Regulator has yet to formally investigate a complaint against a broadcaster
By Cillian Sherlock, Press Association
No formal investigation into complaints against broadcasters has been initiated by the country's media regulator, and most cases have been dismissed or resolved through other engagement with the companies.
Coimisiún na Meán took over the handling of such complaints when it was established three years ago, after the wind-down of its predecessor the Broadcasting Authority of Ireland (BAI).
When it receives a complaint, it is charged with deciding whether to dismiss it, refer it back to the relevant broadcaster or video-on-demand provider, or consider it for a formal investigation.
This is different from the BAI process, where its compliance committee either upheld or rejected complaints, and these decisions were regularly published.
Coimisiún na Meán instead refers suspected contraventions of standards for investigation to an authorised person.
To date, no formal investigation has commenced
Asked how many formal investigations have been launched, it told the Press Association: “To date, no formal investigation has commenced under Part 8B of the Broadcasting Act 2009, as amended.”
Summarised details of 185 complaints are available on the regulator's website.
A total of 157 were dismissed, and three were referred back to the broadcaster.
The remainder were referred to an authorised person to consider whether an investigation should take place. A decision has been made in 11 of those cases.
In six, the authorised person decided it should be resolved through engagement with the broadcaster/provider.
In the other five, the published decision does not make reference to engagement but instead says it was decided “not to direct an authorised office to commence an investigation”.
Asked to explain this wording, the regulator said: “In cases where an authorised person decided that there was reason to suspect a contravention but not to initiate an investigation or undertake any further engagement with the broadcaster, this may have been for a number of reasons, for example that it was a once-off breach; that the broadcaster had taken steps in the interim to avoid reoccurrence; or that the situation had otherwise changed such that the risk of repeated contravention was removed.”
Decisions are pending in several cases.
