This article is from the source 'bbc' and was first published or seen on . It will not be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/rss/-/1/hi/entertainment/6284014.stm

The article has changed 5 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
BBC fined for Blue Peter phone-in BBC fined for Blue Peter phone-in
(20 minutes later)
The BBC has been fined £50,000 after the results of a Blue Peter competition were faked last November.The BBC has been fined £50,000 after the results of a Blue Peter competition were faked last November.
The show allowed a child visiting the studio to pose as a caller when technical problems stopped real calls getting through to the studio.The show allowed a child visiting the studio to pose as a caller when technical problems stopped real calls getting through to the studio.
Media watchdog Ofcom criticised the BBC for "negligence" and the Blue Peter editor for not referring the issue to senior managers after the broadcast. Media watchdog Ofcom criticised the BBC for "negligence" and for "making a child complicit" in the deception.
It fined the BBC £45,000 for the first broadcast and £5,000 for a repeat. It fined the BBC £45,000 for faking the competition and £5,000 for repeating the show on children's channel CBBC.
The decision to involve the child in the deception for the sake of expediency demonstrated a casual lack of regard for the welfare of that child Ofcom ruling "We regret that Ofcom found it necessary to impose a fine," the broadcaster said in a statement.The decision to involve the child in the deception for the sake of expediency demonstrated a casual lack of regard for the welfare of that child Ofcom ruling "We regret that Ofcom found it necessary to impose a fine," the broadcaster said in a statement.
"As our previous statements have made clear, we fully accept the seriousness of this case and apologise for the breach of trust with our audiences.""As our previous statements have made clear, we fully accept the seriousness of this case and apologise for the breach of trust with our audiences."
Technical difficulty
The contest, on 27 November, was raising money for children orphaned by Aids in Malawi.The contest, on 27 November, was raising money for children orphaned by Aids in Malawi.
'Unavoidable difficulty'
Callers were asked to phone in to identify a mystery celebrity's shoes. More than 13,800 people entered, with calls costing 10p each, including 3.25p for the Unicef charity.Callers were asked to phone in to identify a mystery celebrity's shoes. More than 13,800 people entered, with calls costing 10p each, including 3.25p for the Unicef charity.
But an "unavoidable technical difficulty" meant callers' details could not be accessed, so producers found a stand-in. The winner could select a prize from a list of toys. But an "unavoidable technical difficulty" meant callers' details could not be accessed, so a researcher found a stand-in. The winner could select a prize from a list of toys.
The child they found was already in the studio because she had won a separate competition.The child they found was already in the studio because she had won a separate competition.
"The decision to involve the child in the deception for the sake of expediency demonstrated a casual lack of regard for the welfare of that child," Ofcom said in its ruling."The decision to involve the child in the deception for the sake of expediency demonstrated a casual lack of regard for the welfare of that child," Ofcom said in its ruling.
The Blue Peter team apologised after the error was discoveredIt added that the incident had only occurred because of a "background of management and compliance failures".The Blue Peter team apologised after the error was discoveredIt added that the incident had only occurred because of a "background of management and compliance failures".
These included inadequate training for the researcher who was running the competition and a lack of experience in running phone-ins among the production team. These included inadequate training for the researcher running the competition, who made the decision to select a fake "winner" without getting approval from senior members of the team.
Ofcom noted that the incident was only discovered three months later when another visitor to the programme set, Mona Zahoor, wrote to the BBC's Have Your Say messageboard. Ofcom also noted that the incident was only discovered three months later when another visitor to the programme set, Mona Zahoor, wrote to the BBC's Have Your Say messageboard.
"Had no complaint actually been received from a member of the public, knowledge of what had happened would almost certainly not have been communicated beyond the Blue Peter team," Ofcom said."Had no complaint actually been received from a member of the public, knowledge of what had happened would almost certainly not have been communicated beyond the Blue Peter team," Ofcom said.
It added that action taken by the BBC to rectify the mistake - including an on-air apology, a re-run of the competition and the offer of a refund to participants - would not have happened if Ms Zahoor had not contacted the corporation.It added that action taken by the BBC to rectify the mistake - including an on-air apology, a re-run of the competition and the offer of a refund to participants - would not have happened if Ms Zahoor had not contacted the corporation.
'Panic''Panic'
The decision not to let senior managers know about the incident was a "serious editorial failure", it added.The decision not to let senior managers know about the incident was a "serious editorial failure", it added.
However, Ofcom agreed with the BBC that the Blue Peter team had not set out to intentionally mislead its audience, and noted that both BBC One and CBBC had a good compliance record in the past. A repeat edition of the programme on CBBC later the same day also incurred a fine because it did not make it clear that the competition lines were closed.
More than 3,500 further calls were received during the repeat. The BBC accepted its on-screen captions "were not adequate".
However, Ofcom agreed with the BBC that the Blue Peter team had not set out to intentionally mislead its audience on either occasion, and noted that both BBC One and CBBC had a good compliance record in the past.
It also took into account that the fine would be paid from the licence fee, and set the amount accordingly.It also took into account that the fine would be paid from the licence fee, and set the amount accordingly.
In March, host Konnie Huq told viewers: "We'd like to say sorry to you because when this mistake happened, we let you down." After the incident came to light in March, Blue Peter host Konnie Huq told viewers: "We'd like to say sorry to you because when this mistake happened, we let you down."
At the time, BBC Children's controller Richard Deverell called the faking of the competition an "exceptional incident" and said the person responsible had acted "in a panic".At the time, BBC Children's controller Richard Deverell called the faking of the competition an "exceptional incident" and said the person responsible had acted "in a panic".