By Nick Higham BBC media correspondent

The Daily Star headline was wonderfully pithy: "Yank TV too tacky, say MPs."

The Daily Record went further, attempting a little political analysis: "Blair gives go-ahead to swamp our TVs with junk."

Both papers were reporting the publication of the Puttnam committee's report on the draft communications bill - and the government's reaction to the most contentious of its 148 recommendations.

Pre-emptive leaks to Sunday newspapers before the report was published had shown battle lines were being drawn.

Lord Puttnam: Chaired the committee

The members of the Lords and Commons who made up the committee weren't happy at the proposal to let US media giants buy up ITV. They agreed with those who argued that a US owner might treat the channel as a dumping ground for its own cheap programming.

The government however was adamant (as I reported here two weeks ago) that its proposals were non-negotiable.

In fact things were not quite as simple as the tabloids made them seem.

For one thing, many commentators say American companies would be crazy to try and foist second-rate US programming on British audiences when it is home-grown programmes that get the biggest ratings.

The Financial Times forcefully argued as much under its own tabloid-style headline, "Chariots of bilge", a reference to Lord Puttnam's finest moment as a film producer, Chariots of Fire.

And for another the committee had not actually rejected American ownership out of hand. Instead it recommended delaying a decision until the new regulator Ofcom, under its newly-appointed chairman, the economist Lord Currie, has had a chance to review the issue itself.

Lord Currie will be the new Ofcom chairman

It is not quite true that the differences are, as the culture secretary Tessa Jowell observed, merely ones of timing.

But Puttnam himself describes the coverage of the report as "a highly caricatured head-butting contest between an overbearing government and a tub-thumping committee".

Perhaps most revealing was the reaction of the independent producers' organisation, Pact, which would have most to lose from the dumping of US-made programmes.

It welcomed the report, not least for its suggestions about how to promote a more competitive market for the supply of programmes.

Commercial radio companies want more freedom

All this talk of predatory Americans tended to overshadow reaction to much else the committee suggested.

Defenders of public service broadcasting were encouraged by the committee's suggestion that Ofcom should have a "principal duty" to protect both the interests of citizens (in terms of programme quality and range) and the interests of consumers (in terms of how much they have to pay).

The lobby group 3WE, which represents international development and environment charities, says that would put public service broadcasting at the heart of Ofcom's concerns.

The committee itself, on the other hand, felt it was vital to strengthen Ofcom's powers to regulate competition, as part of what Puttnam calls "a step change in the effectiveness of regulation".

The commercial radio industry declared itself "deeply disappointed" with the report because it recommended no change to the "three-plus-one" rule (at least three different owners of local radio stations, plus the BBC, in every area) which it thinks is unnecessarily heavy-handed and restrictive.

Ofcom should oversee BBC competition issues, the committee said

Paul Brown, who runs commercial radio's trade association, says the three-plus-one rule makes even less sense given the committee's suggestion that there should be a new "plurality test" applied to media mergers.

"The government has spent four years thinking about this," he said, "and the committee has said go away and think about it for another four years. We want movement now."

But there has been a widespread welcome for another recommendation: giving Ofcom responsibility for regulating the BBC on competition issues.

Ian Twinn of the advertisers' association ISBA, said: "The recommendations underline the growing recognition that BBC dominance could be abused to the detriment of the commercial sectors."