Studio66 USA - Chat & Discussion

(07-06-2014 18:30 )HannahsPet Wrote:  if its an american licence then they and us are fucked cos the FCC are worse than ofcom

Well I also hope not, never thought anybody could be worse than our friends at Ofcom HQ but then I googled the Amercan censors and they actually make us look pretty laid back and liberal.

Read it here - http://www.fcc.gov/guides/obscenity-inde...-profanity

(07-06-2014 18:30 )HannahsPet Wrote:  if its an american licence then they and us are fucked cos the FCC are worse than ofcom

(07-06-2014 18:38 )Scottishbloke Wrote:  

(07-06-2014 18:30 )HannahsPet Wrote:  if its an american licence then they and us are fucked cos the FCC are worse than ofcom

Well I also hope not, never thought anybody could be worse than our friends at Ofcom HQ but then I googled the Amercan censors and they actually make us look pretty laid back and liberal.

Read it here - http://www.fcc.gov/guides/obscenity-inde...-profanity

This is very true, especially anything regarding sex/nudity. I watch Craig Ferguson's talk show on CBS which goes out after midnight. Someone sent him a business card from an Aussie strip club which he held up. It had a drawing of a naked girl on it in silhouette, and they pixellated the damn drawing! The censorship on network tv over there is crazy.

Having been on holiday in the USA and worked in the USA in the past, I definately agree with the comments about the American censor the FCC, they make ofcom seem very liberal and relaxed

thing is in this country u have Mumsnet and the daily mail in the states u have all the bible bashing churches most of which are armed to the teeth

Ofcom should take note that the more liberal the media in countries, the more liberal the country itself and the more liberal the country, the more well rounded and sane the population. People with choices to make tend to develop the ability to, you know, make choices. They think more freely for themselves and as a result are less likely to choose to do bad things. It's no surprise that generally the worst things happen when people are within a group following strict rules, or 'not thinking for themselves' Crowds, Gangs, Cults, Militias, Religions and Governments! Whereas those with free choice tend to make decisions for themselves and thus, consider consequence.

We're stuck firmly in the middle, but still enable the few to dictate to the many. 14 people may be outraged by 'popular program A' but 8 million are still happy to choose to watch it. 70 million are happy enough not watching it. So why should those 14 be enabled by Ofcom to determine what's okay now? If there was a less enablng censor those 14 would just be grumbling to themselves, instead of determining stricter and stricter policy. The fact is the population IS becoming more liberal anyway, thanks to the internet connecting the world and people developing more empathy, but we are still being held back by those in power who can't let go. This is much bigger than 'tit to channel ratios', this is about letting a population become more accepting in every way.

In summary, we should try to be less and less like America - Russia - North Korea (increasing censorship order) in every way possible. Our population is more liberal than those determining what is acceptable to it. Okay moved to Ofcom thread may be in order I just got inspired to rant

Although we have a separate Thread devoted to all that is ofcom I think it's also appropriate and relevant to also include them in discussions with regards to the channel discussions seeing as its them that sets out the rules and regulations.

With regards to Studio66 USA I'd assume that it will be an ofcom licence that'll be getting used seeing as Studio66 has one, only company's such as Babestation qualify for an overseas's one as they are based in the Netherlands whereas Studio66 is UK based.

With regards to the restrictions placed on Studio66 USA it shouldn't differ from what happens in the UK studio. Only thing that will be different will be the quality of the picture on the telly and the webstream which if it's anything like the last one it's already been documented just how grainy it was. I do hope they make improvements on this front.

(07-06-2014 19:15 )Rammyrascal Wrote:  Having been on holiday in the USA and worked in the USA in the past, I definately agree with the comments about the American censor the FCC, they make ofcom seem very liberal and relaxed

But then the girls there love a British accent, so on balance the USA becomes quite liberal in itself

(07-06-2014 17:20 )Jay39 Wrote:  It all depends where the licence for the channel is issued from. If the channel has changed ownership and their office is based in the states then they will be regulated by the US not the UK.

No, not true. If you broadcast in the UK you must have an Ofcom license, unless you are exempt because you are licensed elsewhere in the EU.

This principle was established by the EU's Television without Frontiers Directive, which was introduced to avoid EU broadcasters needing to have more than one license. The US is not a member of the EU, so US broadcasters to the UK are not exempt from Ofcom licensing requirements.

(07-06-2014 19:42 )RatedR Wrote:  We're stuck firmly in the middle, but still enable the few to dictate to the many. 14 people may be outraged by 'popular program A' but 8 million are still happy to choose to watch it.North Korea (increasing censorship order) in every way possible. Our population is more liberal than those determining what is acceptable to it. Okay moved to Ofcom thread may be in order I just got inspired to rant

Pah! You really haven't been paying attention.

A union votes for strike action on a turnout of less than 50% then those who wish to impose restrictions on our freedoms will be shouting undemocratic, whilst 14 people complaining when 8 million have watched is seen as taking the view of those concerned about breakdown of Broken Britain.

Funny thing politics.

Well if you find liars and hypocrites funny.

(07-06-2014 21:15 )Count Spankula Wrote:  This principle was established by the EU's Television without Frontiers Directive, which was introduced to avoid EU broadcasters needing to have more than one license.

The EU directive you refer to has been renamed the Audiovisual Media Services Directive - but the principle remains exactly the same, that a broadcaster can't be required to have a license to broadcast if they already have one from another EU member state.