Complaint
The programme looked at concerns about the lack of regulation and oversight of some carbon offset projects. It introduced Plan Vivo (a registered charity) as a not-for-profit organisation based in Edinburgh, describing it as 鈥淏ritain鈥檚 most influential player in carbon offsetting鈥. Plan Vivo complained the reference suggested it was exercising improper or undue influence and that the programme misrepresented its role and responsibilities in the Voluntary Carbon Market.
Outcome
In the ECU鈥檚 view the programme was entitled to offer a professional judgement on a subject so long as that judgement was based on evidence. In this case listeners were told Plan Vivo had grown in scale and scope and had built relationships with government departments. The programme presented supporting evidence, and contained nothing which would have led listeners to regard its description of Plan Vivo as pejorative. Whilst the terminology used by the programme did not always match that used by the industry, it would not have materially misled listeners in general, who were told what Plan Vivo does and the distinction between setting and verifying standards. Plan Vivo was given an appropriate right to reply.
Not Upheld