Someone sent OfcomWatch a very funny email this morning concerning Ofcom’s recent Broadcast Bulletin [85-page .pdf]. They write in part:

‘There is a Swedish language programme on UK Satellite TV which can’t be viewed by many people. (Less than 10k???) Prior to the recent general election, it broadcasted a programme at 10pm on the tax and spend policies of the Swedish government. Incredibly our “light touch” regulator . . . has ruled on this programme and says it is in breach of our broadcasting code. Even more incredibly TV3 is a Swedish re-broadcast channel and presumably the stuff was broadcast over in Sweden without problems.

This is just amazing stuff and shows what a complete joke our regulator is becoming - Can you imagine how must this investigation cost? I’m sure the programme had to be translated and note the number of complaints = 1!!!!

Meanwhile back in the land of the living it can’t make a ruling on Celebrity Big Brother bringing 40k complaints.’

* * *

My take: This is funny. Let’s face it, the overall effect of Ofcom’s adjudication in terms of resources is tantamount to someone from Ofcom just chucking the same amount of money into the Thames. But I suppose that — in order to render a proper adjudication — Ofcom must properly translate the material in question. However, maybe Ofcom should have a complaint threshold of a certain number before it undertakes the cost of translating material — or who knows — maybe the broadcaster foots the bill? If it’s only one person complaining, they should certainly pay for the translation.

Basically, any time you read the Ofcom Broadcast Bulletin you get the feeling that the money and resources involved could be better spent elsewhere. In this most recent bulletin, Ofcom cover diverse topics such as: homeopathic remedies (in Urdu), naughty nurses, Swedish politics, and grazing rights in a North Wales valley.

But that’s part of Ofcom’s statutory mission. Ofcom cannot shirk their duties — they must do what Parliament commands. At Ofcom’s very beginning, then-CEO Stephen Carter warned that the Communications Act was not really the light-touch vehicle portrayed in some circles.

That’s putting it mildly…