A Channel 4 docudrama which imagined a future in which Ukip won the general election has been cleared by the broadcasting watchdog.
The show, portraying Nigel Farage as Prime Minister, sparked 6,000 complaints.
Ukip: The First 100 Days depicted rioting on the streets in the wake of a Ukip 2015 general election victory and combined archive footage with imagined scenes.
An Ofcom spokesman said: "Ofcom carefully investigated this dramatisation of what the first 100 days under a Ukip government would be like and has found the programme did not breach the Broadcasting Code.
"We found it was not misleading, taking account that it was clearly presented as a fictional drama, and that the depictions of Ukip policy were closely based on the party's recent announcements, in particular on immigration and the EU.
"It was duly impartial because it included numerous statements, both from archive clips and from actors, who expressed support for Ukip and its policies."
The programme - which depicted riots between protesters for and against tough anti-immigration raids - was strongly condemned by Mr Farage.
''Look like 100 Days Of Ukip may well have backfired on Channel 4. A biased, partisan depiction of the only party that Believes in Britain,'' he wrote on his Twitter feed at the time.
Channel 4 had said ''a lot of research'' went into the film and that Mr Farage had been invited to watch it before it was broadcast and then to do an interview afterwards but he declined.
Mr Farage previously appeared in an alcohol-fuelled Gogglebox special on Channel 4, with ''posh couple'' Steph and Dom Parker.
Ofcom is investigating whether ITV breakfast show Good Morning Britain broke impartiality rules in an interview with Mr Farage.
The interview, in which Mr Farage was asked about his chances of becoming an MP, was broadcast on May 1 in the run-up to the general election, when he was defeated by Conservative candidate Craig Mackinlay.
An Ofcom spokesman said: "Ofcom is investigating whether the programme was duly impartial to ask Nigel Farage about his prospects of winning the Thanet South constituency without reflecting the position of other candidates."
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article