How well does contemporay media regulation protect the public? (Exam)

Plan
Intro- Discuss both practises (when they were formed, there aims)

P1- How each regulator works.

P2- BBFC
Jamie Bulger Case.
Copycat theory

P2- OFCOM
Benefits street-Channel 4

Conclusion
Relate to the question.


Essay
BBFC, the British Board of Film Classification, and OFCOM, the Office of Communication, are two regulatory practises in the UK that rate different media products. The BBFC give age ratings to films, whereas OFCOM deal with complaints about TV programs. The BBFC was formed in 1912 when it was known as the British Board of Film Censors. In 1984 the name was changed from censors to classification to suit there job better. This was mainly due to the Video Recordings Act being passed the same year, which meant that the BBFC now have to also regulate DVDs and videos. Before OFCOM was formed in 2003 the BBFC  also had to regulate TV.

The BBFC works by the film industry playing for there film to be given an age rating. They are a proactive regulator as they act in advance of the film being released.  A group of professionals then decided the appropriate age rating based mostly on bad language,violence, and sexual content. This means that the BBFC are able to give an age rating to films before there released. OFCOM are only able to deal with complaints after the program has been shown.This means that they are less effective at regulating than the BBFC as they are only able to deal with the complaints after the TV program has been shown, whereas the BBFC can prevent complaints from being made by getting production companies to take certain elements of there films out for it to get a certain age rating between PG and R.

In 1993 a two year old called James Bulger was kidnapped from a shopping centre in Liverpool and was beaten to death. Not until after the trail was it revealed that at the home of one of the boys they had the film Child's Play 3. Even though there was no actual proof if either of the boys had watched the film it was blamed for influencing one of the boys. The Copycat theory suggests that when someone watched something such as a film they are influenced to repeat the actions. This was the case here as it was suggested that the boys had copied the violent acts from the film. This shows the BBFC struggles to protect the public as a contemporary media regulator as parents are still able to buy films for there children even if it's got an age rating older than there children.

In 2014 Channel 4 showed a program called Benefits Street. The program received over 800 complaints from viewers. One of the reasons for this was due to the criminal activity it showed. An example of this is that it showed some of the people on the show giving methods on how to shoplift. Even with the concern that other people could be influenced by the actions to go and shoplift OFCOM were happy enough that what was shown didn't given enough detail so that others could copy there actions. This shows how OFCOM doesn't protect the public very well as unlike the BBFC they had to wait for the program to be released before they can do anything about it and deal with complaints.

Overall, I believe that the BBFC and OFCOM are not able to protect the public fully. Even though the BBFC put age ratings onto films and shops can't sell them to those under the age ratings they still struggle with the problem of parents buying the film for there children. This was shown during the James Bulger case with the parents of the two boys buying the film and it influencing the boys.  OFCOM suffer from a bigger problem as they can't act until the program has been released and only if they receive complaints from viewer about the program. This means that both have a tough time having there regulatory practises used by people without them being forced to comply.