• We have updated the guidelines regarding posting political content: please see the stickied thread on Website Issues.

Information Or Propaganda?

rynner2

Gone But Not Forgotten
(ACCOUNT RETIRED)
Joined
Aug 7, 2001
Messages
54,631
Inquiry into television shows funded by ministers
Ministers are tonight at the centre of a row over the use of taxpayers’ money to fund television documentaries.
By Patrick Sawer and Jonathan Isaby
Last Updated: 7:41AM BST 03 Aug 2008

The Government has spent almost £2 million to fund programmes that are all but indistinguishable from regular shows, The Sunday Telegraph has established.

But unlike normal documentaries, the programmes are commissioned by ministers with the purpose of showing their policies or activities in a sympathetic light.

The media watchdog Ofcom has disclosed that it had opened an investigation into one of the programmes, Beat: Life on the Street — about the Government’s controversial Police Community Support Officers, to see whether it breached its broadcasting code.

Media freedom campaigners, broadcasters and opposition politicians expressed alarm over the Government-funded documentaries.

The Channel 4 newsreader Jon Snow said: “I find it extraordinary. So the Government is funding commercial television productions highlighting government policy? Presumably they don’t criticise government policy.”

The Government has funded at least eight television series or individual programmes in the past five years.

Subjects range from an Army expedition to climb Everest to advice for small businessmen on how to improve their company’s fortunes.

However, the show about PCSOs and a newly commissioned programme about Customs and Immigration officers are particularly controversial because they deal with sensitive political issues and policies.

Beat: Life on the Street, which was supported with £800,000 of funding by the Home Office for its first two series, portrayed PCSOs as dedicated, helpful and an effective adjunct to the police — despite the controversy about their role.

One Whitehall source admitted of the documentary: “It allows the Government to have more air time and get its message across to people.”

Ministers are so pleased with the way the series, which drew in audiences of three million people on ITV and changed the public’s perception of the officers, that they commissioned a third series, to be broadcast next year.

But The Sunday Telegraph established that the programmes appeared to break Ofcom’s broadcasting code by not making it clear that they were funded by the Home Office.

In a further apparent breach of Ofcom rules, this time on independence, Home Office officials were directly involved in the making of the series.

They were allowed to view a second edit of individual programmes and were able to suggest changes to some of the “terminology” and “language” used in the narration.


The Conservatives condemned the Government funding of programmes as an inappropriate use of taxpayers’ money.

David Ruffley, the shadow police minister, said: “People want the Government to put police on our streets, not propaganda on our television sets.”

The Campaign for Press and Broadcasting Freedom said that it was a disturbing trend in Government attempts to influence television programming.

But a Home Office spokesman said: “Documentaries of this nature play an important role in informing the public, openly and transparently, about the work of the police and UK Border Agency.

“The Home Office do not influence the content of these programmes after they are commissioned and they adhere to Ofcom’s strict guidelines on this kind of programme.”

A spokesman for ITV said: “As with all advertiser-funded programmes, Beat: Life On The Street is subject to a strict process to ensure it meets all the regulatory requirements set out under the Ofcom code on sponsorship, to ensure transparency and editorial independence by the broadcaster.”

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/ ... sters.html

I haven't seen any of the series 'Beat:..' - any comments from those who have?
 
Jesus, just when you think the media cant get any worse it suddenly does.
Whats next? Bringing back Top of the Pops with Gordon Brown ?
 
Degrizzzz said:
Jesus, just when you think the media cant get any worse it suddenly does.
Whats next? Bringing back Top of the Pops with Gordon Brown ?

"Evening, pop-pickers I'm Gordon Brown, and welcome to tonight's show. Now, a new entry at Number 10 it'ssss...David Milib- who's writing this s***?"
 
I have been told by a forum owner that most of the Conspiracy sites are run by the government designed to mislead and delete any real Revelations. This is why most have given me and the H2onE2 work the boot.
 
H2onE2 said:
I have been told by a forum owner that most of the Conspiracy sites are run by the government designed to mislead and delete any real Revelations.
It's very easy to get caught in a recursive loop if you start believing stuff like that. I'm not saying it never happens, but many of the sites concerned are quite loopy enough to not need any outside intervention.
H2onE2 said:
This is why most have given me and the H2onE2 work the boot.
To be brutally frank, I imagine that explanation comes somewhere down the list.
 
I have to say that I mentioned something about a police programme [UK] a couple of years ago to my husband. I don't know what it was called but in each case the police was portrait as "these brave policemen" or "These men of value" "risking life and limb" or "are here for you" and similar statements.
It was so in your face that I had to comment on it. In comparison, there are enough cheap police programs that just show you drunken people or how the police is chasing car thieves where nothing is mentioned about the police. There is a definite stark contrast between those programs, that I mentioned propaganda and it actually wound me up a bit.
Unfortunately I can't remember the name of the program.
I do believe it is definetly possible.
 
Whatever next!

Soon you'll be telling me that our Press is putting spin on their news stories in order to further the political agendas of their owners - perish the thought.
 
A hilarious propaganda video for the Chinese Belt and Road Initiative:
 
Why does anyone think there was that sudden swamping of benefit-porn tv programmes, just before the introduction of Universal Credit?

Hmmm...
 
A hilarious propaganda video for the Chinese Belt and Road Initiative:
That's curious.
The new Silk Road (the belt and road) is really for the benefit of China only.
Yet that video has a lot of western children in it.
 
Why does anyone think there was that sudden swamping of benefit-porn tv programmes, just before the introduction of Universal Credit?

Hmmm...

But did the government fund any of them as in rynners o.p.

What independent tv companies produce is entirely up to them. If they're popular with enough viewing public they'll get made. Especially if they're cheap to make. The government found to be funding them would be a different thing.
 
But did the government fund any of them as in rynners o.p.

I've got no evidence either way mate...just a theory. It might not have been as unsubtle as direct funding. But I don't, personally, think it was a coincidence. Loads of programmes whose aim is to portray benefit recipients as idle scroungers (not true- statistically the majority of benefit-claimants are in work) just before widespread benefit cuts...ahem, sorry, not cuts - "changes".
 
Back
Top