Ofcom, the UK's broadcasting regulator, has ruled that Channel 4's documentary 'Undercover Mosque' was a "legitimate investigation". Ofcom dismissed police claims that the programme-makers had intended to "encourage or incite" violence against Muslims.
The hour-long documentary, aired in January, reported that preachers in numerous British mosques had incited violence against women and voiced support for Taliban attacks on British troops.
After the programme was broadcast, West Midlands police accused the programme-makers of taking the preachers' words out of context in a manner which might amount to 'stirring up hatred'. Ofcom said that it found no evidence that this was true.
A statement issued by Ofcom said:
"Ofcom found no evidence the broadcaster had misled the audience or that the programme was likely to encourage or incite criminal activity.
"On the evidence (including untransmitted footage and scripts), Ofcom found the broadcaster had accurately represented the material it had gathered and dealt with the subject matter responsibly and in context."
The decision will be seen as a victory for investigative journalists who had feared that a decision against Channel 4 would hamper their attempts to report on Muslim issues in the UK.
Comments (4)
I saw the programme and expected the response from the Muslim "orchestra" and from the police as a result. Noteworthy in the ruling was the perception by Ofcom that the complaints about Undercover Mosque seemed to have been orchestrated and were part of a campaign to undermine the programme and its writer.
It's really scary that the judgement of the police could be so easily swayed by such people. I hope the programme maker sues the West Midlands Police as an example to other police forces who may be leant on in future and may be cowardly enough to be tempted to cave in under the pressure.
Posted by Sarah Vey | November 26, 2007 9:13 AM
Posted on November 26, 2007 09:13
I believe the Officer who led the West Midlands Police investigation into Channel 4 is ACC Anil Patani.
ACC Patani seems to be of a very " sensitive disposition":
The latest lucky recipient of the big cheque is Acting Chief Superintendent Anil Patani of Nottinghamshire Police. (Yes, he's Asian, but I'd be saying the same about him if he was Welsh.)
Mr Patani has sued the force for racial discrimination. No surprise there, then. Except that Mr Patani is taking legal action because he got preferential treatment and was promoted too quickly. Therefore his colleagues look down on him because they think he only achieved his rank because of his race.
This is just nonsense. You wouldn't pay out for that, would you? Why didn't he just turn down the promotion?
Hold your horses. Mr Patani has previous. In 1990, when a sergeant, he sued for racial discrimination and collected £5,000. He didn't even have to Phone a Friend.
He wouldn't "happen" to be a Muslim, would he?
Posted by Alfred of Wessex | November 22, 2007 11:23 AM
Posted on November 22, 2007 11:23
I appears no muslims were prosecuted over the barbaric and seditious comments made yet C4 was investigated.ONE LAW FOR MUSLIMS ANOTHER FOR EVERYONE ELSE.
Posted by R.Rowan | November 20, 2007 3:26 PM
Posted on November 20, 2007 15:26
The whole business gives the impression that somebody senior in the West Midlands Police is not the sharpest tool in the box.
Wasn't there a story about an assistant chief constable there being given rapid promotion and suing his employers because the impression had been given that he rose over the heads of more deserving officers on account of of his ethnic background?
Posted by wally greeninker | November 20, 2007 1:40 AM
Posted on November 20, 2007 01:40