Ofcom Broadcasting Complaints Process Explained

A broadcast can leave viewers with a clear concern but no clear route for action. The Ofcom broadcasting complaints process exists to test whether television or radio content may have breached broadcasting rules. It is not a public vote on whether a programme was liked, nor a route for settling every disagreement with an editorial decision. Used carefully, however, it gives citizens a formal way to raise evidence-based concerns about standards, fairness and public interest.

The strongest complaints are specific. They identify what was said or shown, explain why it matters under the rules, and distinguish verifiable shortcomings from personal political disagreement. That discipline matters because Ofcom is assessing compliance with a code, not choosing between competing viewpoints.

What Ofcom can consider

Ofcom regulates broadcasters and certain on-demand programme services in the UK. Its Broadcasting Code covers a broad range of standards, including harm and offence, protection of under-eighteens, crime, religion, elections and referendums, fairness, privacy, commercial references, and due impartiality and due accuracy in news.

For many members of the public, the most relevant questions concern news and current affairs. A complaint may be worth considering where a report appears materially inaccurate, where significant relevant context has been omitted, or where a programme has treated a major matter of political or industrial controversy without due impartiality. “Due” is a meaningful word here. It does not normally require every programme to contain every viewpoint, or every contributor to receive identical time. What is required depends on the subject, the format, the audience’s reasonable expectations and the broadcast as a whole.

That is why a complaint should not simply state that a programme was biased. It should show how. Was a key claim presented as fact without support? Was one relevant perspective excluded from a discussion framed as balanced? Did the programme use language that gave an untested allegation the appearance of established truth? Clear examples allow a regulator to assess the issue rather than infer it.

Ofcom can also consider complaints about unjust or unfair treatment and unwarranted infringements of privacy. These are different from general standards complaints. They are usually brought by the person or organisation directly affected, and the process can involve more detailed representations. A viewer who is not directly involved may still raise a general standards concern, but should not assume they can pursue another person’s fairness or privacy case.

What the process cannot do

A complaint is not automatically proof that a broadcaster has acted improperly. Editorial freedom is protected, and broadcasters are entitled to make judgements about which stories to cover, which guests to invite and how to structure a programme. Ofcom does not require reporting to be neutral in the sense of having no perspective at all.

It also cannot normally provide personal compensation, remove a programme from public memory or force a broadcaster to adopt a campaigner’s preferred wording. If the issue is dissatisfaction with a presenter, a scheduling decision or the absence of coverage of a particular story, it may fall outside the Code unless there is evidence of a specific standards breach.

This boundary is not a reason to give up. It is a reason to frame the concern accurately. A complaint about missing coverage may be weak. A complaint showing that coverage of a major issue omitted material facts while presenting a partial account as complete may raise a clearer standards question.

How the Ofcom broadcasting complaints process works

In most cases, start by complaining to the broadcaster. This gives it an opportunity to explain, correct an error or address the concern. It also creates a written record. For BBC content, the BBC’s own complaints procedure is generally the first stage before a complaint can be referred to Ofcom.

When writing to the broadcaster, ask for a substantive response rather than a generic acknowledgement. Keep the reply, the date it was received and any reference number. If the response does not address the central point, say so plainly when you take the matter further.

Ofcom expects complaints to be made promptly. Time limits can vary by complaint type and circumstances, so check the current requirement before submitting. Do not wait for a wider public debate to develop if you already have a clear concern. Record the programme details while they are available.

A useful submission should include:

• the broadcaster, programme title, channel or station, and date and time of transmission;

• the precise segment, quotation or sequence at issue, ideally with a timestamp;

• the relevant Code area, if known, and a plain-English explanation of the possible breach;

• the broadcaster’s response, where one has been received; and

• supporting material that can be checked, such as official data, transcripts, documents or contemporaneous reports.

Avoid turning the submission into a general account of every concern about a broadcaster. Ofcom can assess a focused allegation more effectively than a long statement containing several loosely connected objections. If there are separate issues, make clear whether each concerns accuracy, impartiality, harm and offence, or another part of the Code.

Evidence matters more than volume

The public often assumes that a large number of complaints will, by itself, produce an investigation. Numbers can show public concern, but they do not determine whether the Code has been breached. Ofcom considers the substance of complaints and may group similar ones together.

A well-documented complaint from one viewer can identify an issue that deserves examination. Equally, thousands of near-identical complaints may not add much if they repeat an assertion without evidence. Collective action is most useful when it helps people submit accurate, independent accounts of the same identifiable broadcast problem.

Take care with clips circulated on social media. A short extract can omit a correction, qualification or response given elsewhere in the programme. Watch or listen to the surrounding section, and where possible the whole item. Context does not always excuse an error, but it can change the regulatory assessment.

There is also a distinction between a fact that is disputed and a fact that is demonstrably wrong. If the evidence is contested, explain why the broadcaster’s presentation was misleading or insufficiently qualified. If an official source, court finding or published statistic directly contradicts the claim, identify it precisely. Assertions such as “everyone knows this is false” carry little weight.

What happens after submission

Ofcom first decides whether a complaint raises an issue that warrants consideration under its rules. Many complaints are assessed but do not proceed to a formal investigation. That outcome does not necessarily mean the concern was unreasonable. It may mean the matter fell outside Ofcom’s remit, lacked sufficient evidence, was submitted too late, or did not reach the threshold for a breach when viewed in context.

Where Ofcom investigates, it asks the broadcaster for representations and considers the material before reaching a decision. The process can take time, particularly where it concerns a detailed programme, multiple complainants or questions of fairness and privacy. A regulator must give the broadcaster a fair opportunity to respond; speed should not replace proper scrutiny.

Decisions are normally published. They may record that a programme was not in breach, that it breached one or more Code rules, or that a matter was resolved in another way. Published decisions matter beyond an individual programme. They show how standards are being interpreted and give the public a basis for comparing stated rules with regulatory practice.

If Ofcom finds a breach, the outcome depends on seriousness, harm, repetition and the broadcaster’s response. Remedies may include a direction to broadcast a statement of Ofcom’s findings, a correction or other regulatory action. In serious cases, Ofcom has stronger sanctions available. The aim is not simply punishment. It is to maintain standards that serve audiences and the public interest.

A practical test before you complain

Before submitting, ask three questions. First, can you identify the exact content and the exact concern? Second, can you support the concern with material others can verify? Third, does the complaint relate to a broadcasting standard rather than a preference about editorial style or political viewpoint?

If the answer is yes, make the complaint calmly and keep a record. If the answer is uncertain, refine the evidence first. Public accountability works best when citizens are precise about both what happened and what should be examined.

A complaint is most valuable when it adds clear information to the record: not noise, not assumption, but a fair question that an institution should be able to answer.

Need more clarity? GB2GB helps make complex media and public-interest issues easier to understand. Learn more About GB2GB and explore our wider public-interest work.