Comments on: Daily Show episode yanked from UK TV because Brit law prohibits using Parliamentary footage in satire

By: cinerik

cinerik — Mon, 01 Aug 2011 18:38:00 +0000

Did you read your own link?

“Since the 19th century, the advice of the prime minister or the cabinet—who are then accountable to Parliament for the decision—has been required in order for the prerogative to be exercised.”

By: Antinous / Moderator

Antinous / Moderator — Fri, 29 Jul 2011 20:01:00 +0000

It disproves your point if you actually read it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_Prerogative_in_the_United_Kingdom

By: Kevin Shields

Kevin Shields — Fri, 29 Jul 2011 15:41:00 +0000

That’s just not the case. Channel 4 shows Daily Show clips every week.

By: Ryan O'Keefe

Ryan O'Keefe — Fri, 29 Jul 2011 15:35:00 +0000

this of course is an antiquated rule in this day and age. But we have totall coverage and a dedicated parliament channel that airs all proceedings of parliment and then discusses and provides cometary by intelligent insight majority unbiased commentators, so the important stuff is there.

with the clear biases in US media I’m still very happy with my UK broadcasting and would not exchange for the states media consumption.

I’ve always watched the dailyshow online anyway in recent years.

what I would say is that this is just one example of antiquity and is not designed or upheld here because people insist it or wish to censor or withhold rights.

also what is humours is the point johns making about accountablity in governance and being questioned all the time with the facts each week live on tv for the country to see withholding no punches, which in contrast to the US was his point.

I’d sooner make this the point than an antiquated rule.

By: Martin Nash

Martin Nash — Fri, 29 Jul 2011 14:51:00 +0000

Sure this is annoying, but it s barely denying access to commentary. We have in depth news of the story and many satirical shows covering this that are locall produced.

I was not ware of Parliamentary Copyright, and will read more of this weirdness, but please do not think that the only commentary we get is from the USA’s only decent satrist.

By: Kerry Donnelly

Kerry Donnelly — Fri, 29 Jul 2011 14:27:00 +0000

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_Prerogative
How’s them apples?

By: Antinous / Moderator

Antinous / Moderator — Fri, 29 Jul 2011 01:37:00 +0000

Did you want to produce some citations for those outlandish claims?

By: Kerry Donnelly

Kerry Donnelly — Fri, 29 Jul 2011 00:08:00 +0000

And by the way, you can pass as many laws as you want. The Queen may still exercise her Royal Prerogative which means she is above your silly little peon laws.

By: Kerry Donnelly

Kerry Donnelly — Fri, 29 Jul 2011 00:05:00 +0000

You are like a prisoner defending your jailer. And by the way I am 100% correct and you are so wrong, and subjugated, and are to be seen and not heard.

You are a subject and not a citizen.
You do not vote for your own leaders as they are all appointed for you.
The Queen does owns all the land and you, my little serf friend, can only have severable rights to real estate. Can you produce a Title to your land…NO…Can you vote on a ballot for your Head of Stae and Prime Minister and Senator? ….NO….

By: James Goffin

James Goffin — Thu, 28 Jul 2011 20:57:00 +0000

The current Ofcom Broadcasting Code is here: http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/binaries/broadcast/831190/broadcastingcode2011.pdf

I can’t find anywhere that says parliamentary proceedings can’t be used in satire. I understand it used to be in there, but isn’t in the current version.

By: Kris Jones

Kris Jones — Thu, 28 Jul 2011 20:24:00 +0000

The restriction only applies to broadcasting, so by making the episode available through the iTunes store, Comedy Central (It’s nothing to do with Channel 4) are not in breach of the law.

By: Kris Jones

Kris Jones — Thu, 28 Jul 2011 20:22:00 +0000

More 4 broadcasts the Daily Show Global Edition every Monday. It didn’t do so this week because the UK broadcasting code prevents it from showing any parliamentary proceedings in a context that might be regarded as satire. Had More 4 gone ahead they would have risked a substantial fine by the regulator OFCOM.

By: Crispian

Crispian — Thu, 28 Jul 2011 18:06:00 +0000

If we got rid of the freedom of speech for corporations, the government could stop the Comedy Channel from talking about these issues at all :D

By: Matt

Matt — Thu, 28 Jul 2011 17:48:00 +0000

It is. It’s unavailable anywhere outside of the US. Even in Canada we can’t watch videos via the Daily Show website.

By: AlexG55

AlexG55 — Thu, 28 Jul 2011 17:21:00 +0000

[MORBO] BRITAIN DOES NOT WORK THAT WAY! [/MORBO]

Seriously, which of the following do you think are personal property of the Queen:
The Royal Navy
The Royal Air Force
The Royal Borough of Kensington & Chelsea
The Royal National Lifeboat Institution
The Royal Society
The Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals
The Royal Albert Hall
The Royal Automobile Club
Henley Royal Regatta

If your answer is anything other than “none”, you are deluded. The first two are organisations whose assets (ships, planes, etc) are property of the Ministry of Defence and hence of the Crown- but that means the Government not Elizabeth Windsor personally. She is also their commander-in-chief- but the position is purely ceremonial.

The others are just things which some previous monarch decided (on advice, as always) to give the “Royal” prefix to to signify their approval. Apart from the third, they are entirely non-governmental- though some receive government support or have a special legal status. Ownership doesn’t come into it. Thinking that the “royal” prefix makes something personal property of anyone is like thinking that a gold fringe on a flag in a court makes it a military court.

There have been a lot of laws passed determining what is the personal property of the Queen (a few palaces, some land) and what is government property (some more palaces, a LOT of land, everything else that the government owns). Incidentally, she doesn’t “own” Parliament, she reigns (but does not rule) by and with the consent of Parliament, and historical precedent shows that monarchs who ignore that tend to find themselves out of a job and possibly a head shorter.

By: Brainspore

Brainspore — Thu, 28 Jul 2011 16:28:00 +0000

For crying out loud, Jon wasn’t even making fun of Parliament! Y’all have some stupid laws.* Also, having a royal family in this day and age seems silly. There, I said it.

*Yes, we have stupid laws too. But at least we have Jon Stewart to make fun of them.

By: Vitaly Ivachin

Vitaly Ivachin — Thu, 28 Jul 2011 15:14:00 +0000

“contrast this with the US, where anything produced by the federal
government is presumptively in the public domain, belonging to all
people”

-damn commies the lot of you

By: Kerry Donnelly

Kerry Donnelly — Thu, 28 Jul 2011 15:09:00 +0000

This is a point lost on my Canadian friends and alas some Brits also.

The Government of the UK (and Canada) is the sole personal PRIVATE PROPERTY of the cngntlly rtrdd monarch known as Queen Elizabeth. It is hers. She owns it. She also owns the military and the police forces also.

A clue is that any thing that has the word Royal in front of it is property of the queen personally.

By: IRMO

IRMO — Thu, 28 Jul 2011 14:35:00 +0000

Got to say, though, that if Parliamentary Copyright prevents MPs from mugging for the camera and throwing inane soundbites the was Congressmen do in the US, then that is a point in its favor.

By: mypalmike

mypalmike — Thu, 28 Jul 2011 14:27:00 +0000

“contrast this with the US, where anything produced by the federal government is presumptively in the public domain, belonging to all people”

[/sarcasm?]

By: Martin O'Gorman

Martin O'Gorman — Thu, 28 Jul 2011 14:16:00 +0000

I don’t get the Red Coats comment. Is this some kind of 200-year old satire or do they mean Butlins Redcoats?

By: niro5

niro5 — Thu, 28 Jul 2011 13:29:00 +0000

Thank goodness I live in a country with freedom of expression.

By: MikeRich

MikeRich — Thu, 28 Jul 2011 12:42:00 +0000

That episode is available in the UK iTunes store, so it looks like either Apple or Channel 4 don’t know/care about the law.

By: Peter Harris

Peter Harris — Thu, 28 Jul 2011 12:32:00 +0000

should have gone to spec savers doh

By: Tim Norton

Tim Norton — Thu, 28 Jul 2011 11:20:00 +0000

It’s the same in Australia (we also follow the Westminster style of Parliament).

Parliamentary footage cannot be used for satire or ridicule.In fact, when the satire show The Chaser (broadcast on our national TV channel ABC) wanted to cover the Royal wedding in the UK, the focus was brought back on our own Parliament and politicians - http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/politics/jokes-on-us-if-we-cant-make-fun-of-pollies-20110518-1esyb.html

By: Steve Bosman

Steve Bosman — Thu, 28 Jul 2011 11:10:00 +0000

I wonder if juga was referring to the fact that because of US copyright the embedded video is blocked in the UK.

By: K G

K G — Thu, 28 Jul 2011 11:07:00 +0000

So why are they blocking Ireland?

By: Lewis Jamieson

Lewis Jamieson — Thu, 28 Jul 2011 10:30:00 +0000

After having to resort to torrents because of Channel 4′s decision to stop showing every episode of The Daily Show, I have seen that episode and from what I remember Jon Stewart didn’t even satirise the parliament footage, all he did was say something like “British politics is awesome”

By: tw15

tw15 — Thu, 28 Jul 2011 07:36:00 +0000

UK citizens – want to read and understand your parliament’s rules and procedures? That’ll be £250 please.

“Erskine May” falls under the same protection – there’s no free HTML or PDF version available.

By: Peter J Cat

Peter J Cat — Thu, 28 Jul 2011 07:26:00 +0000

The Daily Show is shown once a week in the UK.