Dutch culture minister Ronald Plasterk plans to take no action against public TV channel Nederland 3 to prevent it from broadcasting 13 X-rated movies this summer, reports the NIS News Bulletin.

The scheduled series, titled Cinema Erotica, follows a broadcast by the channel last February of adult classic Deep Throat, and is being protested as that broadcast was by Christian party leaders.

These films are characterized by connoisseurs as artistic, Plasterk said in a letter to parliament. He maintained that there is no reason to stop the broadcasts, nor does the government have the means to do so.

Hindus have urged the Viacom and its brand Paramount Pictures to post a study guide about Hinduism and guru tradition on their websites and place it in movie theaters worldwide to undo the supposed damage done by their upcoming Hollywood movie The Love Guru.

Bhavna Shinde, representing Hindu Janjagruti Samiti and Sanatan Society for Scientific Spirituality, in a communique to Paramount Pictures said: ...We also feel that the parody on Gurus will contribute to the misunderstanding about the sacred concept of the 'Guru'...

Shinde urged Viacom and Paramount to immediately issue a study guide about Hinduism and the sacred tradition/role of the 'Guru' confirming to Hindu scriptures, post it on the official websites of Viacom and Paramount and 'The Love Guru', and make it available free of cost in printed form at the movie theaters worldwide.

She further said, This guide should also offer the viewers a framework in which to see the film, so that the viewers do not carry any misconceptions about Hinduism and that the characters portrayed in this movie are in no way depicting authentic Gurus from the Hindu and spiritual tradition.

The American President
UKTV Gold, 13 January 2008, 14:55

The American President is a film about the difficulties of an emerging romance for a fictional president of the United States in the midst of a re-election campaign. It was transmitted in UKTV Gold’s regular Sunday afternoon movie slot.

Ofcom received complaints that this film contained highly offensive language (“fuck”), which was inappropriate for a pre-watershed transmission when children could be watching.

Decision

Rule 1.14 of the Code states that the most offensive language must not be broadcast before the watershed or when children are particularly likely to be listening. The broadcast of the word “fuck” three times within this film in an afternoon slot when children were particularly likely to be viewing was clearly unacceptable. We welcome UKTV’s broadcast apology as soon as it was alerted to the issue, and its review of scheduling processes. However, it is the licensee’s clear responsibility to ensure that material originally intended for post watershed transmission is scheduled correctly and in accordance with the requirements of the Code, to ensure that viewers under eighteen are protected from broadcast of harmful or offensive material.

In this instance the most offensive language was broadcast before the watershed. UKTV have encountered similar problems before in that technical and human errors have resulted in inappropriate material being broadcast before the watershed. We treated the issues as resolved on those occasions, given UKTV's assurances that it had reviewed its compliance processes. However, as there have been repeated lapses in compliance procedures of this nature at UKTV, on this occasion we have recorded a breach of the Code.

The results of a national survey on attitudes to classification, carried out by MRBI for IFCO, (the Irish Film Censor’s Office), are included in the Film Censor’s Annual Report for 2007, which was published on 29th May.

The survey sample consisted of 1,000 persons aged 15+ representative of the national population in terms of gender, age, social class and region.

Among the main findings of the survey:

• 80% of respondents agreed with the Film Censor’s decision to ban the video game Manhunt 2 on the grounds that its level of gross, unrelenting and gratuitous violence was unacceptable.
• 85% would like to see IFCO’s age ratings on films downloaded over the internet (even though respondents were advised this is currently outside IFCO’s remit)
• 72% said they would like to see IFCO’s age ratings displayed before films shown on Irish television channels such as RTE and TV3.
• Asked which types of screen media they believe can have the most potentially negative effect on children, 44% of respondents said the internet, 32% video games, 17% television, 4% DVDs and 2% said cinema.
• Asked which film content might be considered most potentially harmful for children, 63% said violence, 21% drugs, 11% sex and 4% said language.

Speaking today on publication of his report, John Kelleher said: Our research shows that those parents who do use our website - www.ifco.ie - appreciate the consumer advice it provides. It will therefore be our main priority now to significantly increase the level of public awareness, particularly among parents.

In 2007, almost 9,000 cinema films and DVDs were certified by IFCO.

Millions of viewers tune in every week to BBC's Springwatch, fronted by Bill Oddie. It came as a shock to many when the presenter used rather direct language when narrating sexual congress in the natural world.

Describing a mating scene between two sparrows, Oddie  said: The female is asking for it – and getting it, basically. She is doing that wing-fluttering think like that as if to say: 'I am a baby, feed me'... [and] is getting quite the opposite. He concluded the piece by saying: That's a wing-trembler she's just had there.

An item on beetles reignited the sensitivities of some viewers. Describing the sexual congress taking place in front of viewers' eyes, Oddie abandoned euphemism altogether. He crash-lands on top of a likely looking lady – there's a bit of luck! One thing's for sure: this boy is horny!

Then, as the male fought off a competing suitor for the right to mate, Oddie went into character, adopting the part of the female and saying in a high-pitched voice: Come on big boy, come and get it. Oh, be gentle with me!

A few viewers reacted with predictable outrage. One man complained: I am sick to death of the constant innuendo being offered by Bill every time a scene of mating appears.

It isn't funny or witty... just downright embarrassing when you are watching it with children. For example, being asked by my 10-year-old daughter: 'What does horny mean, daddy?' when watching mating beetles isn't right.

Another viewer said: This is schoolboy sniggering, behind-the-bike-sheds type humour and it's out of place in a programme that is otherwise marvellously educational for all age groups.

The BBC commented that many viewers endorsed the "light-hearted view" of Springwatch and Oddie. The programme is always looking at new, creative and entertaining ways of bringing nature to a wider audience. Storytelling is one of many ways of doing this. No offence was intended.

As part of Liverpool Streets Ahead over the weekend, Cacahuète performers were based in the windows of shops on Bold St. Some of the performances were stopped by the police. A guy walking around Bold St in a loin cloth with a fake penis. A girl in a lingerie store sitting in her underwear, had been told to cover or up she wouldn't be allowed to perform. A lady wrapped in clingfilm with bits covered by banana skins and various food items had been told that some people have complained, and that performers were being provocative. The Amy Winehouse styled performer had been asked to remove the cocaine looking substance.

Pascal, who was the leader of the group, said that Liverpool was the "Capital of Censorship." Bit of a shame to invite people to perform in the Capital of Culture and then censor them.

Having been one of the performers I have to say that it really was a travesty for these performances to be stopped - do the police now have artistic control over this capital of culture year?

Hundreds thoroughly enjoyed the mannequins yet a minority dictated the actions of the police. Instead of abandoning the final performance completely we thought it would be more beneficial to make the actions of the police known to the Liverpool public. I have seen this protest mentioned on one website only so please keep the debate going....

The lady in her underwear in a wheelchair was told she could continue if she covered herself up (which totally changes the meaning of the piece) yet it was ok for a guy dressed as a pimp simulating sex with a blow up doll! It was also ok for Kate Lawler to run the London marathon in her underwear.

If any form of pleasure is exhibited,
Report to me and it will be prohibited.
I`ll put my foot down. So shall it be!
This is the land of the free!
Rufus T Firefly in Duck Soup

Early Bird
Turn On TV, 28 October 2007, 07:15 – 09:00

Turn On TV (now broadcasting as Tease Me) is a free-to-air unencrypted channel shown in the “adult section” of the Sky Electronic Programme Guide (“EPG”). It broadcasts programmes based on interactive chat services: viewers are invited to contact on-screen female presenters via premium rate telephony services (“PRS”).

A viewer complained that the presenter on the channel’s Early Bird programme broadcast in the early morning was shown rubbing her crotch over a pair of skimpy knickers and tweaking and blowing on her nipples to make them erect. The complainant objected that the presenter’s behaviour was unsuitable for the time of broadcast.

Ofcom Decision

Ofcom has repeatedly made clear its concerns about inappropriate, sexually explicit content being shown on “babe” channels whose programmes are based on interactive “adult” chat. Turn On TV has itself previously been found in breach of the Code for the inappropriate scheduling of sexual content (Ofcom Broadcast Bulletin issue number 85).

In this case, Ofcom considers that the actions of the presenter were not explicit. However, they were clearly sexual in nature and unsuitable for the time of broadcast. We note the broadcaster has taken certain remedial steps as a result of the complaint, but are concerned that at the time of these breaches it did not have sufficient procedures in place to satisfy itself that the material it transmitted was fully compliant with the Code.

Breach of Rules 1.3, 1.17 and 2.1

Australia's Imparja Television has decided to ban advertisements for x-rated chat-lines.

Outgoing chairman Owen Cole says the local community has expressed concern about the advertisements. It seemed a logical decision, given the problems faced by remote Indigenous communities.

He says the broadcaster was making a statement by giving up revenue from the sexually explicit advertisements: Now the effectiveness of whether it's going to stop people from downloading pornography, that's questionable, but nevertheless sometimes you have to take a principle stance and that's what we've done.

Cole is calling on the Federal Government to take a more pro-active role in raising public awareness about the effects of pornography, domestic violence and sexual abuse in communities.

Operators of porn sites have to demonstrate that the models they use, at least 18 years.

The Lower House Tuesday adopted a motion to that effect from the SP and the PvdA unanimously adopted.

The government should put forward suggestions for July 1. It is claimed that this is a fair requirement for the operators of porn sites.

It is intended to make it easier for 'virtual searches', not only to detect child pornography, but also other forms of crime and terrorist crimes.

Does Dunkin' Donuts really think its customers could mistake Rachael Ray for a terrorist sympathizer?

The Canton-based company has abruptly cancelled an ad in which the domestic diva wears a scarf that looks like a keffiyeh, a traditional headdress worn by Arab men.

Some observers, including ultra-conservative Fox News commentator Michelle Malkin, were so incensed by the ad that there was even talk of a Dunkin' Donuts boycott.

The keffiyeh is the traditional scarf of Arab men that has come to symbolize murderous Palestinian jihad, Malkin yowls in her syndicated column. Popularized by Yasser Arafat and a regular adornment of Muslim terrorists appearing in beheading and hostage-taking videos, the apparel has been mainstreamed by both ignorant and not-so-ignorant fashion designers, celebrities, and left-wing icons.

The company at first pooh-poohed the complaints, claiming the black-and-white wrap was not a keffiyeh. But the right-wing drumbeat on the blogosphere continued and by yesterday, Dunkin' Donuts decided it'd be easier just to yank the ad.

Said the suits in a statement: In a recent online ad, Rachael Ray is wearing a black-and-white silk scarf with a paisley design. It was selected by her stylist for the advertising shoot. Absolutely no symbolism was intended. However, given the possibility of misperception, we are no longer using the commercial.

A new campaign featuring cats engaged in the act of making kittens is apparently too frisky for some television networks which are banning the "kitty porn."

The public service announcement, titled Sex and the Kitty, a take-off of the new movie Sex and the City, is produced by PETA, People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals.

The spot shows animatronic cats in heat, to say the least, as it focuses attention on the need for animal birth control.

Daphna Nachminovitch, vice president of PETA said: When you consider the millions of unwanted cats and dogs born each year, it's clear that the purrfect solution is spaying and neutering companion animals.

The animal-rights group issued a release, claiming its PSA was banned from MTV and most networks for being "too steamy," but said the ad will run in Seattle this week on KSTW-TV.

However, when contacted by WND, the Seattle station was not so sure.

Aarti Chhabria didn't know what hit her when her hit song Hari Om Hari Om which has been on the air for one month now turned into Jale Mome Jale Mome when the film Dhoom Dadakka released on Friday.

Not only that, huge chunks of the song had to be dropped because they apparently would've offended religious sensibilities.

So many songs suggesting so many things are freely being played on radio. My number's promo has been playing for a month. What sense does it make to censor it when everybody has already heard it? says the livid producer-director, Shashi Ranjan.

A few members of the censor board objected to my song. They feared Public Interest Litigations (PIL) against the words and the visuals. I had no choice but to change the words. What I want to ask is, what is the validity of the censor board if they're so scared of people going to the court? Let us filmmakers directly fight the PILs straight in the courts instead of going through the censor board, sighs Ranjan.

I've constantly fought to discipline vulgar songs. But my song in Dhoom Dadakka is by no means vulgar. And then to subject me to this. Eight days before release I was told to make the deletions and changes. It was a nightmare.

Blackpool Medics
BBC1, 28 January 2008, 19:30

Blackpool Medics is a fly-on-the-wall three-part documentary series about the difficulties faced by NHS staff in Blackpool.

Ofcom received a complaint that this episode contained the words “Oi, you fat cunt”, which they found unacceptable for broadcast at this time of the evening when children could be watching.

The BBC agreed that the inclusion of this language was inappropriate in a programme broadcast at that time of the evening when there was a strong likelihood that a significant number of children may have been watching. It apologised unreservedly for its error.

The offending word was contained in a sequence illustrating night life in Blackpool and was in one of a series of shots edited to music and commentary. The spoken words which were distant and muffled. In particular the expletive complained of was not spotted during the later stages of production, including the technical review stage which was the final viewing for both technical quality and editorial content.

Ofcom Decision

Rule 1.14 of the Code states that the most offensive language must not be broadcast before the watershed or when children are particularly likely to be listening. The inclusion of the words Oi you fat cunt within this programme, albeit slightly muffled but still audible, was clearly offensive and inappropriate before the watershed.

We note the BBC’s apology. However, the BBC’s broadcast of this language before the 21:00 watershed was a breach of Rule 1.14 of the Code.

Sayed Pervez Kambaksh believes his long nightmare is almost over.

The 24-year-old student, sentenced to death in Afganistan for downloading internet reports on women's rights, is allowing himself to be hopeful for the first time since he was condemned.

The Independent has learnt, however, that the Afghan President, Hamid Karzai, has privately assured Kambaksh's campaign team that he will be freed. Senior government figures have also indicated that they believe his sentence, by a court in Mazar-e-Sharif, was based on a mistaken interpretation of the country's constitutional law.

Kambaksh has already discreetly been issued with a passport which will enable him to start a new life abroad if and when he is freed.

A petition by readers of The Independent to secure justice for him has attracted more than 100,000 signatures. Des Browne, the Defence Secretary, said on a visit to Afghanistan yesterday that he would be raising the matter with Karzai.

Kambaksh said from his cell yesterday that he was aware that the Afghan President may save his life. This is very, very important for me. It was a court which said I must die without even hearing my side of the story. There are many judges who are very conservative and say I have insulted Islam without really considering the evidence.

They themselves are also afraid of extremists and this could influence their decision. That worries me. But I am very grateful to the international media, especially The Independent, for taking an interest in my case. I think that makes it difficult for them to just get rid of me.

According to Samay Hamed, the co-ordinator of Kambaksh's campaign team, President Karzai first agreed to pardon the student in March this year. I ... have been told repeatedly by government ministers that [they] want the matter resolved quickly.

The National Commission for Women (NCW) is campaigning for an amendment to a law governing the portrayal of women in media.

Chairperson Girija Vyas urged the industry, particularly the electronic media, to ensure that they did not show women in an 'indecent' manner. Expressing disappointment over the regressive and stereotypical depiction of women in TV serials and ads, Vyas said the NCW would push for an amendment to the Indecent Representation of Women (Prohibition) Act, 1986.

Soap operas of the 'saas-bahu' kind reinforce gender stereotypes. This can be dangerous because they condition the thought process of the youth. Ads use provocative images of women to sell products that bear no relation to them, while Bhojpuri music albums contain erotic lyrics and dances. Such influences must be curbed. The past few years have seen a steady rise in crimes against women and the media has the power to influence a change in mindset. Vyas said.

Supreme Court advocate Aparna Bhat has drafted the proposed amendments on behalf of the panel. We recommend the institution of an advisory council comprising women's organisations and advertising professionals. This panel should install screening committees to filter advertisements that are in bad taste. said Bhat.

Using a two-pronged strategy, the panel advised the TV and advertising industries to devise a self-regulatory mechanism of censorship. Panelist Mahesh Bhatt agreed that TV wields the widest influence among the media: I oppose censorship being enforced on creative professionals but news channels and advertisers must self-regulate content.

The Sixties were swinging and letters signed “Disgusted of Tun-bridge Wells” went unanswered by the permissive executives at the BBC. Who could stem this rising tide of filth?

Step forward an indomitable housewife-superstar from Wolverhampton, She Who Must Be Dismayed. Her clean-up crusade brought down the BBC’s Director-General and terrified liberals in the Church, the state and the stage.

It has taken the BBC eight years since her death to dare mine the comic potential of her life as the self-appointed leader of the “moral majority”.

The Mary Whitehouse I knew was a tough, feisty, vainglorious woman, in league with the right-wing moral rearmament movement, instinctively aware of her opponents’ weaknesses and unscrupulous in exploiting them.

However, in all her autobiographies (she wrote three), she created the myth of the humble, self-effacing teacher, chosen by God to lead the country out of the moral wilderness cultivated by clever liberals. She was David, who dared to take on the Goliath at Broadcasting House, slaying him, not with pebbles, but with postbags of complaints by her legion of followers, who sat glued to BBC Two solemnly recording every swearword in the Play for Today and every innuendo in Pinkie and Perky.

The dramatist Amanda Coe has taken her at face value and run with her own account of the humble housewife who has greatness thrust upon her. It is a richly comic story and Mary is robustly reincarnated by Julie Walters, upstaged every few minutes by Alun Armstrong as Ernest, her bewildered postman husband, who alerts her to the acronymic danger of her original name for her campaigning organisation, Clean Up National Television.

To make the production work, Mary’s enemies must be made equally ridiculous. So, Sir Hugh Carleton Greene is reinvented as a manic John Cleese figure, a lecherous, upper-class, overclever twit brought down by the simple soul he is too stuck-up to meet. Hugh Bonneville does a fine imitation. And there is a wonderful (and more accurate) portrayal of Lord Hill, the smarmy “radio doctor” who ran ITV and disarmed Mary with tea and cakes. But it was Harold Wilson, not Mrs Whitehouse, who really engineered Sir Hugh’s removal by making the pliant Hill chairman of the BBC. It was Greene’s penchant for satirising politicians and not his support for Play for Today that was his undoing.

The television play ends by showing how Mary learns to manipulate the media – a formidable talent she had from the outset. It swallows her pretence that she was not interested in politics, but, on the contrary, despite the laughable obsession of her followers with sexual innuendo, her true concern was with liberal and left-wing ideology. Her early target was Cathy Come Home – Ken Loach’s drama about the underclass – and she discerned psychological discord and social anarchy in every Dennis Potter play.

Her fear of homosexuals was visceral. She claimed that homosexuality was caused by abnormal parental sex during pregnancy or just after.

Her real political agenda came to the fore in her alliance with Mrs Thatcher, whom she supported at every election. This was a betrayal of her cause at the time that it could have meshed with the antiporn feminists in the Labour Party. It was under free enterprise Thatcherism that sexual profiteering began to thrive in the Eighties – from the groaning “adult” shelves of every corner newsagent to the dirty talk on telephone lines leased from the newly privatised British Telecom.

Mary’s bandwagon was finally derailed when her prosecution of the National Theatre for staging The Romans in Britain  (Howard Brenton’s play attacking British Army actions in Northern Ireland) collapsed. She had privately prosecuted the play’s director, but had been too mean to pay for her solicitor witness to occupy the best seat in the stalls, forcing him to sit at the back of the Olivier Theatre. From this vantage point, he could not say for certain whether the object that touched the naked buttocks of Greg Hicks (playing a druid priest) was the tip of a centurion’s penis or the tip of a centurion’s thumb. After the case was thrown out and she had been ordered to pay costs, she cut a doleful figure, muttering tearfully that God will provide.

Nonetheless, Mary’s cultural vandalism left its mark, curbing the most creative period in British TV drama. If the corporation ever wishes to pay her a genuinely backhanded compliment, it should run a Mary Whitehouse season, devoted to all the comedy, drama and current affairs programmes condemned by her National Viewers’and Listeners’ Association. It would provide more entertaining and enriching television than its current output.

New Zealand media companies are resisting calls for a combined telecommunications and broadcasting commissioner to regulate the converging industries.

Ministry for Culture officials have opened a hornets' nest of ill feeling in their review of broadcasting regulations.

It is the first time in 20 years that the Government has considered pulling back from New Zealand's laissez faire broadcasting rules.

TVNZ and TV3's owner MediaWorks have called for radical changes including a Telecom-style break up of Sky TV and unbundling its sports rights.

But despite the tough talking against Sky, TVNZ and MediaWorks have joined Sky steering the bureaucrats away from a powerful regulator like the United Kingdom's Ofcom.

It is unclear if any government - whether led by Labour or National after the election - would support a tough regulator. Politicians from both sides have resisted regulations.

Under Labour the Government has cracked down on Telecom with the Telecommunications Commissioner and the Commerce Commission now playing a key role in the running of the industry.

According to a summary of the submissions there was a consensus that a converged regulator should not have both cultural and financial obligations. Broadly speaking media companies were against media ownership rules of any kind while a number of consumers, though not all, were in favour, it said.

Strange Days is a 1995 US action film by Kathryn Bigelow

The BBFC provided the following justification for their 15s of cuts to the DVD:

The already reduced rape-murder scene in Strange Days was also found unacceptable on video, where the murder was further reduced to remove sexualised images of forcible breast exposure in a medium which could permit the repeated viewing of such scenes out of context. The scene was designed to convey the dangerous pleasures purveyed by 'snuff movies', but it seemed to the Board to have come perilously close to providing those same pleasures itself.

But now Daniel reports:

From what I could tell, ITV4 recent screening of STRANGE DAYS was uncut, including the 2 seconds removed from the Point of View rape / murder for the 1995 theatrical release, though this needs confirmation.

Hopefully this means that the BBFC would now allow an uncut DVD release.

The Singapore authorities attempted to stop a private screening of a critical film on Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew on 17 May 2008, alleging that the screening violated the Films Act, according to news reports.

Section 21(1)(b) of the Films Act forbids the screening of a film that has not been vetted by the censors, punishing violators with a maximum fine of S$40,000 (approx. US$29,428), or jail term of up to six months, or both.

Three officers from the Media Development Authority (MDA), claiming they were acting on a "tip-off", went to the hotel where the film, One nation under Lee, was being premiered and requested for the disc, alleging that it has not been vetted by the censors.

The night before the screening, the Board of Film Censors had warned the organisers of the offence they would be committing under the law if they had not submitted the film for approval.

The 45-minute film is produced and directed by artist/activist Seelan Palay. It documents former premier Lee's rise to power through a host of restrictive measures on civil liberties, criticises the economic and political governance of the ruling party and pays tribute to the efforts of activists and citizens who persist in claiming and exercising their democratic rights.

The MDA officials later brought in plainclothes officers in an attempt to hold the organisers supposedly for obstruction of justice. They left, however, when Chee agreed to hand over the film as the screening had fortunately ended by then.

A French court has punished web publishers because of snippets of text that appeared on their sites via an RSS feed. It is believed to be the first time that a website operator has been held responsible for content delivered by a third party's RSS feed.

RSS, or Really Simple Syndication, is a common way for publishers to make their content available to others. Individuals use RSS readers to see the latest headlines from their favourite sites without needing to visit each site.

A French court, the Tribunal De Grande Instance De Nanterre, has said that three websites, Planete Soft, Aadsoft and Lespipoles, are liable for invasion of privacy because of articles published by other people but available via RSS from their sites.

The articles concerned the director Olivier Dahan and actress Sharon Stone and were taken via RSS from publisher Gala.fr. Dahan's lawyer Emmanuel Asmar told OUT-LAW Radio that as well as a successful privacy suit against Gala, they also won cases against the three RSS feed publishers.

In this particular case the RSS reader displayed information made up of a simple link and the headline content: Sharon Stone and Olivier Dahan, the star has a romantic embrace with the director. This was sufficient to constitute an attack on his private life.

Media law expert Kim Walker of Pinsent Masons, the law firm behind OUT-LAW.COM, said that there has not been a test case in the UK on link liability.

Nader Gohar has been in the business of broadcasting for the past 25 years, but he is now standing trial for importing and owning television equipment and transmitting broadcasts without permission.

At least that is the official line.

In reality, Gohar is on trial for broadcasting the Mahalla al Kobra protests on April 6, including footage of protesters tearing down and defacing a large poster of Hosni Mubarak, the Egyptian president.

The following day, the head of the board of the Radio and Television Union filed a complaint with Egypt’s prosecutor general, alleging that Gohar’s Cairo News Company (CNC) – which provides satellite broadcast services and equipment to such television networks as Al Jazeera, BBC and CNN – had been operating without the required permits.

On April 17, 35 plainclothes police officers raided CNC’s Cairo offices, confiscating its five sets of satellite transmission equipment, effectively shutting it down.

The date of the strike, April 6, was originally set by factory workers in Mahalla al Kobra, 120km north of Cairo, who were protesting against high food prices, low wages and widespread poverty.

Clashes erupted and continued until the following day and police fired tear gas and rubber bullets at protesters, killing at least two and wounding about 100. More than 300 people were arrested. Footage of the violence sent tremors through Egyptian society.

lA TV ad, for The Scottish Government, encouraged viewers to register as organ donors. It showed an image of a young girl's head set against a black background. The voice-over and on-screen text stated Would you allow your organs to save a life? You have 20 seconds to decide. The girl's face started to fade gradually and become distorted. The voice-over stated Kill Jill?and on-screen text stated Kill Jill accompanied by a choice "Yes" or "No". The voice-over and on-screen text then stated No ... register and you could save a life.

10 viewers complained. Several viewers objected that the ad was misleading, offensive and distressing, because it implied that people who did not register as organ donors were killing someone. One viewer called Jill, whose seven-year-old son had been upset by the ad, objected that it was likely to cause distress to children.

ASA Decision

The ASA noted many of the viewers objected to the claim "Kill Jill", because it implied that people who did not sign up to the register were choosing to kill someone.

We considered, however, that most viewers were unlikely to interpret the claim literally and would understand the ad was intended to highlight that by signing up to the register they could save someone's life, which was made clear in the statement register and you could save a life. We noted the ad was hard-hitting and referred to a difficult and sensitive subject matter, which could be upsetting for some. We considered, however, that in the context of the important message the ad was promoting, the ad was unlikely to mislead, cause serious or widespread offence or undue distress.

We noted the ad had been given an ex-kids restriction, which helped to prevent it being seen by very young children when they were watching programmes specifically designed for them. We acknowledged that the complainant's son had been upset by the ad. We considered, however, that the images used in the ad were unlikely to distress the vast majority of children. We considered that the ad was unlikely to cause undue fear or distress to children. We considered that it was not necessary to impose a greater restriction to direct the ad away from all children and concluded that it had been appropriately scheduled.

Complaints not upheld, no further action required.

Members of the Russian Communist party have called for the new Indiana Jones film to be banned in the county because they say it distorts history.

Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull, set during the Cold War, sees Harrison Ford's character battle Cate Blanchett's evil KGB agent.

St Petersburg Communist Party chief Sergei Malinkovich told the Reuters news agency it was rubbish. Why should we agree to that sort of lie and let the West trick our youth?

They will go to the cinema and will be sure that in 1957 we made trouble for the United States and almost started a nuclear war.

The Associated Press news agency quoted Moscow Communist official Andrei Andreyev as saying: It is very disturbing if talented directors want to provoke a new Cold War.

Twenty nine "inappropriate" websites are being investigated for content deemed to be critical of or offensive to the Thai monarchy.

A police source at the High-Tech Crime Centre said a list of inappropriate websites, compiled about a month ago, has been handed over to the Special Branch Police.

The SBP is working with the Department of Special Investigation (DSI) in tracking down operators or owners of those websites, the source said.

Note that Lese Majeste accusations are sometimes more to do with settling personal scores rather than strident attacks on the monarchy.

The newspapers published the list of sites under investigation. Having compiled the list, the thorny issue of how to block them seems to be causing problems. The recent law suggests that blocking should be via court orders but these have not been obtained. So it seems that the blocking has been delegated to ISPs with assurances that they will not be prosecuted.

See full article from Prachatai

Information and Communications Technology Minister Man Pattanothai said that so far internet service providers had not dared to block websites found to have lèse majesté content for fear of breaching the National Telecommunications Commission law that forbids blocking information flows, with a maximum penalty of licence revocation.

After consulting with the National Telecommunications Commission, the ICT Ministry has assured all ISPs that they will not be subject to the penalty if they block the truly offensive websites, said the Minister.

The National Telecommunications Commission has confirmed with the ministry that blocking websites offensive to the royal family can be carried out without breaching the law. Therefore, the ICT Ministry can guarantee all ISPs that their licenses will not be revoked, said the Minister.

ICT Minister said that there had been an order from ‘high above’ not to block the websites and to allow the free flow of information, on the grounds that foreigners do not understand the blocking and may form negative perceptions.

See full article from Reporters without Borders

Reporters Without Borders is alarmed about the comments made by Man Pattanotai, the Thai minister of information and communication technology (ICT), in a radio interview on 14 May. He said prosecuting websites because of their content would cause a “big scandal” and that it was better to just “suppress the news” by closing them down or blocking access.

By voicing a preference for radical censorship measures, the minister is in complete contradiction with the Computer Crime Act, which has been in force since the summer of 2007 and which requires the authorities to bring a complaint against a website before requesting its closure, Reporters Without Borders said: We condemn the reinforcement of online controls, which includes the creation of a toll-free number for people to call to denounce any website criticising the monarchy.

A poultry magazine from western Arkansas has agreed to ask Amazon.com to stop selling its publication online, but a lawyer representing The Gamecock says the publication does not promote cockfighting or violate a federal ban on the bloody sport.

The settlement filed in US District Court in Washington, DC, is related to a lawsuit the Humane Society of the United States filed against Seattle-based Amazon.com in February 2007.

In the lawsuit, the HSUS accused Amazon.com of violating federal animal-cruelty laws by selling The Feathered Warrior and The Gamecock, which HSUS described as two cockfighting magazines.

The Marburger Publishing Co., which publishes The Gamecock, agreed to settle with HSUS because it was a way to remove itself from the case, said attorney Ali Beydoun. Beydoun said that the magazine also promised in the settlement to be more vigilant in its content. He said the magazine intends to follow the agreement and all applicable laws.

HSUS lawyer Jonathan Lovvorn said his organization is hoping the agreement with Marburger, which had not been signed yet by the judge hearing the case, will encourage Amazon.com and The Feathered Warrior, another Arkansas magazine, to come to similar agreements.

Amazon has argued that it has a constitutional right to sell the publications and called pulling them from the shelves a form of censorship.

On 25 April a Brussels court sentenced the “anti-globalist”  monthly magazine MO to a payment of 1 euro in moral damages to the businessman George Forrest because the magazine had printed a cartoon on its front page depicting Mr. Forrest, who owns a copper empire in Congo, in the traditional costume of Congo’s former dictator Mobutu Sese Seko.

The court ruled that freedom of the press, as protected by article 25 of the Belgian Constitution, does not apply to cartoons because article 25, which dates from 1831, applies to “writers” but not to illustrators.

Article 25 of the Belgian Constitution states: The printing press is free; censorship can never be introduced; no deposits can be demanded from the writers, publishers and printers. If the writer is known and has his domicile in Belgium the publisher, printer or distributor cannot be prosecuted.”

Judges Valvekens, De Ridder and Morel of the 20th Chamber of the Court of First Instance in Brussels ruled that The cover illustration cannot be considered to be a direct expression of a thought or opinion protected by the freedom of the press because

Article 25 explicitly refers to ‘the writer.’ The illustration used on the cover is merely a depiction of a person, and not a writing, to which the exceptional status that applies to offences relating to the printing press has no effect.

Iranian bloggers and activists have condemned a move by a government panel to block access to several Web sites related to women's issues and human rights.

It's like a big attack, said Parvin Ardalan, who works for www.change4equality.net, a Tehran-based feminist Web site affected by the new restrictions: Now, most sites related to women's and human rights issues have been blocked in one day

Ardalan's site is part of a campaign to collect 1 million signatures aimed at pressuring the government to change what activists call discriminatory laws against women. The authorities want to silence us, she said.

The Ministry of Islamic Guidance and Culture's supervisory board for the media notified Iranian Internet service providers about the new restrictions, which affected dozens of sites.

This week the European parliament will seek to introduce a new euphemism for genocide into the lexicon of international relations. Diplomats who follow MEPs' advice will no longer have to run the risk of offending countries with a dishonourable history by uttering the 'genocide' word. They can, instead, refer to the most egregious crimes against humanity as "past events".

...

Last month, the Turkish assembly agreed to modify the law, reportedly to placate the EU's most powerful institutions. Out went the crime of insulting Turkishness. In came the crime of insulting the Turkish nation.

Several analysts have concluded - rightly - that this amendment is cosmetic and ambiguous. Yet according to the European commission, it is very much a welcome step forward. The socialist grouping in the European parliament, which includes Britain's Labour MEPs, has made a similar statement ahead of this week's debate.

...Read full article

Imagine that you are the editor of a national newspaper. After launching a new service on your website, a minority of your journalists start submitting copy that is clearly distasteful. None of the content is libellous or in breach of hate laws, but it would be considered as offensive by large sections of the public. What do you do?

You could advise your journalists to desist, order a rewrite or spike the offensive content. Beyond that, the only choice for many editors is to fire them. But what if the questionable content is coming from your readers? Do you treat it any differently? Would you likewise censor the offensive content, even though it's not quite breaking the law?

...Read full article

The British public continues to retain a high degree of common sense [...BUT...] allowing the public to decide what is acceptable or not, is simply passing the buck. [...A buck that Mediawatch is happy to accept]

Thousands of people have been able to watch a sickening video showing the massacre of young Russian men before it was eventually deleted from YouTube. The horrific footage shows the terrified men lying beside a road having their throats slit in turn. It was posted on Sunday, May 18. Three days later it was still there and had been viewed more than 8,300 times. YouTube promises that videos flagged by users as inappropriate will be removed from the site.

The film clip was removed within two hours of Sky News Online contacting YouTube. The 10-minute video was apparently posted by a 17-year-old Russian. The description which accompanied it said: This is a little part of the full horror!

But John Beyer, director of campaign group Mediawatch-uk, said:

While I recognise the argument about regulation at the periphery, allowing the public to decide what is acceptable or not, is simply passing the buck. It points up a lack of internal regulation. People take advantage of the system and by the time someone takes notice it's too late - the damage has been done. It's a huge problem. We need an international legal framework to decide what is permissible. This sort of material should simply not be uploaded.

Comment: Public Hypocrisy

Well if the public can't be trusted to decide what is acceptable or not, Then it rather puts a dent in Beyers usual rhetoric eg...

British public demands accountability for film censors

The results confirm what we have always believed. The British public continues to retain a high degree of common sense and is not impressed by the self interested demands of the film industry.

The Entertainment and Leisure Software Publishers Association has instructed its members to ignore any request from the BBFC to change the current age ratings process.

The UK industry representative has requested that leading publishers hold fire on implementing any changes to classification of their games until the Government has officially executed proposals influenced by the Byron Review.

The industry is now in an 18-month period of consultation with Government following Dr Tanya Byron’s recommendations – which included BBFC ratings on all video games boxes and a statutory ‘12’ classification.

However, ELSPA believes that rival European ratings body PEGI – which seems to have the support of publishers – may be able to make a strong claim to hold greater power, possibly in contradiction to Dr. Byron’s proposals.

ELSPA told MCV:

You may have heard that the BBFC has appointed a ‘BBFC Byron Implementation Officer’. Apparently his brief is to contact PEGI and interested trade bodies as well as the country’s games companies ‘with a view to implementing the Byron recommendations’.

Our view is that this appointment at the BBFC – along with the brief itself – is somewhat hasty since we still await actual details of the full consultation promised in the Byron Review.

The National Secular Society invite you to write to your MP and suggest signing Roger Godsiff's Early Day Motion (no. 1586) which criticises West Midlands Police for its behaviour over the Channel 4 Undercover Mosque programme. The matter is one of immense public importance going to the very heart of the Justice system.

The motion reads:

That this House welcomes the unreserved public apology given by the West Midlands Police and the Crown Prosecution Service and the six figure libel settlement paid by them to Channel 4 over the Dispatches programme broadcast on 15th January 2007 which contained covert filming inside mosques in Birmingham and Derby; notes that the comments and allegations made by West Midlands Police and the Crown Prosecution Service had already been dismissed by the industry regulator, Ofcom; further notes that the individuals shown in the programme broadcast were using highly derogatory and racist language against a variety of non-Muslim groups which included Christians, Jews, homosexuals, lesbians and women and were in clear breach of existing legislation in respect of incitement to religious and racial hatred; calls on the Home Secretary to launch an immediate investigation into why the West Midlands Police and the Crown Prosecution Service chose to attack the programme makers at Channel 4 rather than investigating and prosecuting the individuals who were shown in the programme; and asserts that incitement to religious and racial hatred has no place in British society.

The board of the Arts Council of Windham County, Vermont, is unanimous in condemning the shutting down of Zeke Hecker's play, The Lift. We are appalled by what appears to be an act of intimidation that has robbed the public of the opportunity to see a production that took many months to bring to the stage, and who knows how many months, even years, to write.

It is our understanding, that a member of the audience felt the age of the individual playing the part of the "younger man" was too young.

A woman in the audience complained of "inappropriate" material; namely, a segment involving aural suggestions of sex between an 18-year-old and an older woman.

A popular Japanese cartoon is sparking off outcries in the Muslim world.

Shueisha Inc, a Japanese publisher involved in the production of the cartoon JoJo’s Bizarre Adventure and its animation version, suspended sales of some of the original comics and the DVD series, but said the material was not intended to be offensive.

At issue is a 90-second segment from JoJo’s Bizarre Adventure, which depicts Dio Brando, a villain, picking up a Quran from a bookshelf and apparently examining it as he orders the execution of the hero and his friends.

After a viewer posted negative comments and the still scene, it sparked off more protests. Eventually responses were carried on more than 300 Arab and Islamic Web forums with some accusing Japan of insulting the Quran.

Sheikh Abdul Hamid Attrash, chairman of the Fatwa (religious edict)
Committee at Al-Azhar, the highest Sunni authority based in Cairo, dismissed the cartoon as an insult to Islam: ‘This scene depicts Muslims as terrorists, which is not true at all. This is an insult to the religion and the producers would be considered to be enemies of Islam.’

In responding to the accusation, the Shueisha official explained that it was a simple mistake. Neither the original comic nor the animation intends to treat Muslims as villains. But as a result, the cartoon offended Muslims. We apologize for the unpleasantness that the cartoon may have caused and will carefully consider how to deal with religious and culture themes.

Gamal Qutb, the former head of the Fatwa Committee at Al-Azhar suggested that Muslims would boycott Japanese products unless Japan takes action against the controversial video.

When it was announced that New Zealand would receive the same edited version of the hit video game Grand Theft Auto IV that was destined for the Australian market, there was anger in the local gaming community.

There has never been an official announcement by publisher Take-Two Interactive about the reasons behind this, but logic suggests it was because it would be easier to supply the Australiasian region with a single version of the game.

New Zealand, which does have an R18 rating, received a version of the game which was watered down to please the censors in neighbouring Australia, where the highest possible rating for a game is MA15+.

One man who was not happy with situation was Stan Calif, founder and director of First Games. Stan was not only annoyed that New Zealand would be receiving an edited version of the game courtesy of Take-Two - he also thought it was more than a bit cheeky that New Zealanders would be paying “full price” for a cut-down game. He was determined to give Kiwis the right to buy the uncut version locally.

Stan filed a submission to the OFLC in the week after the release of GTA IV. Stan’s efforts and perserverance were rewarded, when the OFLC gave the uncut version of GTA IV a classification of R18, paving the way for First Games to sell the game legally in New Zealand.

First Games are proud to be able to deliver GTA IV uncut to New Zealanders, says Stan. The uncut GTA IV is now available for Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3 from www.firstgames.co.nz for the price of $99.50 and carries a NZ classification of R18 (contains violence, offensive language, and sex scenes).