Censor Watch

Shrek 2 is a 2004 USA family animation comedy by Andrew Adamson and Kelly Asbury
Starring Mike Myers and Eddie Murphy and Cameron Diaz.

BBFC category cuts were required for a U rated release for cinema and home video. Later the film was passed PG uncut for 4K Blu-ray in 2022. Uncut in the US with an MPAA PG rating.

The previous BBFC category cuts for a U rating was to remove a surprise headbutt.

UK: Passed PG uncut for mild bad language:

• 2022 Universal Steelbook R0 4K Blu-ray at UK Amazon

Promotional Material

Everyone's favourite larger-than-life hero returns in the Oscar-nominated Shrek 2, which has been hailed by critics and audiences alike as even better than its Oscar-winning predecessor! "There are so many jokes and jests, not even a jelly bellied ogre could consume them all in one sitting," proclaims USA Today. Happily ever after never seemed o far far away when a trip to meet the in-laws turns into another hilariously twisted adventure for Shrek and Fiona. With the help of his faithful steed Donkey, Shrek takes on a potion-brewing Fairy Godmother, the pompous Prince Charming, and the famed ogre-killer, Puss In Boots, a ferocious feline foe who's really just a pussycat at heart!

Extra Content: SECRETS OF SHREK 2 - SPOTLIGHT ON PUSS IN BOOTS FILMMAKERS' COMMENTARIES - FAR FAR AWAY IDOL - MUSIC VIDEOS Blu-ray Exclusives: The Animators' Corner - Shrek's Interactive Journey II

Adam Baxter, Ofcom Director of Standards and Audience Protection writes:

Over the year, we received 36,543 complaints about over 9,500 issues, and completed 74 broadcast standards investigations. We found in 66 of these cases that our rules had been broken. We also completed 45 fairness and privacy investigations during the year, of which six complaints were upheld. These figures show the weight we place on freedom of expression, and that we only step in when it's really needed.

Importantly, this number doesn't include complaints about programmes on the BBC. These are handled by the BBC in the first instance. In the summer, we told the BBC that we expect it to improve how it handles complaints from viewers and listeners. And we were pleased to see it recently announce that it would be changing its processes to make it easier for people to complain.

2022's list of most complained about programmes is, once again, dominated by reality TV -- in particular ITV's Love Island and I'm a Celebrity Get Me Out of Here! Given the large viewing figures, and the headlines and conversations created by these shows -- both online and offline -- it is not surprising to see them topping our chart.

Top ten complaints:

• Love Island, ITV2, 17 July - complaints related to alleged misogynistic and bullying behaviour by some contestants in the villa.
• I'm a Celebrity.... Get me out of here!, ITV, 6-27 November - viewers objected to the inclusion of Matt Hancock in the series.
• Friday Night Live, Channel 4, 21 October - complaints related to a performance by Jordan Gray.
• Love Island, ITV2, 19 July - complaints related to alleged misogynistic and bullying behaviour by some contestants in the villa.
• Good Morning Britain, ITV, 15 February - complaints related to comments made by Richard Madeley about death threats made to Keir Starmer.
• Jeremy Vine, Channel 5, 24 January - viewers complained about a health consultant's inaccurate statement about numbers of unvaccinated people in hospital with Covid-19.
• Love Island, ITV2, 18 July - complaints related to alleged misogynistic and bullying behaviour by some contestants in the villa.
• I'm a Celebrity.... Get me out of here!, ITV, 13 November - viewers objected to bullying behaviour against Matt Hancock.
• FIFA World Cup Final 2022: Argentina v France, ITV, 18 December - complaints related to politicised comments from Gary Neville.
• Sky News, Sky News, 10 September - a Justice for Chris Kaba walk was reported as people on their way to pay tribute to the late Queen. Ofcom is investigating whether this breached our rules on due accuracy.

Born to Fly is a 2022 China action drama by Liu Xiaoshi
Starring Yibo Wang, Jun Hu and Yosh Yu

The story of a special operations team headed by elite pilots , being ordered to test new fighter jets. Test flight after test flight, they continue to challenge the sky and the limits of themselves.

With hot young Chinese test pilots and heart-stopping aerial acrobatics, Born to Fly was supposed to be China's answer to Top Gun: Maverick. The wildly anticipated action flick stars Wang Yibo, a pop star turned actor (think China's Harry Styles), and was written and directed by Liu Xiaoshi, who cut his teeth making popular promotional videos for the Chinese military. Produced in full cooperation with the People's Liberation Army Air Force -- much as Maverick was with the U.S. Navy 204 the film showcases China's most advanced stealth fighter jet, the J-20.

So, when Born to Fly was officially scheduled for release on Sept. 30, the day before China's National Day holiday, many analysts were bullish on the tentpole's prospects to become China's next proudly nationalistic military blockbuster.

But Born to Fly was mysteriously grounded just days before its planned opening. The film's producers, including major studios Alibaba Pictures and Bona Film Group, put out a vague statement saying that the release would be postponed in order to present better production effects. No further details were provided and no update has been given.

Chinese authorities never comment directly on censorship decisions, but the word within the Beijing film industry is that Born to Fly's producers were made to realize that their movie's stunts and visual effects were far inferior to Top Gun: Maverick's and that the Chinese version risked ridicule in comparison -- all of which would have been most unwelcome, even politically dangerous, given that the two films are, in part, propagandistic displays of the United States' and China's military strengths.

A poster for Rated People , seen in September 2022, featured text stating, Building Work. It's a man's game. Bit like football was. Alongside was an image of a hand holding a drill. Beneath that, smaller text stated, If you've got the skills, we've got the jobs.

Eleven complainants, who believed the ad perpetuated harmful gender stereotypes by suggesting employment in the building industry was exclusive to men, challenged whether it breached the Code.

Rated People Ltd said the ad was one of several ads that were part of a campaign to encourage diversity into the trades profession. They said the intention of the ad itself was to highlight that just as football had traditionally been seen as a man's game, the trades profession continued to be seen in that way. They said the aim of the campaign as a whole was intentionally designed to challenge that stereotype and change that mindset through their message of encouraging women into the trades, with the message that it was skills that were important, rather than gender.

They said that whilst the ad itself had an element of tongue-in-cheek humour, it was intended to recognise the success of the England Women's football team at the recent 2022 UEFA European Women's Football Championship. They said they used that to demonstrate that women could have success in a previously male dominated industry, and to illustrate that the same could also be true in the trades.

ASA Assessment: Compaints upheld

The CAP Code stated that marketing communications must not include gender stereotypes that were likely to cause harm, or serious or widespread offence. It also stated that particular care must be taken to avoid causing offence on the grounds of gender.

We recognised that the ad was part of a wider campaign made up of a number of ads, with the aim of improving diversity in the trades industry and challenging the associated stereotypical bias. However, because the ad was displayed in isolation, we assessed it on its merits alone.

We understood that there was a negative long-established stereotype that building work was a male profession. We considered that consumers were likely to understand the phrase Building work. It's a man's game to mean that building work was a profession that was carried out by men, and was not appropriate for women. The phrase was immediately followed by text stating, Bit like football was, which we acknowledged was intended to imply that, in football, women had successfully challenged a similar stereotype, as exemplified by the success of the recent Women's European Championship 203 and that the stereotype around building work was being challenged in a similar way. We acknowledged that some consumers were likely to interpret the ad that way.

However, we considered that the claims in the ad were ambiguous, and that other consumers were likely to interpret the ad as presenting changing attitudes to football in a negative light, mourning the fact that football might no longer be considered a man's game, and presenting building work as one area where women were still excluded, and should continue to be. We considered that the ad reinforced harmful gender stereotypes that both football and the trade industry should be for men only.

For these reasons, we concluded that the ad included a gender stereotype that was likely to cause harm and serious offence, and breached the Code.

The ad must not appear again in its current form. We told Rated People Ltd to ensure they did not present gender stereotypes in a way that was likely to cause harm and serious offence.

Two ads (one Instagram and one website) promoted a drinking card game.

a. A paid-for ad on Instagram, for a drinking card game, seen on 4 November 2022 stated, UK's most irresponsible drinking game Spice up your pre-drinks, parties, stag dos and hen dos with an easy to play but brutally exciting drinking game. Warning: This game is NOT for snowflakes and showed an image of a full beer glass with a face on the side which had crosses for eyes and a sloping mouth.

b. Ad (a) linked to a website which featured the beer glass with the face and stated HANGOVER GUARANTEED. DRUNKH is a no fuss, no bullshit drinking game. We've taken away confusing rules, because who understands those when you're pissed? Draw a card, do what it says. Brutal drinking game for parties, stag dos and hen dos. Get DRUNK with DRUNKH!

A complainant challenged whether ad (a) was irresponsible and the ASA challenged whether ad (b) was irresponsible because they:

1. encouraged excessive drinking;

2. portrayed drinking alcohol as a challenge, encouraged irresponsible and anti-social behaviour and linked alcohol with daring behaviour; and

3. suggested that alcohol was a key component to the success of a social event.

4. The complainant also challenged whether ad (a) was inappropriately targeted at people under 18 years of age. Response

DrunkH Ltd said they were new to the market and were not aware of the rules. They said they had ended all paid-for advertising for the game.

ASA Assessment: Complaint upheld:

The CAP Code stated that marketing communications must be socially responsible and must contain nothing that was likely to lead people to adopt styles of drinking that were unwise. It also stated that marketing communications which included a promotion must not imply, condone or encourage excessive consumption of alcohol.

We considered that the image of the beer glass with a face suggested someone who was inebriated, and the references to the UK's most irresponsible drinking game and The drinking game you'll never remember in ad (a) and the claims hangover guaranteed, when you're pissed and Get DRUNK in ad (b) condoned and encouraged excessive drinking and were therefore irresponsible and breached the Code.

We noted that the advertised game encouraged participants to drink alcohol and complete dares and considered lines such as UK's most irresponsible drinking game, brutally exciting drinking game, Warning: This game is NOT for snowflakes, Brutal drinking game, Not for the SNOWFLAKES, Not for the faint of heart and showing the dare cards portrayed drinking alcohol as a challenge. Furthermore, we considered that the ads encouraged people to behave in irresponsible and daring ways when drinking alcohol.

We considered that readers would understand the claim Spice up your pre-drinks, parties, stag dos and hen dos to mean that playing the drinking game was a significant factor in the success of those events or similar social events. Furthermore, we considered that the claims For the pre-drinkers, for the party goers, Not for the SNOWFLAKES to mean that drinking alcohol as part of the game was an integral part of the events. We therefore considered that the ad (a) implied that alcohol was a key component of the success of social events.

We understood that the ad had been served to people aged between 16 and 32 years and understood that it had not been directed only to people aged over 18. We concluded the advertisers had not taken sufficient care to ensure that the ad was not directed at people under 18 years and it therefore the ad breached the Code.

The ads must not appear again in the form complained of. We told DrunkH Ltd to ensure their future ads contained nothing that was likely to lead people to adopt styles of drinking that were unwise, encourage irresponsible or anti-social behaviour, portray drinking alcohol as a challenge or suggest that alcohol was a key component of the success of a social event. We also told them to ensure that ads referring to alcoholic drinks were not directed at people under 18 years of age.

The Online Safety Bill is back in Parliament. It had been stalled for five months whilst the government made a few changes. A Parliamentary debate on Monday (5th December) revealed the shift in policy direction for the first time. It's relatively small change, with big implications.

According to the government, the Online Safety Bill is supposed to protect children. However, from a digital rights perspective it is probably the most worrying piece of legislation ever imagined to date. The government's focus is on the content it wants to ban, with little attention paid to the impact on freedom of expression or privacy. The lack of definition or precision in the text leaves wide open loopholes for over-removals of content and the possibility of government- imposed, privatised surveillance.

The emphasis was on new amendments to be tabled early next year. Self-harm content, deep fakes and the sharing of non-consensual intimate images, will be defined as new criminal offences and illegal content.

The subtle policy shift turns on a requirement for large online platforms to tackle the so-called "legal but harmful" content. This is a legally-problematic, grey area. It is about content that is not illegal but which the government wants to ban, and understood to include eating disorders, self-harm, and false claims about medicines.

The government has announced a plan to delete this requirement, but only for adult users, not for children. An amendment will be tabled next week.

A further, legally problematic, amendment requires platforms to allow adult users to filter out these kinds of harmful content for themselves. The idea is a kind of filter button where users can select the type of harmful content that they don't want to see.

In tandem, there will be an amendment that makes online platforms enforce their terms and conditions with regard to content that is not addressed by the Bill.

We have seen drafts of some of these amendments, and await the final versions.

This filter, together with the requirement to enforce terms and conditions, and an existing requirement to remove all illegal content, is what the government is calling its "triple shield". The government claims this will protect users from the range of harms set out in the Bill. It also claims the move will protect free speech. This claim does not stack up, as the underlying censorship framework remains in place, including the possibility of general monitoring and upload filters.

Moreover, the effect of these amendments is to mitigate in favour of age-gating. The notion of "legal but harmful" content for children remains in the Bill. In Monday's debate, government Ministers emphasised the role of "age assurance" which is a requirement in the Bill although it does not say how it should be implemented.

The government's position on age-gating is broader than just excluding under-18s from 'adult' content. The Secretary of State, Michelle Donelan, said that all platforms must know the age of their users. They may be required to differentiate between age-groups, in order to prevent children from engaging with age-inappropriate harmful content to be defined by the government. The likely methods will use biometric surveillance.

MPs have also passed an amendment that confirms chat controls on private messaging services. This is the "spy clause" , renumbered S. 106 (formerly S.104). It's a stealth measure that is almost invisible in the text, with no precision as to what providers will do. The government's preferred route is understood to be client-side scanning. This completes a trio of surveillance on public posts, private chats and children.

Twitter's Trust and Safety Council is no more, an email sent to its members who remained after last week's resignations reveals.

On Friday, three members of the council resigned, citing disagreements with Elon Musk over the safety and well-being of Twitter users under his ownership.

Musk replied to a thread started by Anne Collier, one of the members who resigned from the now-dissolved body, by tweeting:

It is a crime that they [the Council] refused to take action on child exploitation for years!

The email announcing its end said that Twitter's new phase requires reevaluating how it incorporates external insights into its products and policy, adding that the Trust and Safety Council is not the best structure to do this.

Irish President Higgins has signed the Online Safety and Media Regulation Bill into law.

The OSMR Act 2022 amends the Broadcasting Act 2009 to establish Coimisiún na Meán (a multi-person Media Commission), dissolve the Broadcasting Authority of Ireland, establish a regulatory framework for online safety, update the regulation of television broadcasting and video on-demand services, and transpose the revised Audiovisual Media Services Directive into Irish law.

The regulatory framework for online safety will be overseen by an Online Safety Commissioner, who will be empowered to make binding Online Safety Codes to hold designated online services to account for how they tackle the availability of some of the most serious forms of harmful online content. The Commissioner is also empowered under the Act to introduce an individual complaints mechanism on a phased basis, focusing initially on children and to order the removal or limitation of availability of specific items of harmful online content, either on foot of a complaint or on its own initiative.

Updates to the regulation of television broadcasting and video on-demand services will bring video on-demand services under statutory regulation for the first time. Providers of such services will, as broadcasters currently are, be subject to binding codes and rules, including in relation to advertising, accessibility and impartiality in news and current affairs.

Coimisiún na Meán will have a modern suite of robust compliance and enforcement powers, including the powers to appoint authorised officers to conduct investigations of suspected non-compliance, to require the provision of information and to seek administrative financial sanctions of up to 20 million euros or 10% of turnover. Ultimately, providers of regulated services under the Act who remain in breach of the rules may be subject to criminal prosecution.

Apple has announced it will provide fully encrypted iCloud backups, meeting a longstanding demand by EFF and other privacy-focused organizations.

We applaud Apple for listening to experts, child advocates, and users who want to protect their most sensitive data. Encryption is one of the most important tools we have for maintaining privacy and security online. That's why we included the demand that Apple let users encrypt iCloud backups in the Fix It Already campaign that we launched in 2019.

Apple's on-device encryption is strong, but some especially sensitive iCloud data, such as photos and backups, has continued to be vulnerable to government demands and hackers. Users who opt in to Apple's new proposed feature, which the company calls Advanced Data Protection for iCloud , will be protected even if there is a data breach in the cloud, a government demand, or a breach from within Apple (such as a rogue employee). Apple said today that the feature will be available to U.S. users by the end of the year, and will roll out to the rest of the world in "early 2023."

We're also pleased to hear that Apple has officially dropped its plans to install photo-scanning software on its devices , which would have inspected users' private photos in iCloud and iMessage. This software, a version of what's called "client-side scanning," was intended to locate child abuse imagery and report it to authorities. When a user's information is end-to-end encrypted and there is no device scanning, the user has true control over who has access to that data.

Apple's image-scanning plans were announced in 2021 , but delayed after EFF supporters protested and delivered a petition containing more than 60,000 signatures to Apple executives. While Apple quietly postponed these scanning plans later that year, today's announcement makes it official.

In a statement distributed to Wired and other journalists, Apple said:

We have further decided to not move forward with our previously proposed CSAM detection tool for iCloud Photos. Children can be protected without companies combing through personal data, and we will continue working with governments, child advocates, and other companies to help protect young people, preserve their right to privacy, and make the internet a safer place for children and for us all.

The company has said it will focus instead on "opt-in tools for parents" and "privacy-preserving solutions to combat Child Sexual Abuse Material and protect children, while addressing the unique privacy needs of personal communications and data storage."

Constant scanning for child abuse images can lead to unwarranted investigations and false positives. Earlier this year, the New York Times reported on how faulty scans at Google led to false accusations of child abuse against fathers in Texas and California. The men were exonerated by police but were subjected to permanent account deletion by Google.

Companies should stop trying to square the circle by putting bugs in our pockets at the request of governments, and focus on protecting their users, and human rights. Today Apple took a big step forward on both fronts. There are a number of implementation choices that can affect the overall security of the new feature, and we'll be pushing Apple to make sure the encryption is as strong as possible. Finally, we'd like Apple to go a step further. Turning on these privacy-protective features by default would mean that all users can have their rights protected.

Little Demon is a 2022 US animation TV comedy
Starring Aubrey Plaza, Lucy DeVito and Danny DeVito

After being impregnated by the Devil, a reluctant mother and her Antichrist daughter attempt to live an ordinary life in Delaware.

Parents TV Council is a US morality campaign group. The group is campaigning against the US TV cartoon satire, Little Demon. The group writes:

A couple of weeks ago, I told you that KFC bought advertising time on "Little Demon." You and many other like-minded parents and grandparents took action, calling on KFC to pull its ads. The next week there were no KFC ads at all.

But it looks like KFC (and its Yum! Brands corporate cousins Pizza Hut and Taco Bell ) reconsidered and determined that the content on "Little Demon" is within their corporate standards.

KFC was back again last week. Not only that, but other YUM! Brands -- Taco Bell and Pizza Hut -- also purchased advertising on Little Demon.

Somebody at KFC, Pizza Hut and Taco Bell made an affirmative decision that the content on Little Demon was within their standards. Keep in mind that the program content has included satanic imagery, full-frontal female nudity, dozens and dozens of F- and S-words, graphic gore and violence, occultism, recreational drug use, and more.

That means KFC, Taco Bell, and Pizza Hut have chosen to EMBRACE the dark, depraved worldview presented on Little Demon.

Apple Inc. announced this week that it will offer full encryption for data in its cloud storage system worldwide, which not surprisingly has been met with consternation from hackers, thieves & snoopers but joy from customers.

The move means that all content, chats, photos and videos, will have end-to-end encryption under Apple's Advanced Data Protection feature. For the average consumer, this is a win, and for the average privacy advocate, it's a victory in an ongoing fight with the authorities.

We applaud Apple for listening to experts, child advocates, and users who want to protect their most sensitive data, the Electronic Frontier Foundation wrote today. Encryption is one of the most important tools we have for maintaining privacy and security online.

The foundation was equally pleased that Apple also stated that it had finally decided not to implement its CSAM photo-scanning child protection technology.

The authorities, on the other hand, have denounced the move, especially the FBI, which has a history of battling with Apple over trying to get its hands on user data.

Apple will also likely run into problems concerning the U.K. government and its online safety bill. The bill gives the U.K. government broad powers to force companies to ensure content on their platforms aligns with what it calls internet safety. Many privacy advocates have condemned the bill as a new kind of censorship.

A Canadian Senate committee amending the Liberal government's controversial Bill C-11 has added the requirement for online platforms to verify the age/identity of users accessing pornography, a move internet law experts say is likely unconstitutional.

Sen. Julie Miville-Dechene proposed the amendment, stating that online undertakings shall implement methods such as age-verification methods to prevent children from accessing programs on the internet that are devoted to depicting, for a sexual purpose, explicit sexual activity.

The committee passed the amendment, with seven senators voting in favour, five opposing it and two abstaining.

The amended version of the legislation must be approved by the full Senate and then go back to the House of Commons before it becomes law. #

It if does pass into law, it would be up to the CRTC to decide how to implement the age verification requirement.

Journalist Ella Whelan is arguing that censoring the classic Christmas song, Fairytale in New York is a form of cultural vandalism.

The Spiked Online contributor was speaking to Newstalk Breakfast after BBC Radio 2 became the latest station to censor the song.

She said her biggest problem with the decision is the suggestion it was taken at the behest of a young generation that's 'more sensitive' than those of us horrible old people to questions of gender and sexuality.

Censoring Fairytale of New York has become as much of a Christmas tradition as hanging up stockings and putting the tree up, she said. It's getting ridiculous now.

The Andinia Plan on Islam Channel
22 February 2021, 21:00

Islam Channel is an Islamic-focused, English language satellite television channel broadcasting a range of content to the Muslim community in the UK.

The Andinia Plan was a one-hour documentary programme which was broadcast on 21 February 2021. It examined a conspiracy theory known as the Andinia Plan that alleges there is a plan to establish a Jewish state in Patagonia, the southern region of South America governed by Argentina and Chile.

Ofcom received one complaint that the programme contained antisemitic statements and views that amounted to hate speech against Jewish people.

Ofcom Conclusion

The breaches of the Code resulting from the broadcast of this potentially very harmful and highly offensive antisemitic hate speech are serious.

We are therefore putting the Licensee on notice that we will consider these breaches for the imposition of a statutory sanction.