happened twice once was in 2014 and the other was in 2015 and what happened was a lot of private and person emails and texts were leaked, some of them are just casual talks between workers at sony. Here
this is an example of that rule act being broken because the information was not public for people to actually look at it. this kind of thing happens pretty much every day
within some of the emails there was an email from the boss at Sony about Angelina Jolie, Amy Pacsal (American business executive and film producer Of sony, well was) and Scott Rudin. The emails which were leaked were aiming offensively at Angelina Jolie.
"Jolie objected to David Fincher directing the “Jobs” film instead of her big-budget remake of “Cleopatra.”
what was said in the emails was “want to waste [his] time on this.” this was said when Amy Pascal asked Scott rudin about him directing that film instead of hers.
He also carried onto to say that “minimally talented spoiled brat”
http://variety.com/2014/film/news/leaked-sony-emails-reveal-nasty-exchanges-and-insults-1201375511/