Zoom-in Winter 2016 Zoom-in Winter 2016 | Page 13

The report – which included a very useful quick reference guide for programme-makers and broadcasters – was the first study of this nature since 2010. It noted that the public appear to be becoming less tolerant of discriminatory language. Word For example, words such as ‘spastic’ and ‘retard’ to describe those with disabilities were as unacceptable as the strongest racist insults. However, other words relating to mental health such as ‘nutter’ or ‘loony’ were considered fairly mild. Acceptability Strongest language, unacceptable pre-watershed. Seen as strong, Fuck aggressive and vulgar. Older participants more likely to consider the word unacceptable. Strong language, generally unacceptable pre-watershed. Seen as crude and Gash often derogatory, particularly by women. Mild language, generally of little concern. Typically viewed as a humorous Ginger insult, however more aggression or specific intent to hurt heightens impact. Mild language, generally of little concern. Tyically viewed as a humorous Git insult. Mild language, generally of little concern when used to express emotion. A God concern for older or more religiously sensitive participants when used as an obscenity. Some recognition that this may offend religious people. Mild language, generally of little concern when used to express emotion. Goddam Seen as slightly stronger than ‘God’ because it is more aggressive. Some recognition that this might offend religious people. Mild language, generally of little concern when used to express emotion. A Jesus concern for older or more religiously sensitive participants when used as an Christ obscenity. Some recognition that this may offend religious people. Strong language, generally unacceptable pre-watershed. Seen as vulgar and Knob distasteful by many. Less problematic when used in a humorous context, and generally considered slightly milder than ‘cock’. Strong language, generally unacceptable pre-watershed. Seen as crude and Minge often derogatory, particularly by women. Mild language, generally of little concern. Viewed as a humorous insult. Minger More unpleasant than offensive. More aggression or specific intent to hurt heightens impact. Strongest language, problematic for some even post-watershed. Vulgar, Motherfucker derogatory and shocking for both men and women. Seen as very aggressive when intended to hurt or offend. language, potentially unacceptable pre-watershed. More aggression or Munter specific intent to hurt heightens impact. Medium language, potentially unacceptable pre-watershed. Neither Pissed / meaning – drunk or angry – particularly offensive but more problematic when pissed off used aggressively or repeatedly. Strong language, generally unacceptable pre-watershed. Less problematic Prick when used in a humorous context. Strong language, generally unacceptable pre-watershed. Not always Punani recognised. Seen as vulgar and distasteful by those familiar. Strong language, generally unacceptable pre-watershed. Seen as vulgar and Pussy distasteful when used to refer to the vagina. Much milder when used to mean weak or ineffectual but still seen as problematic by some. Medium language, potentially unacceptable pre-watershed. Common Shit language used in everyday life but problematic when used aggressively or repeatedly. Concerns about children learning the word. Strong language, generally unacceptable pre-watershed. Seen as vulgar and Snatch distasteful by many. Sod-off Mild language, generally of little concern. Son of a Medium language, potentially unacceptable pre-watershed.. bitch Medium language, potentially unacceptable pre-watershed. Vulgar or sexual Tits use heightens the impact. Strong language, generally unacceptable pre-watershed. Seen as vulgar and Twat distasteful when used to refer to the vagina. Less problematic if describing a rude or obnoxious person, but still potentially offensive. This change in attitudes is something to be aware of both when making programmes and when repeating older programmes. As we report on page 9, Ofcom recently found a segment in an episode of Harry Hill’s TV Burp, which had previously been found by Ofcom not to be in breach of the Ofcom Broadcasting Code, now to be offensive and in breach – attitudes to transgender issues and the sort of language used by Harry Hill in relation to those issues having changed in the intervening years. The study also found that the public found swearing on the radio more offensive than swearing on television. Participants said that radio was a more intimate medium, often on in the background at home or in other places where children may be listening unsupervised. Older participants were more likely to find substitute swearwords such as ‘feck’ and ‘effing’ to be offensive than younger participants. Overall, Ofcom ranked these words as medium, meaning they are potentially unacceptable before the watershed. Participants were more accepting of accidental use of swear words before the watershed in live programmes, where they recognised that it can be difficult to control the language used, but were less tolerant if they thought the broadcaster had been careless or had deliberately allowed the swearing. Apologies, if done swiftly, do assist in mitigating offence caused. The Ofcom study also warned that the bleeping out of swearwords must be done effectively, and should not be excessive, since repeated bleeping may simply draw children’s attention to the swearing. Both non-discriminatory and discriminatory language were rated in terms of potential offensiveness. We reproduce the ‘Non-discriminatory language’ table here, courtesy of Ipsos Mori and Ofcom. zoom-in Winter 2016 | 13