I think these rules though still only tackle the gambling aspect of the problem - there is nothing on dodgy questions or dodgy winners!
I think Ofcom have come up with quite a good range of workable policies, the odds of getting through is the real gem; i'm sure the number of calls will fall dramatically when the true odds are shown.
Re: Dodgy questions - maybe if they had to spent x% of the game time explaining the game and how they arrived at an answer - could be useful for the dodgy maths ones, and entertaining to watch them justifying ridiculous lists.
If they cap call charges - they'd have to do it for all premium rate lines. You wouldn't know it, but TV isn't the only media willing to rip people off in this way.
I take it radio makes good use of premium rate phone lines too; in which case it's only right their call charges be restricted also. Who else should we be thinking about?
Quote:
Free Web entry - to be fair most, if not all, of them do anyhow. I think though they need to be clearer about how the selection process works as a lot of people don't believe web entrants are ever chosen.
I don't think it unreasonable that a web entry alternative be made compulsory, not just for Quizmania-type shows, but also things like Dancing On Ice. If the phone and web databases were integrated (not difficult to do, surely?) then, at least in theory, everyone would have the same chance regardless of how they entered.
Even Jeremy Kyle ought to provide an e-mail address for those wanting to be on his show (Trisha always used to) and not just an 0901 number. In his case the phone line is particularly exploitative considering the types he has on!
Quote:
As for refunding call costs for winners - that would make the problem worse if anything, with people phoning in more if they believed they'd get the call costs refunded.
Perhaps I should have clarified this - I meant only the call that resulted in a win would be refunded. Not any others made by the same person!
I take it radio makes good use of premium rate phone lines too; in which case it's only right their call charges be restricted also. Who else should we be thinking about?
Well, for starters all the newspapers who had such great fun exposing all the TV scandals. So often they'd slag off the premium rate comps in the articles and editorials - and a couple of pages later they run their own premium rate competitions.
Also a favourite of newspapers is the Agony Aunty helplines, plus things like extended horoscopes or crossword answers etc.
Plus of course those scratchcards you get in the papers most weeks - where to claim your prize you have to phone a £1.50/min hotline to find out you've won a biro.
Alot of organisations use them too - including helplines and Government organisations. Rates are set at between 10p and £1.50 a minute I think.
tvarksouthwest posted:
I don't think it unreasonable that a web entry alternative be made compulsory, not just for Quizmania-type shows, but also things like Dancing On Ice. If the phone and web databases were integrated (not difficult to do, surely?) then, at least in theory, everyone would have the same chance regardless of how they entered.
Even Jeremy Kyle ought to provide an e-mail address for those wanting to be on his show (Trisha always used to) and not just an 0901 number. In his case the phone line is particularly exploitative considering the types he has on!
In theory everyone should have the same chance of winning - phone or web entrant - and to be fair in all these scandals there has never been the suggestion web entries aren't treated fairly. I just think the presumption of alot of people is that paying customers will always take priority.
For competitions perhaps it is viable to always have free web-entry - I think at least it should be made a condition for children's programming. For voting lines though it causes problems as it's then easier to manipulate the vote. Yes, you can vote multiple times by phone but you are charged for that. Online it's as easy as repetitive clicking - with perhaps the occassional clearout of cookies required.
Re: Jeremy Kyle - completly agree. Back to the point about newspapers and their so called £1.50 a minute helplines.
tvarksouthwest posted:
Quote:
As for refunding call costs for winners - that would make the problem worse if anything, with people phoning in more if they believed they'd get the call costs refunded.
Perhaps I should have clarified this - I meant only the call that resulted in a win would be refunded. Not any others made by the same person!
That's the crux of this whole issue - clarity. I don't see the benefit of refunding winners at all - ir's just adding 75p to the value of their prize.
The moment you dial that number, you accept it's cost you 75p or whatever.
Nope, never felt OFCOM's input would strike the death knell for it. Still makes money so the people controlling these things will find a way through given now they've got their foothold.
For as long as people are willing to fritter away their cash on the lottery, there'll always be a place for the gambling scam phone-in shows on late night TV.
[quote="tvarksouthwest"
Perhaps I should have clarified this - I meant only the call that resulted in a win would be refunded. Not any others made by the same person![/quote]
I don't quite understand the logic behind this... if you win, say, £1000 you also get your £1 entry back?
That's right; pedantically speaking, you'd only end up with £999. But this rule would not really be there for the benefit of contestants, more the game shows themselves to curtail their profits.
That's right; pedantically speaking, you'd only end up with £999. But this rule would not really be there for the benefit of contestants, more the game shows themselves to curtail their profits.
Yes, I can see them having to give an extra £1 back to the winner really hurting their profit margins. I bet they're all so pleased that Ofcom didn't pick that one as part of the new rules!
Remember these companies could be taking 50,000 calls to give away £1,000. Work the maths out yourself on the damage you inflict by making them give back £1 of that over and above the prize.
That's right; pedantically speaking, you'd only end up with £999. But this rule would not really be there for the benefit of contestants, more the game shows themselves to curtail their profits.
What happened to Barney's 'Pop the Q' thread? I was going to reply to that.
It amazes me at how bored and talentless these presenters are sometimes. To them its a effort-worth 4 hour pay packet. To us its a complete waste of TV. Urgh.
What happened to Barney's 'Pop the Q' thread? I was going to reply to that.
It amazes me at how bored and talentless these presenters are sometimes. To them its a effort-worth 4 hour pay packet. To us its a complete waste of TV. Urgh.
Sorry about that. I suddenly realised there was a more substantial thread about the same thing (that would be this one) but I didn't think I was really saying anything of worth to justify merging it into here.
A bit of clarification on this - it only applies to quiz channels or shows in that mould, so competitions on Deal or No Deal etc. would be exempt - which is a good thing because not only would these measures be an unneccessary intrusion, they'd lead to the competitions being more heavily promoted if anything else.
I thought this would be a good opportunity to clarify the 'not all calls will be successful, but will be charged' nonsense.
It's like buying a raffle ticket and not being put in the draw.
I do not believe it! Cash Call has returned on The Hits! 
More money for the little bloke in his apartment in Budapest!
