Legal and Ethical IssuesIn this documentary we will be using a lot of archive footage and songs owned by other companies, enterprises or individuals. We are covered against any legal action under the use of fair dealing under the 1988 Copyright Designs and Patents Act (UK). These are largely the same as the laws of fair use. I'm covered under the 1st rule 'Research and Private study' and particularly 'The copy is made for the purposes of research or private study'.  Here is the specific guidelines taken from the copywriteservice.co.uk.

     I.  Research and private study

Copying parts of a literary, dramatic, musical or artistic work or of a typographical arrangement of a published edition for the purpose of research or private study is allowed under the following conditions:

·       The copy is made for the purposes of research or private study.·       The copy is made for non-commercial purposes.·       The source of the material is acknowledged.·       The person making the copy does not make copies of the material available for a number   of people.

We are also cleared under the critisim and revue rule as we would be critising or reviewing whatever archieve footage we use, the material we will has been made available to the public and as we are covering such a big topic in a short 10 minute documentary we wouldn't quote more of the material than is necessary. 

III.               Criticism or review

Quoting parts of a work for the purpose of criticism or review is permitted provided that:

·       The work has been made available to the public.·       The source of the material is acknowledged.·       The material quoted must be accompanied by some actual discussion or assessment (to warrant the criticism or review classification).·       The amount of the material quoted is no more than is necessary for the purpose of the review.

Making a documentary our main concern were legal issues over accuracy and bias so we looked into the OFCOM broadcasting codes rules on impracticality and accuracy. I looked specifically at section 5 rules Rules 5.5 to 5.12 as they are the rules that 'apply to television programme'. Specific rules that applied to us and that we were most concern with were:  

5.7 Views and facts must not be misrepresented. Views must also be presented with due weight over appropriate timeframes. We made sure

we weighed up the positives of media censorship and the negatives of TV censorship so it's a balanced documentary. 4 points that are pro censorship and 4 points that are against censorship. 

5.9 Presenters and reporters (with the exception of news presenters and reporters in news programmes), presenters of "personal view" or "authored" programmes or items, and chairs of discussion programmes may express their own views on matters of political or industrial controversy or matters relating to current public policy. However, alternative viewpoints must be adequately represented either in the programme, or in a series of programmes taken as a whole. Additionally, presenters must not use the advantage of regular appearances to promote their views in a way that compromises the requirement for due impartiality. Presenter phone-ins must encourage and must not exclude alternative views. When editing the documentary we make sure the interviews which are anti censorship directly follow ones that are pro censorship and there is an equal amount in each segment of the documentary. 

5.10 A personal view or authored programme or item must be clearly signalled to the audience at the outset. This is a minimum requirement and may not be sufficient in all circumstances. (Personality phone-in hosts on radio are exempted from this provision unless their personal view status is unclear.) All person views are given through talking heads and no personal opinions are expressed in the voice over which is where the facts will be expressed.         

There are other rules in this section which are about criticism of public policy but that doesn't really apply to us.  

Since three of our interviewees are under 18 or were under 18 at the time of the interview and our secondary audience also includes under 18 so we had to look into the Ofcom's rules on protecting under 18s. It's also a regulation that applies to any program not matter what the intended target audience is. 

 1.3 Children must also be protected by appropriate scheduling from material that is unsuitable for them. If our program was broadcast on TV it would be aired at 9pm which is known as the watershed. Ofcom state that programs that feature 'material unsuitable for children should not, in general, be shown before 2100 or after 0530'. 

1.17 Material equivalent to the British Board of Film Classification ("BBFC") R18-rating must not be broadcast at any time. This means we can't show any films that were given the R18 - rating by the BBFC as an example of what the BBFC censors. We may have to just show a film still as on screen graphic while mentioning what is censorsed if we want to talk about the specific censorship of a film in our documentary. 

1.22 No film refused classification by the British Board of Film Classification (BBFC) may be broadcast unless it has subsequently been classified or the BBFC has confirmed that it would not be rejected

according to the standards currently operating. Also, no film cut as a condition of classification by the BBFC may be transmitted in a version which includes the cut material unless:

the BBFC has confirmed that the material was cut to allow the film to pass at a lower category; or 

the BBFC has confirmed that the film would not be subject to compulsory cuts according to the standards currently operating. This similar to the previous rule. Although this rule means we can't broadcast any films that were cut by the BBFC in their original form to show how BBFC cuts work. This may harm our documentary but the cut scene from Brighton Rock was aired on a 1995 BBC documentary Empire of the Censors.  

1.28 Due care must be taken over the physical and emotional welfare and the dignity of people under eighteen who take part or are otherwise involved in programmes. This is irrespective of any consent given by the participant or by a parent, guardian or other person over the age of eighteen in loco parentis. This rule means we can't ask questions that distress or trouble the interviewee's who are under 18. We also can't grill them for answers if they don't wamt to or are unable to interview a question. 

1.29 People under eighteen must not be caused unnecessary distress or anxiety by their involvement in programmes or by the broadcast of those programmes. This as with the previous rule means we can't ask questions that distress or trouble the interviewee's who are under 18. We also can't grill them for answers if they don't wamt to or are unable to interview a question.

Most of the laws in section 1 'protecting the under eighteens' specifically apply to shows that are gonna be broadcast before the watershed for example this one under foul language:  

1.14 The most offensive language must not be broadcast before the watershed (in the case of television) or when children are particularly likely to be listening (in the case of radio). We don't have to worry about this because our program will not be broadcast before the watershed.   

We also had a look at the Harm and Offence section:  

2.2 Factual programmes or items or portrayals of factual matters must not materially mislead the audience. We have taken special care not to be accurate in our facts and not enforce our opinion on the auidence or promote our opinions to the auidence. 

2.4 Programmes must not include material (whether in individual programmes or in programmes taken together) which, taking into

account the context, condones or glamorises violent, dangerous or seriously antisocial behaviour and is likely to encourage others to copy such behaviour. (See Rules 1.11 to 1.13 in Section One: Protecting the Under-Eighteens.) It means we can't explain how people say that films or video games are the cause of violent tragedies like columbine. This is not to much of a set back to our documentary as it's a short 10 minute documentary so we don't have the time to go into this kind of detail however if we were making a longer documentary this rule may effect the quality of our documentary. 

I also looked at section three, Crime as it's a recurring theme in our documentary for example in comes up in the chapter about media censorship protecting easily influenced people in which I mention the batman killings among other crimes and the chapter about the techniques of censorship in which I mention the Victor Jara killing: 

3.1 Material likely to encourage or incite the commission of crime or to lead to disorder must not be included in television or radio services. It means I might not be able to show any clips of films that are said to have inspired crimes. 

 3.3 No payment, promise of payment, or payment in kind, may be made to convicted or confessed criminals whether directly or indirectly for a programme contribution by the criminal (or any other person) relating to his/her crime/s. The only exception is where it is in the public interest. This may mean we wouldn't be able to interview any of the criminals involves in the crimes that were said to be inspired by films that are mentioned in the segment about media censorship protecting easily influenced people. 

3.4 While criminal proceedings are active, no payment or promise of payment may be made, directly or indirectly, to any witness or any person who may reasonably be expected to be called as a witness. Nor should any payment be suggested or made dependent on the outcome of the trial. Only actual expenditure or loss of earnings necessarily incurred during the making of a programme contribution may be reimbursed. This means we may not be able to interview any of the witnesses to the crimes that are mentioned in the segment about media censorship protecting easily influenced people. 

3.6 Broadcasters must use their best endeavours so as not to broadcast material that could endanger lives or prejudice the success of attempts to deal with a hijack or kidnapping. This may mean we can't interview anyone who is in someone knows someone who has been kidnapped by a government as part of media censorship. 

It was also important to look into section seven on fairness as we are trying to be imparcial. 

7.1 Broadcasters must avoid unjust or unfair treatment of individuals or organisations in programmes.  

7.3 Where a person is invited to make a contribution to a programme (except when the subject matter is trivial or their participation minor) they should normally, at an appropriate stage:

o be told the nature and purpose of the programme, what the programme is about and be given a clear explanation of why they were asked to contribute and when (if known) and where it is likely to be first broadcast;

o be told what kind of contribution they are expected to make, for example live, pre-recorded, interview, discussion, edited, unedited, etc.;

o be informed about the areas of questioning and, wherever possible, the nature of other likely contributions;

o be made aware of any significant changes to the programme as it develops which might reasonably affect their original consent to participate, and which might cause material unfairness;

o be told the nature of their contractual rights and obligations and those of the programme maker and broadcaster in relation to their contribution; and

o be given clear information, if offered an opportunity to preview the programme, about whether they will be able to effect any changes to it. This means we have to brief the interviewee's before we interview them. 

o 7.6 When a programme is edited, contributions should be represented fairly. We will definitely do this. We will always try to put the interviewee's words into the proper context they intended. This may mean that some of the longer interview answers might take up more time in the interview than we wanted them to.  

7.9 Before broadcasting a factual programme, including programmes examining past events, broadcasters should take reasonable care to satisfy themselves that:

o material facts have not been presented, disregarded or omitted in a way that is unfair to an individual or organisation; and

o anyone whose omission could be unfair to an individual or organisation has been offered an opportunity to contribute. Anything we mention about a historic event is true and we simply state the facts and recount the event we don't give our personal thoughts towards the historic event.

8.5 Any infringement of privacy in the making of a programme should be with the person's and/or organisation's consent or be otherwise warranted. This means we can't invade people's privacy to find out information on censorship. It means we can't record people's private

conversations without them knowing it just to capture their views on media censorship. 

8.7 If an individual or organisation's privacy is being infringed, and they ask that the filming, recording or live broadcast be stopped, the broadcaster should do so, unless it is warranted to continue. If an interviewee want to leave during an interview we must not stop them doing so. This rule may be very relevant when filming vox pops.  

8.8 When filming or recording in institutions, organisations or other agencies, permission should be obtained from the relevant authority or management, unless it is warranted to film or record without permission. Individual consent of employees or others whose appearance is incidental or where they are essentially anonymous members of the general public will not normally be required. This means we need to gain permission from thomas tallis school before we can film in the school and we need to find out if we're allowed to film on Oxford street. 

8.12 Broadcasters can record telephone calls between the broadcaster and the other party if they have, from the outset of the call, identified themselves, explained the purpose of the call and that the call is being recorded for possible broadcast (if that is the case) unless it is warranted not to do one or more of these practices. If at a later stage it becomes clear that a call that has been recorded will be broadcast (but this was not explained to the other party at the time of the call) then the broadcaster must obtain consent before broadcast from the other party, unless it is warranted not to do so. This means if we conduct a telephone interview for our documentary we must tell them what the interview is for at the start of the telephone call.