Ofcom Broadcast Code Consultation

A great post, Ian.

Can you now pop over to Ofcunt HQ and explain it to the law-breaking bastards there?

lol

Exactly what I've been thinking too Ian, the trouble seems to be that no one is willing to take Ofcom to task for those restrictions, and I truly don't know why - if a ragtag of adult video producers can, then so can a gaggle of adult broadcasters, surely? It can't be *that* expensive to hold them legally accountable? All it would take is for someone to be found in breach, exhaust the internal Ofcom appeals procedure and then request that decision gets taken to judicial review.

Do we still suspect, as some have in the past, that these single viewers who complain are, in fact, rival channels? Are they not such a close-knit bunch as their association would have us believe?

Great post Ian.You sound like a lawyer. we need more well spoken knowledgeable gentlemen like yourself who are commited to bringing us much harder content to satisify our ever increasing sexually explicit no holes barred pornographiic demands, wich history indicates we will acheive over time.
Here's an article i wrote in Elite discussion wich is relevant to this thread.

Well i have some good news for you all. The TV channels will be getting harder no matter wich way you look at it, maybe not tommorow maybe not next month, but mark my words they will.
The simple explanation is if you look back to the 50's or 60's when playboy was conceived, their was huge controversy and outrage, a few naked pictures of women, that you know see in some womens magazines and even tv ads.
Then their was Larry Flynt who conceived Hustler magazine in the early 70's wich was much harder in retrospect, and also caused huge controversy, and public marches. I remember back in the 80's any film shown on tv that did contain nudity or partial nudity was almost always edited out or at a much later time than now. Also explicit language was almost always censored.
Haveing seen thousands of pornos myself i know for a fact porn is a thousand times more explicit than what it used to be. Back in the early 90's anal movies were rarer than hen's teeth, and DP scenes was banned in most countries, whearas now you will hardly find a movie that doesn't have an anal scene in it. Also BDSM and Beastiality were banned in most countries.
So Gentlemen, i raise my glass and toast to a bright and happy future, with much more TV explicitness to come, including muff rubbing, girl/girl action, combined with full nudity, and adorned with beautiful lingerie.

Dunno if this has already been mentioned but its dated November 3rd

Ofcom strengthens adult chat TV rules

http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/broadcasting...rules.html

(03-11-2009 15:28 )Wazo Wrote:  Dunno if this has already been mentioned but its dated November 3rd

Ofcom strengthens adult chat TV rules

http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/broadcasting...rules.html

Fuck that makes for depressing reading!

Just noticed this on ofcom's site.

Participation TV 3
Rules on the promotion of premium rate services

Consultation published: 03|11|2009
Consultation closes: 15|01|2010

http://www.ofcom.org.uk/consult/condocs/...pationtv3/

Just had a look at the online form that you can fill in, to respond to them with your opinions.
https://www.ofcom.org.uk/consult/condocs...spond/form
Its a bit complicated.
If someone could work out something suitable for each of the boxes, the forum members could bombard them with replies.
It requires a valid email address to submit a form.

Its pity there was not an option for telling them to f*ck off.

Viewer servey results, oppinions on short-term advertising (30second adds etc) of Adult Services in the Adult section of the Sky EPG...

Quote:Overall, short form promotion of the product on specialist channels within the Adult section of the EPG was considered the most acceptable option. Most already believed that this is where such promotions occurred and hence were keen that they should remain there. Short form promotion on specialist adult channels was acceptable for the following reasons:
o an expected environment for this kind of promotion;
o more relevant to the programmes around the promotion;
o allows control over whether promotions are accessed or not (particularly via parental PIN protection).
“If you can block it - that gives you the control.”
Female, 20-29 yrs, London
Given the wider acceptance of short form promotion on specialist adult channels, there were fewer restrictions around what type of promotion could appear here. In terms of suggestive actions and nudity there were no restrictions. In this viewing environment, consumer protection issues were the main concern; if an individual chose to access the product as a result of the promotion, the promotion should be adequately clear as to its nature.

Well, that's good news, isn't it?

Viewers survey results, oppinions on long-form advertising (the programs themselves)

Quote:Specialist channels
The vast majority of participants were of the opinion that long form promotion should be restricted to channels within the Adult section of the EPG. As noted, this was because it would be available to those who want it, whilst not intruding into a mainstream viewing environment;
“Nobody‟s saying they shouldn‟t exist but don‟t want to have it stuffed down your throat.”
Male, 30-39, York
“Where does it end? What‟s the line? ... [it should be on] „Adult‟ channels only. If anyone is interested they can go to there. We don‟t need to have it on normal TV.”
Female, 50-59 yrs, York
“Leave it as it is, there‟s no need for it to be anywhere else, on ITV - no way.”
Female, 20-29 yrs, London
PIN protection
Due to the adult nature of the product and content of typical adult chat promotions, most were in favour of the availability of some form of PIN control in order to protect children and young people.
For the majority, parental PIN control was sufficient protection.
“If there are parental controls on it, I don‟t see a problem with it.”
Male, 30-39 yrs, York
40
A minority of people wanted this kind of promotion to be blocked by default. In other words, PIN protection should be automatically set, with individuals making the decision to switch it off. This audience felt that promotions of this kind should be something viewers actively opted into, rather than having the responsibility placed on them to opt out. In addition, it was thought that some adults may not know how to set parental PIN controls, whereas unlocking a mandatory PIN was considered relatively easy.
For a small minority, this type of channel warranted encryption. They reasoned that this was a service that individuals should make their own choice about and as such should actively choose to subscribe to it. Again the key concern was the protection of children and young people.
“Children can decode the block … they know more about decoding than their parents."
Female, 60-75 yrs, Glasgow
Freeview
As seen with short form, most participants did not feel this type of long form promotion would be acceptable on Freeview. The main reason was the lack of PIN protection and genre-driven EPG with Specialist or Adult sections. The content would only be acceptable on Freeview if it was aired on a PIN protectable channel and in the specialist section of the EPG;
“If you can‟t control Freeview, it shouldn‟t be on it.”
Male, 30-39 yrs, York
Conclusion
Overall, it was clear that long form promotion of the product on channels other than specialist adult channels was unacceptable to most participants. A small minority accepted such promotion on general entertainment channels, but this almost always excluded Channels 3, 4 and 5, and would need to be subject to strict conditions.

Quote:Views on the options for promotion
Towards the end of the research sessions, participants were tasked with making a decision on the promotion of the adult sexual entertainment PRS. They were asked to make a considered judgement based on everything that they had heard, seen and discussed. Furthermore, they were asked to bear in mind Ofcom‟s duties and considerations when making this final decision (scripts can be found in Appendix D).
Option one: A total ban on promotion of the product on television
Of those who participated in the Adult group discussions, a very small proportion felt any promotion of the product on television was unacceptable and as a result, all adult sexual entertainment chat promotions should be banned from TV.
This view was held equally by men and women from the two oldest age groups: those aged 50-59 years old and those aged 60-75 years old. These participants felt promotion of the adult sexual entertainment PRS product could lead to more harm than good and as a result they felt it should be promoted exclusively in media where users would expect to find it (specialist magazines), rather than via television, which was regarded as having greater potential to attract a new market.
Option two: As now, allow long form but not short form promotion of the product
The majority of participants (around three in five) said that the adult sexual entertainment PRS should only be promoted on television in the same way that it is currently promoted. It should remain as long form promotions on dedicated channels within the Adult section of the EPG. This view was particularly common among women.
Those who opted for Option Two were able to apply additional restrictions, if they felt they were necessary. The additional restrictions that could be applied were:
o Must only be on a dedicated TV channel in the Adult section of the EPG;
o Must not be carried on Channel 3, Channel 4 or Channel 5;
o Must not be carried on Freeview;
o Must not feature before certain times;
o Must feature warning about risk of offence;
o Must have appropriate limits on language and nudity.
Almost all applied the following restriction:
o Must only be on a dedicated TV channel in the Adult section of the EPG
42
Furthermore, unless a genre-driven EPG and parental PIN functionality were available, then the majority thought that the promotion must not be carried on Freeview. The two restrictions were also supported by a significant, mainly female participants:
o Must feature warning about risk of offence;
o Must have appropriate limits on language and nudity.
 A minority, mainly men, supported blocks of long form promotion outside of the Adult section of the EPG. However, these participants typically supported this option with the following restrictions:
o Must not be carried on Channel 3, Channel 4 or Channel 5;
o Must not feature before certain times (post 9pm watershed, ideally later);
o Must feature warning about risk of offence;
o Must have appropriate limits on language and nudity.
 As before, unless a genre-driven EPG and parental PIN functionality were available, then the majority ruled that the promotion must not be carried on Freeview.
Option three: Allow both long form and short form promotion of the product
Around one in three participants chose option three. A significant majority (over 8 in 10) of these were men. These participants were also given the opportunity to apply any restrictions they deemed necessary. These additional restrictions were the same as those offered to participants who chose Option two:
o Must only be on a dedicated TV channel in the Adult section of the EPG;
o Must not be carried on Channel 3, Channel 4 or Channel 5;
o Must not be carried on Freeview ;
o Must not feature before certain times;
o Must feature warning about risk of offence;
o Must have appropriate limits on language and nudity.
Those who chose Option three placed the same restrictions, in a similar order of priority, to those who chose Option two. However, most were not willing to allow short form promotion outside of a dedicated Adult channel. In effect, this group argued that full promotion of the adult sexual entertainment PRS (in either long and short form) would be acceptable to them on the following condition:
o Must only be on a dedicated TV channel in the Adult section of the EPG.
43
Conclusion
Although some supported a total ban and others a total relaxation of the rules regarding promotion of adult sexual entertainment PRS, the overwhelming majority of people sought a continuation of the status quo – with appropriate restrictions to ensure that future promotion is wholly restricted to dedicated channels within the Adult section of the EPG.
It follows that such activity would not be supported on the Freeview platform, given the majority of installed set top boxes currently neither supports parental PIN protection nor a genre driven EPG.

So, it seems that a majority of people, mainly made up of women, want 'appropriate limits on language and nudity' in the program itself, but aren't bothered by 30 second adverts that show full nudity...?

Way to clear things up, eh?


...but they aint gonna ban it from Sky, at least.

Ofcom are in their dying days.......