Main Index

In recognition of the power television wields to influence public opinion, since 1954 Parliament has paid particular emphasis on the need for broadcasters to report political issues with "due impartiality".  Of the many responsibilities that television broadcasters must by law discharge, it is without doubt the most important as far as the democratic function is concerned.

Since then various broadcasting Acts have re-emphasised the prime importance of impartiality in political reporting. Prior to the introduction of the 1990 Broadcasting Act, programme regulation was undertaken by the Independent Broadcasting Authority (IBA) which acted both as the broadcaster and regulator of ITV output.  With the explosion of satellite and cable television, in 1990 the Conservative government set up a new regulator, the Independent Television Commission (ITC), to licence and police all commercial television, whether terrestrial, cable or satellite. 

On its inception the ITC agreed with the government the areas to be covered by the due impartiality requirement.  These were laid down in Clause 6 of the Broadcasting Act, from which the ITC subsequently developed strict guidelines as to how broadcasters and programme-makers can achieve impartiality in the reporting of political and industrial controversies.  These guidelines are laid down in Section Three of the ITC Programme Code, reproduced below, which was in force at the time of J B Hunt's complaint about Granada Television's news blackout of Keith-Hill's and his investigation.

SECTION THREE

Impartiality

Commentary

(a)  As stated in the Foreword, the Broadcasting Act 1990 makes it the statutory duty of the ITC to draw up, and from time to time review, a code giving guidance as to the rules to be observed for the purpose of preserving due impartiality on the part of licensees as respects matters of political or industrial controversy or relating to current public policy.  The Impartiality Code relates specifically to Section 6(1)(c) of the Act and is drawn up in accordance with Section 6(3), 6(5) and 6(6). It is published under Section 6(7).

(b) For ease of reference, guidelines relating to the requirement under Section 6(1)(b) that news be presented with due accuracy and impartiality and the requirement under Section 6(4) relating to the views and opinions of persons providing a licensed service are also incorporated here, as are sections dealing with drama, drama-documentary and dramatic reconstructions.  These are based on the ITC's code-making powers under Section 7(1)(c) of the Act as well as those deriving from Section 6(3).  Section 47 of the Act allows the ITC to substitute for Section 6(1)(c) a modified requirement in respect of local licensable programme services.  Guidance is given in section 3.9 of the Code.

(c) Except where stated in the text these provisions relate to matters covered in Section 6(1)(c) of the Act, that is to say political or industrial controversy or relating to current public policy.  For the sake of simplicity, the word 'controversy' is used in the Code to refer to such matters.  Sections 3.2, 3.3, 3.4, 3.6 and 3.9 refer only to 'controversial' programmes, in the meaning of the Act.  Sections 3.1, 3.5, 3.7 and 3.8 may also apply whether programmes are 'controversial' or not.

The Code

3.1 Objectives

Licensees may make programmes about any issues they choose. This freedom is limited only by the obligations of fairness and a respect for truth, two qualities which are essential to all factually-based programmes, whether on `controversial' topics or not. 

Impartiality does not mean that broadcasters have to be absolutely neutral on every controversial issue, but they should deal even-handedly with opposing points of view in the arena of democratic debate.  Opinion should be clearly distinguished from fact.


3.2 The legal position

3.2(i) Due impartiality

The Broadcasting Act requires the ITC to do all that it can to secure 'that due impartiality is preserved on the part of the person providing the service as respects matters of political or industrial controversy or relating to current public policy'.

The term 'due' is significant; it should be interpreted as meaning adequate or appropriate to the nature of the subject and the type of programme. While the requirement of due impartiality applies to all areas of controversy covered by the Act, it does not mean that 'balance' is required in any simple mathematical sense or that equal time must be given to each opposing point of view, nor does it require absolute neutrality on every issue. Judgement will always be called for. The requirement will also vary with the type of programme;  the considerations applying to drama, for example, are different from those applying to current affairs programmes. News and personal view programmes are also different in kind and bound by separate sets of rules. Similarly, the choice of participants in a research-led investigative report will be determined by the need to be fair to the subject matter, while participants in a political discussion programme will normally be chosen more with a view to reflecting the principal opposing viewpoints.

The provision that due impartiality must be preserved 'on the part of the person providing the service' is also significant. It puts the burden for compliance on licensees rather than individual programme-makers. Subject to the safeguards contained in this Code, the provision allows for individual contributors to put forward what may be a personal or subjective view, or for such views to be reflected in a programme. It is for each licensee, acting through the executives who commission and schedule programmes, to ensure the service they provide deals fairly with matters of political or industrial controversy, or current public policy.

previous page

next page