Daytime nudity - blatant double standards

OK, just done a bit more digging.

Quote:Section 177 of the Broadcasting Act

Under Section 177 of the Broadcasting Act 1990 the ITC can recommend to the Secretary of State for the Department of Culture, Media and Sport that a foreign channel be made the subject of a proscription order if it is satisfied the channel repeatedly offends against good taste and decency. A proscription order makes it a criminal offence in the UK to sell smartcards and decoders or subscriptions, to publish programme information or to advertise the service.

OfCom have the power to stop UK citizens having access to these channels on the grounds of nothing more then 'offending good taste and decency'. They don't even need to prove that harm may be caused by the broadcasts. How can they wack the babe channels with the fine stick for offending good taste and decency, when they do nothing about foreign broadcasters advertising, selling smartcards and listing program information in the UK for hardcore pornography channels?*

Maybe because of this...

Quote:Television without Frontiers

The EC Broadcasting Directive (Television without frontiers), as part of the objective of establishing a single market in television, imposes obstacles on the UK taking action against television channels from other European countries. It permits restrictions on channels originating in other member States only in exceptional circumstances. The only kind of programme service which, subject to other conditions, can qualify for such restrictions is one which grossly and manifestly infringes the provisions of the Directive relating to the protection of children.

So, to get the European courts to ban a foreign broadcaster (or for them to even prosecute the broadcasters in the UK), they have to prove that the broadcasts are harmful to children. In fact, not just harmful, but 'grossly and manifestly' harmful.

Since the UK courts have already ruled that pornography is NOT harmful to children, it's easy to see why they have been so ineffective at stopping European Broadcasts.

And that's from an ITC document direct from OfComs website.

What it hilights more than anything else though, is the contradiction between UK legislation and the European directive. This contradiction is not much comfort to anyone prosecuted under the UK regulations though, as they would have to drag the whole case through the European courts to get any convictions quashed.


*Just one example...
http://uk-tv-guide.com/list/Private+Spice
A website owned and operated by
Gipsy Media
17-18 The Strand, Exmouth, Devon EX8 1AF


OfCom = total fail

I love the French way of life. The French people rule the authorities not like us pussies over here being told what we can and cant do.

I have seen plenty of daytime nudity on TV5Monde (before I got freesat). Even their Saturday night primetime slot has a show called "Le Plus grand cabaret du monde" which has nude dancing girls to open the show. You dont see that on Celebrity Dancing on Ice

TDK, as we're talking double standards, the real issue is that the TVWF applies to ALL broadcasting across the whole of the EU (and that of course includes the UK). So, as Ofcom have no proof of harm and have stated on several occaisions they can't ban anything under TVWF they then mysteriously find some other group of unknown, unidentified and probably non-existent 'vulnerable people' to protect and decided they can ban R18 (THE legal and generally accepted hardcore standard in the UK) from our screens.

Community law is suposed to apply equally to everyone. The TVWF was designed to create a level playing field for TV broadcasting. The ITC were able to ignore the TVWF because the UK argued a derrogation in the 1990's to allow for proscription orders on foreign satellite services while hardcore was still deemed obscene in the UK and banned from R18 (NOTE: R18 used to be broadcast all the time on adult channels thoughout the 1990s because it did not contain any real hardcore sex action).

All this changed in 2000 with that High Court ruling and the final realisation that hardcore material is not a significant risk to anyone of any age. At the time the ITC updated their code (rewrote the whole thing actually) and changed "no real sex" to read "no R18" - that was and is ILLEGAL according to ECHR Case Law which states "It is undisputed that a broadcast licensing system cannot be used to restrict any legally available material" (Groppera AG v Switzerland, 1990).

It simply cannot be correct that offshore broadcasters are free to deliver R18-type (and stronger) material into UK homes whilst UK-based broadcasters can't even deliver the SAFE and LEGAL UK R18-standard hardcore into UK homes. If those children and vulnerable people really need Ofcom's protective interference then they should have stated so under the terms of the TVWF. Ofcom however stated there were no grounds to implement such a ban - and that applies to UK-based broadcasters the same as any other EU broadcaster. And that should be the end of it....unless of course Ofcom can PROVE that none of their mysterious 'vulnerable people' and children in need of their protection are in households that subscribe to any European adult satellite services...???? Go ahead Ofcom - make my fucking day!

on bt vision u can watch the late night shows any time of day and some of the shows have a lot o pussy altho there no that great

Which shows?

Thank you very much for my nomination in
Best Cap or Cap Set Of The Year 2013
for Dannii Harwood Posts 781 & 782