This is a summary written by my former Ofcom colleague Chris Banatvala of the written evidence which we provided to the House of Lords Communications and Digital Committee’s inquiry into ‘The future of News’. Our full evidence is at https://committees.parliament.uk/writtenevidence/130308/html

Stewart Purvis and Chris Banatvala’s concerns focus on two areas:

1) The manner in which Ofcom is now regulating due impartiality.

2) The use of ‘politicians’ to present current affairs programmes (especially at election time) and Ofcom’s use of its recent research into the area.

1) The manner in which Ofcom is now regulating due impartiality.

• Ofcom is not investigating cases which warrant investigation.

• Ofcom is not publishing some ‘not-upheld’ decisions where there is a public interest in doing so. 

• News and controversial matters (which appear in current affairs programmes) must both, according to the law, be treated with due impartiality. 

• There is no lower test e.g. for current affairs programmes. So why can politicians present current affairs programmes(interviewing colleagues from the same party)?

• There is no basis for treating smaller channels differently from e.g. PSBs.

2) The use of active politicians to present current affairs programmes and Ofcom’s research.

Ofcom recently published research (157 participants) on public attitudes to politicians presenting current affairs (they are not allowed to present news). 

​

• While the research was underway, Ofcom Chair, Lord Grade in a Q&A session stated “I don’t think it’s very difficult what is a news programme and a current affairs programme, I don’t think that’s difficult at all, we all know the difference between Panorama and News at Ten”. When challenged that new genres make it confusing, he responded “It’s not confusing, not confusing at all.”

• However, the Ofcom research proved the exact opposite.

• IPSOS said that viewers “struggled to consistently [tell the difference] in practice”. 

• The conclusion from the research firm was “Although there was concern about politicians presenting current affairs content, there was no consensus for preventing them from doing so”.

• Ofcom uses the research to claim that viewers do not want to ban politicians as presenters of current affairs programmes.

• However, given that the public cannot tell the difference between news and current affairs programmes and the “most prevalent opinion…was feeling unconformable with politicians presenting”, the research raises more issues than it resolves.

Recommendations:

• Ofcom should launch a public consultation on the use of politicians in programmes (especially current affairs).

• Parliament should ensure that Ofcom fulfils its statutory duty with respect to due impartiality on all channels.

• Parliament should consider amending the legislation to make it clear that the same level of due impartiality applies to current affairs programmes (dealing with controversial matters) as news.