The Competition and Markets Authority (CMA), Information Commissioner's Office (ICO) and Ofcom have announced the launch of a new forum to help ensure online services work well for people and businesses in the UK.
The Digital Regulation Cooperation
Forum strengthens existing collaboration and coordination between the three regulators. It aims to harness their collective expertise when data, privacy, competition, communications and content interact.
Ofcom announces a reorganisation with a new group in charge of censorship of Broadcasting and Online Content
22nd July 2020
New Ofcom groups to lead industry policy and engagement Ofcom
Kevin Bakhurst will continue to lead Ofcom's media regulation as Group Director of Broadcasting and Online Content. This group combines our work on broadcasting
- including standards, licensing and policy work - as well as new duties to regulate video sharing platforms. The Broadcasting and Online Content group will lead Ofcom's regulatory regimes in these sectors, and manage relationships with its stakeholders.
China 24, News Hour CCTV News, 27 August 2013, 12:00 and 14 July 2014, 21:002
CCTV News broadcast China 24, a news programme which reported on the arrest of Peter Humphrey and included footage of him appearing to
confess to a criminal offence. It then broadcast a follow up report during News Hour, which reported on Mr Humphrey's subsequent conviction and included footage of him apologising for having committed the offence. He was named in both programmes,
although his face was blurred.
Ofcom found that:
The programmes included footage of Mr Humphrey which had the potential materially and adversely to affect viewers’ perception of him. The Licensee did not take sufficient steps to ensure that material facts had not been presented,
omitted or disregarded in a way that was unfair to Mr Humphrey.
The Licensee had not provided Mr Humphrey with an appropriate and timely opportunity to respond to the allegations of wrongdoing being made about him
in the programmes as broadcast.
Mr Humphrey had a legitimate expectation of privacy in relation to the filming and subsequent broadcast of the footage of him without his consent. In the circumstances, Mr Humphrey’s
legitimate expectation of privacy was not outweighed by the broadcaster’s right to freedom of expression and the audience’s right to receive information and ideas without interference. The Licensee had therefore unwarrantably infringed Mr Humphrey’s
privacy in respect of the obtaining of the material included in the programmes and in the programmes as broadcast.
Ofcom also considers that the breach of Rules 7.1 and 8.1 of the Code is serious. We are therefore putting the Licensee on notice that we intend to consider the breach for the imposition of a statutory sanction.