When Charles van Doren’s amazing four-month-long success on the US quiz show Twenty-One was exposed, some believed that the innocence of America had died, long before Watergate. The revelation that the hugely popular NBC show of the late 1950s was rigged prompted a Senate inquiry and a crisis of confidence in television, immortalised in the 1994 film Quiz Show, starring Ralph Fiennes as Van Doren.

The great American quiz show scandal is evidence that television has been in trouble before. Production staff panic in the heat of the moment, corners get cut and children get whisked from the Blue Peter studio to win – unexpectedly – a phone-in that had gone wrong. At least this time around there is no evidence of deliberate deception, which is what made the American quiz show scandal so severe.

No broadcaster is looking good here, although some sins are worse than others. Fake winners on channel five’s BrainTeaser and allegations of picking winners before the telephone lines had closed on Channel 4’s Richard & Judy stand out. However, the abuse of children’s trust by picking a fake winner on Blue Peter is particularly upsetting.

What adds to the worry is that blame is not being apportioned properly. The temptation here is to duff up the phone line suppliers, while prostrate broadcasters await an investigation by Icstis, the curiously named premium rate regulator, and a quick internal inquiry. Yet it really goes to the heart of programme making. After all, broadcasters make most of the money from phone-ins (except the BBC), so commissioners, producers and Ofcom, the proper regulator, should take the responsibility.

Yet, Ofcom seems to want to hang back, even though Icstis is responsible only for the premium rate providers. For all his acumen, Ed Richards of Ofcom seems to lack a popular touch; the sight of him being chased down the street by camera crews because he refused to take questions about Celebrity Big Brother was another instance. Instead, he needs to examine all the cases of phone-in abuse and work out a proper policy.

Phone-ins must be seen as the least-important part of a programme from an editorial point of view. That is easy to say, but you have to make the production teams care. They need to be policed properly, and calls should be held over when the technology does not work – calls can be refunded if needed. A regulator must undertake regular spot checks too. After all, standards slip far more often than once every five decades.

There also needs to be more clarity on price. It is unacceptable for mobile operators to levy 25p a minute on top of a 75p call to a broadcaster.

Price regulation is normally one of life’s bad ideas, but if phone companies want to rip off the public, then they deserve it.

Soon enough the circus will move on, and people will continue to watch television. Last Saturday, more people voted for Dancing on Ice than before, but that is no excuse for waiting for the scandal to blow over. Too many people take advantage while the key regulator stands on the sidelines.

- - - - -

Warner Music has played a far better hand than EMI this year, but, for all the spin about their digital strategy, it would be a mistake to assume that the Americans are a bunch of geniuses.

Warner has been quicker off the mark, all right, but digital is not coming through fast enough to replace the collapse in CD sales. More important, it has few hits. There is one album in the UK Top 40 (Paolo Nutini) and, while there is a US No 1 right now (The Notorious B.I.G.), it has been a quiet year back home, as everybody waits for the release of an album by Californian nu-metal band Linkin Park.

EMI has been beaten over the head, rightly, for its minus 15 per cent recorded music performance between October and March; analysts are estimating minus 15 per cent for the present quarter at Warner, on top of a previously reported minus 16 per cent.

The truth is that both are underperforming the market: Universal was down only 1.5 per cent in the quarter between October and December.

The shares tell the same story. Despite not warning on profits, Warner Music shares are down 25 per cent on the year; EMI is off only 13 per cent, although clearly the British firm’s stock is held up by hopes of a bid. On current form, Warner and EMI deserve each other.

dan.sabbagh@thetimes.co.uk

Times Recommends

• Darling under pressure on record public debt
• Mortgage drought deepens on 32% lending fall
• Oil prices firm after 10% drop to below $130