±±¾©Èü³µpk10

The regulator said that despite the number of complaints, neither the show's producers Endemol nor the broadcaster Channel 4 had been in breach of broadcasting codes. 

The complaints centred on the suitability of the participants competing in the show, particularly Shahbaz Chaudry. The regulator had received complaints that Chaudry "appeared to the viewers to be unstable and not suitable for such a reality programme".

Shahbaz, who left of his own accord in the second week and was not invited back, had threatened to kill himself.

Other complaints were made about eventual winner Pete Bennett, who some viewers said was not a suitable participant in the show because he has Tourette's syndrome, which one viewer said had led to viewers to "laugh at others less fortunate than ourselves".

The regulator said: "We understand that complainants were concerned about the welfare of participants in the show. However, adults make informed decisions about their participation in such programmes, and it is not for Ofcom or others to make or override those decisions.
 
"Ofcom can not consider complaints made by the general public on behalf of participants in programmes. We are therefore not able to consider whether these scenes were unfair or unwarrantably infringed the contestants' privacy."

Viewers also said the Channel 4 should have had a duty of care towards the contestants, which they felt the broadcaster was "not exercising".
 
Ofcom added: "On the issue of whether Channel 4 exercised duty of care towards the participants, the broadcaster has acknowledged its role in this respect on previous occasions. It is also clear from the series that Channel 4 does intervene in matters related to its duty of care when it considers this to be appropriate."

Complaints were also made to the regulator that 'Big Brother' had also included inappropriate behaviour, with contestants bullied and sometimes breaking down into tears, and that those standards were not acceptable as part of a television broadcast.
 
Viewers had contacted the regulator to say that the series had condoned this aggressive behaviour and that the behaviour was likely to have been watched by small children.

If you have an opinion on this or any other issue raised on Brand Republic, join the debate in the .