Week 21 OFCOM Case Study 1 Benefits Street

Objective: to examine the social changes and arguments surrounding the regulation of TV in contemporary UK. 

Outcomes:
C - examine and discuss debates and social/political/moral factors to form an opinion on regulation
B - Analyse links to (WHY?) Effects Theories and consider Debates to support opinion
A - Justify changes in regulation effective in meeting

Top Trumps Case Study 2 Handout

Case study 2 benefits street from ctkmedia

Starter: 
What does this Case Study reveal about social changes?
What Acts or legislation apply to this Case Study?
Would self-regulation of TV by the Producers have been more or less effective?
Is OFCOM too close to political interests?
Is it effective in protecting the vulnerable?

Was this discrimination - would this be accepted if the contributors were all an ethnic minority or women?

Questions to show progression:

http://www.ctklms.com/uploads/5/3/4/2/5342058/regulation_arguments.docx 

http://www.ctklms.com/uploads/5/3/4/2/5342058/regulation_previous_practices.docx

Mind Map out Social Changes/Debates from this Case Study

Sociological - the way society was/is organised and how we live our lives

Cultural and Political - religious, political beliefs, "norms" of behaviours, dominant ideas, who is in power/in charge, attitudes towards social groups

New Information
Case Study OFCOM and Benefit Street 2014 and Channel 4

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JkrX5J73Vi4 

What is the debate?

Plenary recap What are OFCOMs aims, regulatory practices, is it statutory or non?

http://www.ofcom.org.uk/about/what-is-ofcom/statutory-duties-and-regulatory-principles 

What was controversial that let to complaints?

http://www.theguardian.com/media/2014/jan/16/benefits-street-residents-apology-channel-4

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2567712/TV-regulator-investigate-Benefits-Street-nearly-1-800-complaints-depiction-crimes-failure-protect-children-unfairness-parade-scroungers-drug-addicts.html

What is the difference is representation of the story between the above 2 newspapers?

What is Poverty Porn & why do people think it is politically offensive propaganda?
https://rts.org.uk/article/rts-huw-wheldon-memorial-lecture

http://www.newsmediaimages.com/celebrity-article-61263-benefit-street-channel-4-love-productions-disgraceful-political-statement/

http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2014/01/iain-duncan-smith-people-are-shocked-by-benefits-street-and-labour-will-thank-us-for-welfare-reform/
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-25287068

What is the publics response - group them into points of view (scroll through to find some interesting ones)
https://mobile.twitter.com/search?q=%23benefitsstreet&src=typd

What action did the regulator take to the complaints and what was their decision?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-28086213

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/tvandradio/10935383/Benefits-Street-did-not-breach-Ofcom-guidelines-despite-complaints.html

How many complaints and what real harm could it have caused?
http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/tv/news/benefits-street-sparks-ofcom-probe-after-1800-complaints-9152654.html

What responsibility do the programme makers, the broadcaster, the regulator and we as a society have?

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/benefits-street-a-healthy-media-would-stand-up-to-the-powerful-and-wealthy-ours-targets-the-poor-and-9046773.html 

The OFCOM report

http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/binaries/enforcement/broadcast-bulletins/obb257/obb257.pdf 

AGP student Extension activity: read, annotate and summarise the theories of Stuart Hall (decoding preferred, negotiated, oppositional readings) and teach the class

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/feb/22/benefits-street-tv-programme-divided-the-nation

Plenary - Post it notes: Where do you stand?

Prep: http://www.theguardian.com/society/2009/jan/13/class-discrimination-social-mobility 

• What does this Case Study reveal about social changes?
• What Acts or legislation apply to this Case Study?
• Is OFCOM too close to political interests?
• Is it effective in protecting the vulnerable?
• Was this discrimination - would this be accepted if the contributors were all an ethnic minority or women?

STARTER: What do you believe ideology assessment game - what ideology are you?

URL: http://www.selectsmart.com/plus/select.php?url=leftrightbasic 

Regulation Terminology Wheel

1980s Moral Panics, Scapegoating and Video Nasties - Historical BBFC Case Study

http://leighmediaasfilm.blogspot.co.uk/2015/02/session-1-video-nasties.html (answers below)


C - examine & discuss significant facts - social/political changes and debates
B - analyse effects theory and debates in both Case Studies
A - justify the EXTENT that changes in regulation are impacted/effected by Social Changes using theory to back up your OPINION 

http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/films/news/for-their-eyes-only-inside-the-world-of-the-film-censor-2294349.html

Debate

Should there be such a thing as censorship of films?

Task 1: categorise the following under the correct context and Mind Map example


 

-Conservative government sought to protect
-Videos being distributed by cornershops, market traders and garages
-The covers on the boxes often more grusome than the content
-Regulated videos to have age restrictions by BBFC
-Moral Panic created by Media the term: 'video nasties'
-Government Censorship & Police Raids on VHS dealers
-Riots and civil unrest, unemployment and recession
- Moral Campaign against video nasties; Mary Whitehouse (NVLA), Margaret Thatcher, the media and the BBFC.
-The above mentioned scapegoated the video nasties for immoral behaviour which led to a moral panic
-Cinema attendance declined massively due to the rise of VHS
-Video Nasties like Evil Dead, I Spit On Your Grave and Driller Killer were realistic because they were low budget
-Video Nasties were niche films and really popular with teenagers due to controversy
-Video Nasties were exploited to explain responsibility for moral decline in society
-Watching video nasties helps put it in context of narrative, the campaigners did not actually watch them
-Video Nasties were made for distribution only via home-video
-Censorship or individual judgement?
- Video Nasties created diversity of films
- Video Recordings Act 1984, banned list 

Technology -  Home Video

Political/Social (audience & 1980's Britain)

Group 1.

The right-wing, pro-censorship response by groups such as the National Viewers and Listeners Association and conservative MPs who wanted the introduction of restrictive laws for access to films on video (MORAL PANIC and NANNY STATE)

Group 2. 

2. The popularity of home video technologies in the 80s and unregulated home video distributors regarding MEDIA EFFECTS THEORIES - hypodermic needle vs uses and gratifications, catharisis and active reading (neg, opp, pref)

Group 3. 

3. The moral panic about the uncensored Video Nasties and concerns unregulated video content and move to regulation of film in the home. 
MEDIA EFFECTS THEORIES - scapegoating, copycat, moral panic

Some basic resources to work through to help - split then across your teams - not all looking:

http://youtu.be/OqbMvbP_j1k?t=6m17s watch from 6m 17s – 11m 34 s

http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/gallery/2012/nov/10/censored-cinema-in-pictures

http://blogs.examiner.co.uk/moviesfilmscinema/2010/04/30-years-on-from-the-video-nas.html

http://leighmediaasfilmessays12.blogspot.co.uk/2013/02/1980s-video-nasties-bbfc-home-video.html

Check Learning – Share your understanding across the team, this should take a about 30 mins to work through

Task 2

Share your findings with the class as Mentor pairs Mind Map on A3 using highlighters your shared knowledge: write the exam question in the middle and use the notes to write analysis pointsunder the contexts 

• Technology influences
• Political & Social influence
• Theories
• Argument/Debates
• Was regulation effective?
• How this compares to BBFC Case Studies today

Each Mentor team should have a MIND MAP with the 3 contexts from the all the above

This should take about 20 mins - photograph & upload the Mind Map to your blog

Task 3

New Information - Deeper analysis of the resources

Divide up the links between you as Mentor Partners

http://leighmediaasfilmessays12.blogspot.co.uk/2013/02/1980s-video-nasties-bbfc-home-video.html 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bNawGIPLFHo  

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3ppqutUB23A  

Create Meaning - look for answers in the videos & articles

1. What were the concerns around Home Video and regulation/censorship?
2. What is a Video Nasty and why were they popular with audiences- What did these films have in common (Genre/Budget/Subject matter/Story)?
3. Who were Margaret Thatcher & Mary Whitehouse and why were they relevant?
4. How did Video Nasties become Political and how was this Moral Panic being exploited by the government?
5. How did regulation change with changes in society - liberal or conservative?
6. Which OPPOSING theories most accurately outlines the DEBATE on this Case Study on Video Nasties?

Task 4

In your Mentor Teams work your way through the documentaries (seperately) & questions - this should take 30 mins with 10 minutes to share across Teams of 4

Prepare an argument: Critical reviews of Banned Video Nasties

Each team of 4 take a different Case Study from the films below

For the following Video Nasties read over the plot summary imdb or wikipedia – outline the content, watch the trailers - why do you think this one in particular banned?

How have these Video Nasties been critically received over time, what films did these directors go on to make?

• I spit on your grave
• Last House on the Left
• The Driller Killer
• Evil Dead

What is your group's opinion - should these have been banned or censored?

What were the contextual reasons for these films being banned? 

Plenary:

Apply to demonstrate

Do you agree with the right-wing (conservative) decisions to censor or restrict access (regulate) tothese films? Justify your opinion with evidence from today and reference to one of the films.

Write your individual argument on your blog

Week 22: BBFC timeline since 2010 - increasingly liberal? Case StudyHate Crime 2015 & Video Nasties

Prep work: http://leighmediaasfilm.blogspot.co.uk/2014/03/video-nasties-changing-attitudes.html

C Grade: apply terminology and describe the debates and social influences surrounding Case Study

B Grade: analyse the social and political factors and make an assessment of how effective/is there a need for the regulator

http://www.theguardian.com/film/2011/jun/06/human-centipede-sequel-bbfc

http://www.screendaily.com/news/bbfc-bans-hate-crime/5083818.article

Starter: create an interactive timeline covering each decade in Prezi using the resources from the presentations and here:

http://www.bbfc.co.uk/education-resources/student-guide/bbfc-history

Update for the period of 2009-2016 by looking at our key case studies

Hate Crime 

Blue is the warmest colour

Hunger games

Research and add information and your considerations of social changes by each area: 

http://www.bbfc.co.uk/education-resources/student-guide/timelines 

Sex

Drugs

Violence

Imitate behaviour

A Grade: Can you argue the BBFC has become increasingly liberal, or concerned with upholding conservative or traditional moral values. Use effects theories and debates to justify your position.

100 years old, progressively become more liberal (since 1980s Moral Panic and Video Recordings Act), where do the BBFC now focus their attention as a regulator when CLASSIFYING and SUGGESTING cuts.
6 years old article http://www.theguardian.com/film/2012/nov/10/bbfc-celebrates-100-censored-cinema

http://bbfc.co.uk/releases/hate-crime-vod 

Why did its decide that this film should not be seen by anyone - remembering its highest order is human rights to decide what an 18+ should watch themselves.

http://www.theguardian.com/society/2015/oct/13/reported-hate-crimes-rise-by-almost-a-fifth - social context?

Arguments for and against decision - Liberal or conservative opinion?

http://www.nerdly.co.uk/2015/03/02/james-cullen-bressacks-hate-crime-banned-by-the-bbfc/

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/simon-thompson/hate-crime-why-censors-ar_b_6799332.html

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2257436/

Does this make a difference?

https://uk.movies.yahoo.com/director-of-banned-horror-movie-hate-crime-speaks-113162500289.html

How do they compare to the Video Nasties Case Studies of the 1980s http://leighmediaasfilm.blogspot.co.uk/2014/03/451-lesson-plan-recap-video-nasties.html 

Task to analyse Case Study 3 and produce revision Top Trump 

Section 1: 

Case study title and year

Media sector

Regulator responsible 

Statutory or non (self)

Pro or reactive

Guidelines or rules breeched

Regulator powers and decision taken/recommendations made?

1. Social/political factors effecting the Case Study

2. extenuating/legitimising factors: art, controversial ideas or moral panic? 

3. Media effects arguments/debates 

Desensitization

Copycat

Negotiated, oppositional, preferred readings

Hypodermic Needle/Effects

Scapegoat

Moral Panic

Catharsis

4. Is the contemporary BBFC an example of regulation best described by "Individual Freedom/responsibility" or "Nanny State?"

Give an example of a decade and examples of films when this was not the case in the BBFCs history. 

5. Are the BBFC effective in protecting children and vulnerable - or are they protecting society's moral standards?

Reasons why yes

Reasons why no

Protecting children or moral standards?

Conclusions: 

What challenges does the regulator face from online media technology in being effective in protecting the vulnerable or enforcing their practices? 

Compare this Case Study to the Moral Panics of past film regulation (Video Nasties and Jamie Bulger) - what are the differences?

Is it typical for the BBFC to ban film releases/deny a certificate in recent years? 

Is this regulator stricter/liberal or consistent in comparison with other regulators/case studies?

How are films and games regulated differently and more liberally than OFCOM broadcasting? Why is this? 

Is this a typical challenge for BBFC to consider - compare the Media Effect & debates this raises to other Case Studies: Hunger Games and Blue is the Warmest Colour

Do you agree with BBFCs decision? Justify your position using 1 or 2 Media Effects theories or Arguments presented by critics/commentators 

Based on previous studies, do you think it will eventually be granted a Certificate - why? 

Summarise what we have learned from this Case Study - why would you use it, what arguments or points about contemporary regulation does it show? 

Recommendation - would a single regulator be more effective in protecting the vulnerable? What would be the negative points of doing this? 

Plenary Assessment 

http://leighmediaasfilm.blogspot.co.uk/2015/02/session-1-video-nasties.html

FSA 3 Assessment & Exam Prep

Assessment	Please describe assessment	Date of assessment	Weighting  %
Assessment 1	Portfolio for Evaluation Q1-4 average grade	8th  January -27th February	20%
Assessment 2	Final Coursework Products	12th February	40%
Assessment 3	Homework 700 words Regulators/Presentation	w/c 24th February	10%
FSA 3	Regulation 1hr Mock Exam in Gym	w/c 7th March	30%

Your question to prepare for the 1 hour Regulation Mock is:

"How far do changes to the regulation of media reflect broader social changes?"

Introduction
Purposes of regulation - to protect vulnerable or to uphold Moral Standards?
Summary of how Film, Tv or Games have changed over the years - stricter or more liberal with society.
Is all media considered equal & regulated as liberally/strict? Which? Should all regulators have a set standard across all media - does that mean 1 single regulator?
*Answer the question - your position in relation to regulation of the media: should there be a set moral standard that does not change across time/Is it the duty of statutory regulators to uphold/enforce moral standards/
What role does the individuals responsibility?Is regulation even possible in an increasingly online culture.

*Consider the debates over desensitization, Individual Freedom, scapegoating, technology and access

Para 2: BBFC introduction - history and key moments in responding to moral panics

• What changes have happen - 1984 Video Recordings Act,
• Liberalisation over the years - 'censorship' to 'classification'
• Using age ratings - not banned a film since 2011 (until last year)
• Past: Regulation to uphold moral standards - "By the few for the masses"
• Debates surrounding increasing liberalisation from Moral standards to individual freedom to choose at 18
• Protecting children and upholding Moral Standards to just protecting children. 1980s banned list of films = video nasties due to access to unregulated films through home video - imilar to internet?
• Refer to Case Study on 1980s Video Nasties (Evil Dead or Texas Chainsaw Massacre) & effects theories
• VRA 1984 brought in based on questionable research and conservative government agenda - only considered the Effects/Hypodermic Needle approach
• Refer to 1990s Jamie Bulger & Media Effects - scapegoating and copycat pressure on BBFC society more liberal?

Para 3: Case Study 1: Human Centipede 

• Why was it banned/refused a certificate?
• Was this effective in protecting children?
• Similarities of Moral Panics compared to above History of Video Nasties?
• Technology allows access to these films, filmmakers using this to cause controversy and gain notoriety. Where does this stop?
• Media effects arguments and similarities between the 2. HC2 was eventually released as 18 with 2 min 30 sec of cuts only. Catharsis and Use and Gratifications model: escapism, horror fans
• Whose responsibility is it to protect vulnerable/chuildren
• Debates Surrounding Regulation - is it the individuals choice? have we become more liberal as a society?

Para 4: Case Study 2: 'Hunger Games 12A' & '9 Songs'

• BBFC have different attitudes towards sex and violence
• Media Effects Theories that could apply
• Debates Surrounding Regulation - liberalisation of 'Art' vs sex work, and desentisation of violence, not banning films but regulating and certifying age appropriate content
• Conclusion - how does this address the question?

Para 5: Introduce OFCOM and history, aims etc

• What changes have happen - SUPER-regulator 2003, what existed previously ineffective? 
• Statutory relation with the current government
• What are their aims?
• Reactive to public complaints - effected by social changes and attitudes - via social media?
• Compare with BBFC their aims (protect vulnerable, respect right of individual to choose at 18) 
• Compare with BBFC their effectiveness - liberal vs strict, statutory vs self regulated, reactive vs proactive)  
• Influenced by political changes?

Para 6: Social Change - terrorism and showing disturbing images before watershed
Case Study 1: Woolwich Terrorist Attack - debate surrounding regulation overshadowed the terrorist event? 

• Bloody hands, knife and beheading - protecting children?
• Editorial Justified or Media Sensationalism/Moral Panic - "we could all be terrorists"
• Impact of technology in this case study and social change - desensitized to the violence using a phone, or to the existence of terrorism?

To consider in your answer:

1. Is the watershed effective?
2. Is the reactive nature effective?
3. How did their (less-strict) decision reflect the public interest in terrorism?

Para 6: Social Change - conservatism and twitter hate
Case Study 2: Benefits Street

• Class discrimination and Conservative government propaganda/legitimizing benefit cuts?
• Response to question - criminalisation/demonsisation/stereotyping of vulnerable/mentally ill/underclass/disadvantaged people. 
• Complains - protecting the vulnerable, showing criminal behaviour, protecting children in the show
• Media Effects Theories that could apply - Hegemony and Class Scapegoating 
• Debates Surrounding Regulation - who is regulating us? Statutory influence from a Conservative government? 
• Was this effective - reactive?
• Answer the question

Conclusion: 
Answer the question (you may want to consider)
Which regulator is stricter and why - Future prediction for regulation
How has regulation changed to reflect social changes - technology, morality, desentisation?
Which form has had changed most?
Should there not be a set Moral value not ever changing keeping up with society - guardians of morality?

Resources to revise from:

Regulation social issues from ctkmedia

Media effects debate from ctkmedia

Regulation arguments from ctkmedia