I think the UK has an extraordinarily bad track record of allowing freedom of expression. Regarding ofcom though, they actually perform very little regulation of accuracy and impartiality, most of their work is as an ordinary utilities regulator, much like the FCC. To describe their regulatory action of section 5 of their broadcasting code (the part related to accuracy and fairness) as “working fairly well” is generous. I’d say a better description would be “not really functional”.
It's completely failed to cope with the present crisis. And it doesn't stop the BBC having Andrew Neil, formerly of the Murdoch Times, Daily Mail and Tory house magazine Spectator as a leading political interviewer.
Worse, I don't think "fairness" is the correct standard - that leads to bringing in AGW deniers and anti-vaxers as "balance". The standard has to be Reithian: has this discussion contributed to the viewer's understanding of the situation? Repeating two opposing sets of talking points doesn't achieve that.
The rules you mention are completely non-functional.
What would it mean to prevent bias in TV broadcast? Bias can show up in all sorts of subtle ways. You can't really demand people don't have opinions. You also can't ask people to be totally free of bias given limited broadcast minutes, and so many news stories to cover.
Given this starting point, you might begin by expecting people who make TV news to not publicly tell everyone about their own extreme political opinions. You might expect TV journalists not to belittle and insult major political parties.
You might expect these things, but you'd be disappointed because the Ofcom fails to enforce even this most basic of standards.
What was also reported was that during one Glastonbury’s many, many chants, Jon Snow joined in to bellow “Fuck the Tories” before noting that he was “supposed to be neutral”.
You might expect supposedly neutral journalists not to openly compare political decisions to drug epidemics:
Presenter: "At times there can be a perception that most of the headlines surrounding Stoke-on-Trent have a negative connotation, whether it be Brexit or the drug monkey dust"
You might expect broadcasters not to hire political candidates to referee complaints about political bias:
Ever wondered why your complaint of left-wing bias against the BBC wasn’t upheld? It could be because you were speaking to one Chris Summers on the phone. Via his Facebook we learn that Mr Summer’s isn’t too keen on his “dull, boring, grey, miserable, crap job – dealing with election complaints!” Would this be the same Chris Summers who is the Labour coucil candidate in Ealing?
You might expect that government enforcement would reduce allegations of bias to the status of supposition - they may not appear biased in public, but who knows how they are in private? But the UK doesn't even begin to approach this standard of enforced neutrality. All you have to do to prove it is read the Twitter feeds of the journalists themselves.