Ofcom fines ITV plc for misconduct in viewer competitions and voting
Ofcom has informed ITV plc this morning that it is imposing a fine totalling
£5,675,000 for some of the most serious breaches of Ofcom’s Broadcasting
Code concerning the abuse of premium rate services (PRS) in its
programming(-1-).
The fine, which is by far the highest imposed by Ofcom or any of the previous
regulators, reflects not only the seriousness of ITV’s failures but also
their repeated nature. The previous highest fine imposed by Ofcom was £2
million on GMTV in September 2007.
Separately, ITV plc has pledged an additional £7.8 million for viewer
compensation and to charity. This fact was taken into account by Ofcom in
reaching its decision on the level of the fines.
Ofcom's investigation considered information voluntarily supplied by ITV plc
from its review by auditors Deloitte and also material obtained by Ofcom
during its own investigations.
Sanctions Cases
Ant & Dec’s Saturday Night Takeaway:
Various dates between 14 January 2003 to 21 October 2006
Ofcom has imposed a financial penalty on LWT Ltd of £3 million and has
directed it to broadcast a summary of Ofcom’s findings on two occasions on
ITV1.
In summary, Ofcom’s investigation found the following conduct in breach of its
Codes in three competitions within this programme:
Grab the Ads
Selecting competition finalists before the telephone lines were announced as
closed;
Staggering the selection of competition finalists which meant that viewers
entering the competition did not have a fair and equal chance of winning;
Selecting finalists on the basis of their suitability to be on television and
where they lived - contrary to the broadcaster’s own terms and conditions,
which explicitly stated that entrants would be chosen randomly.
Jiggy Bank
Selecting finalists for the competition based purely on where they lived -
contrary to the broadcaster’s own terms and conditions, which explicitly
stated that entrants would be chosen randomly;
Selecting winners on the basis of their suitability to be on screen, contrary
to the broadcaster’s own terms and conditions, which explicitly stated that
entrants would be chosen randomly;
On one occasion, an individual already known to the production team was placed
on the shortlist of potential winners and went on to “win” the competition.
Win the Ads
Selecting members of the studio audience from the competition entrants on the
basis of their suitability to be on screen, contrary to the broadcaster’s
own terms and conditions, which explicitly stated that entrants would be
chosen randomly.
Ant & Dec’s Gameshow Marathon:
17 September - 29 October 2005
Ofcom has imposed a financial penalty on LWT Ltd of £1.2 million and has
directed it to broadcast a summary of Ofcom’s findings on two occasions on
ITV1 relating to the following conduct:
On six occasions in the Prize Mountain competition, winners were selected
based on their suitability to be on screen. This was contrary to the
broadcaster’s own terms and conditions, which explicitly stated that
entrants would be chosen randomly;
Additionally, the licensee was unable to account for almost half of the
competition entries.
Soapstar Superstar:
5 - 13 January 2007
Ofcom has imposed a financial penalty on Granada Television Ltd of £1.2
million and directed it to broadcast a summary of Ofcom’s findings on two
occasions on ITV1 relating to the following conduct:
In one programme, the programme makers ignored the viewers’ vote and finalised
results before the lines had actually closed. This resulted in the wrong
participants being put forward for eviction;
On a number of occasions, the production team overrode the song choices voted
for by viewers. On these occasions a proportion of viewers who voted had not
got what they had paid for.
ITV2+1:
12 December 2006 - 24 October 2007
Ofcom has imposed a financial penalty on ITV2 Ltd of £275,000 relating to the
following conduct:
On 28 separate occasions, when repeating programmes, the broadcaster failed to
inform viewers that interactive competitions had concluded. This meant that
all PRS entries in these competitions had no chance of winning but were
still charged.
On 3 separate occasions, when repeating an interactive dating programme
(Playdate), the broadcaster failed to inform viewers that the broadcasts
were not live and interactivity was no longer available. This meant that the
PRS entry routes to participate in the programmes remained open and anyone
who called was still charged.
The Chairman of Ofcom’s Content Sanctions Committee, Philip Graf, said: “ITV
programme makers totally disregarded their own published terms and
conditions and Ofcom Codes. Further there was a completely inadequate
compliance system in place. The result was that millions of paying entrants
were misled into believing they could fairly interact with some of ITV’s
most popular programmes.”
Commenting on today’s decision to sanction ITV, Ofcom Chief Executive Ed
Richards said: “This was a thorough set of investigations which uncovered
institutionalised failure within ITV that enabled the broadcaster to make
money from misconduct on mass audience programmes. The industry can be in no
doubt how seriously Ofcom takes the issue of audience trust. Our new licence
conditions requiring broadcasters, who operate in this area, to conduct
third party audits will ensure that consumers are protected”.
Additional ITV PRS Issues
ITV’s review of PRS by Deloitte covered key findings on networked ITV
programmes. However, no reference was made to ITV’s regional programming
where PRS was also used. Ofcom therefore requested further information and
details on potential issues relating to regional programming.
Due to its inadequate systems, ITV was unable to provide Ofcom with sufficient
data and evidence to enable Ofcom to carry out fully an investigation into
these cases. Ofcom considers that this lack of information appears to
indicate an absence of robust systems in place in the operation of PRS in
regional programming. ITV plc appeared to have introduced the use of PRS in
ITV regional programming with little or no assessment of the associated
risks and with poor levels of supervision.
Other cases in breach of Ofcom’s Broadcasting Code
In addition to the above, the following were found to be in breach of the Code
but no sanction was imposed:
ITV1: I’m A Celebrity Get Me Out of Here! (LWT Limited): 30 November 2006
ITV1: People’s Court: 17 March 2008
ITV Play: ITV Playalong (16 November 2006), The Mint (7 December 2006),
Glitterball (6 March 2007)
Cases not in breach of Ofcom’s Broadcasting Code
Ofcom also investigated allegations made about the 2005, 2006 and 2007 series
of The X Factor. Ofcom found that these programmes did not breach the Code.
In particular, a detailed minute by minute analysis of the call data
established that in the 2007 finals Leon Jackson was correctly announced as
the winner (over Rhydian Roberts); that ITV did not mislead its audience in
claiming that the finalists were “neck and neck”; and the difficulties some
viewers found in calling the programme did not result in unfairness
The full Adjudications are available on the Ofcom website here
All other findings can be found within Ofcom’s Broadcast Bulletin Issue no.108
on the Ofcom website here
Other on-going investigations
There are a number of other on-going investigations which Ofcom is conducting.
These include the British Comedy Awards (2004 and 2005) broadcast on ITV1,
the Secret Sound competition broadcast on a number of GCap radio stations,
and a number of programmes on BBC radio and television, some of which are
PRS cases.
These investigations are well-advanced, with Ofcom obtaining the reports and
information we have requested from broadcasters and the relevant licensee.
The results of these investigations will be published in the coming weeks.
The Government should simply ban premium numbers which are nothing more than a rip off. I have voiced my opinion on several occasions to the media and Government. I refuse to use them. If the public got wise and did likewise the operators would realise the game is up.
peterfieldman, paris, france