OFCOM research

The importance of the Watershed at 9.00pm it was used principally as a guide to likely programme content and allowed parents the opportunity to exercise control over their children’s viewing. In answer to a question within the research, most respondents (89%) felt that programmes shown before the Watershed should be suitable for children to watch. When the research questionnaire asked if all programmes should be able to be shown at any time (and parents should take full responsibility for their children’s viewing), two-thirds of respondents disagreed.

Children under ten are the most vulnerable and need protecting from things such as sex, violence and swearing.  Viewers and listeners make a contrast between channels which appeal to a wide ranging audience, including children, and those that attract a smaller audience, unlikely to appeal to children. Although broadcasters of these channels still carry a responsibility towards a potential child audience, the majority of homes do not consist of children and viewers and listeners have a right to expect a range of subject matter.

The ‘watershed’ is a well understood concept and audiences are concerned if they  believe programme content is ‘pushing the boundaries’ of what is generally accepted close to the watershed. Audience research shows strong support and recognition for the watershed on all television channels. The watershed plays a vital role for  parents and carers with children aged 5 to 8 and trust in pre-watershed programming is essential. It is also important that the content of pre watershed trails is appropriate for the time of broadcast.

Some programmes scheduled to start before the watershed and finishing after 9:00pm  may be of special appeal to children, especially during school holidays. Depending on the channel and audience it attracts, viewers can be concerned at strong, adult material immediately after the watershed when a significant number of children could still be watching television.

Programme makers should always consider the impact that the representation of the use of illegal drugs, the abuse of drugs, smoking, solvent abuse and the misuse of alcohol, may have on younger viewers and listeners. Any such inclusion pre watershed or at times when children are particularly likely to be listening must therefore be editorially justified. Ofcom does not expect it to be a frequent occurrence that a broadcaster would wish to include material that condones, encourages or glamorises the use of or (where relevant) abuse of these substances. However where that occurs e.g. in a movie that pre-dates the understanding that smoking was linked to cancer and other health effects, then the editorial justification for such material must be carefully thought through. In this example the historical context and the integrity of the film, could be the editorial justification.

Violence exists in life and, as such, will be portrayed and reported on by television and radio programmes. Many citizen-consumers are very concerned about the potential impact of violence within broadcast material upon society and, in particular, children and young people. Violence covers a wide range of behaviour and different situations and children’s reactions vary, depending on their age group and individual sensitivities. Audience research is inconclusive about the direct influence of violence on behaviour, but does highlight how children interpret violence and what reduces its impact and what causes distress.Research shows that children may emulate what they see on television. This is mediated to a certain extent by factors such as a child’s ability to distinguish between degrees of fantasy and reality and the identification with the character. Children have different stages of development and broadcasters should bear this in mind. Areas of concern include:

• the use of accessible domestic implements, such as knives,  or other offensive
weapons, articles or substances portrayed in a dangerous or harmful manner

• any portrayal of household items, such as micro-waves and tumble-dryers,
which can cause harm if misused,

• certain locations, such as railway lines;

• certain material which may lead children to fail to recognise potentially
dangerous play especially if there is no serious outcome; and

• hanging or the preparations for hanging, if easily imitable, particularly if shown
before the watershed, unless the setting gives strong grounds for believing that
imitation is unlikely.

‘When someone gets shot rapidly with a rifle and how they move when they get shot.' The movements and seeing the effects of the violence.

Children’s ‘knowledge’ of violence is changed by their experience of violence in reality, in their own lives. Therefore, it is not surprising that for these participants to feel that something can be classified as ‘violent’, it must be grounded in realism and feel credible.This is especially true for older boys, who think of many scenes of violence as nothing more than a string of special effects. Should the violence not be realistic, then children find ways of distancing themselves from it. And yet, the participants talk of the physical and dramatic representations of violence such as the ‘blood, guts and gore’ and it is doubtful that they have experienced this.

A sense of violence can be heightened if it reflects on to the child’s own fears or anxieties. For example, isolation, the dark, and places where help would not easily be forthcoming are all environments which serve to increase the violence loading in a programme.

Offensive language is a feature of British life and, in certain contexts, it has an appropriate place in broadcasting. However it raises concerns about harm to children and offence in general. There is a concern that children may imitate offensive language or be upset to hear this language, when their parents or carers have told them it is wrong, before they have worked out their own attitude to its use.Milder language in the early part of the evening may be acceptable, for example, if mitigated by a humorous context. However, in general, viewers and listeners do not wish to hear frequent or regular use of such language, including profanity, before 2100.

‘There’s always going to be somebody watching. Like a child maybe, because if he’s not going to pick it up from TV, he’s going to pick it up from somewhere else.’


Looking and researching this I have learnt it is vital not to use things such as weapons, drugs, showing sex scenes, smoking, swearing. Because pre-watershed really means children watching it and it can have diverse effects on them in reality. So as a group we need to take this on board and make sure we don't fail to heed this as it's very important. I can keep coming back to this research I have picked up double checking if what we're doing is allowed or not. Making it easier for us in the group.