On Tue, 22 Jul 2008 12:20:07 +0100, Ian Jackson
wrote:

snip


It seems to me perverse that C4 can escape from the duty to be
impartial or accurate _precisely_ because what they transmitted was
(in Ofcom's view) false. Or to put it another way, that false
assertions are less controversial than widely disputed ones.

I can see your point, but I think as a general principle, OFCOM are
right here.

If something is still a matter for major public debate, then the TV
companies have a duty to be impartial, and not unduly sway the debate
one way or the other.

But if something is genuinely settled in the public view, then showing
something which suggests one view or the other (either the "agreed"
view, or the "false" one) is not going to sway "public opinion" one
way or the other.

I this case, I strongly disagree with OFCOM's suggestion that the
matter is "settled", but that, as you say, is a side issue to the
point we are attempting to discuss.

Imagine these complaints had been about a program supporting the
"creationist" theory against Darwinism. Would you still say it was
important for them to be impartial?
--
Alex Heney, Global Villager
God is real, unless declared integer.
To reply by email, my address is alexATheneyDOTplusDOTcom