Ofcom Discussion

Great post SB, I agree with you buddy I reckon there are things happening which we don't even no about, and lets face it even the people who are at Ofcom must be clearly saying to themselves that there dictator doesn't want to be there anymore. Don't forget Ofcom is like any other work place, rumours start flying around and word gets out, and before you no it everybody starts talking.
SB made a very good point, that things will inevitably change one way or the other either Ofcom are on there way out in otherwords Ofcom will be finished for good or they'll be a change at the top. I guess time will tell, but I do feel that maybe 2013 will be a good year after all

I make no secret of it, I'm pissed off that ED is still here, but I don't think any of us should feel like we've been beaten, if ED had got the top job at the BBC who's to say anyway that things would have got better for us. An even bigger dickhead than ED might have become the new Chief Executive at ofcom.

So the start of another nightshow has started and already we have no idea just what shape or format it will take. Ofcom parania is sometimes more prevelant than other nights.

Going back to an earlier point maybe ofcom should be more concerned about who's working at such corporations such as the BBC and ITV because the Jimmy Savile case just goes to show that is of greater concern especially when individuals are working in a position of trust than what is shown post watershed on other channels which is designed and intended for an adult audience.

Certainly public opinion doesn't have an agenda towards the babe channels so why then should ofcom. It's also really hard to enjoy a show even when it is delivering the goods for fear of ofcom redemption.

Just how exactly are you realistically supposed to monitor a live televised sex show. How can you expect a model to say to the customer who has just phoned up the premium rate number that she cannot carry out their request because of some stupid red tape.

If it's past 9 O'clock then red tape and rules shouldn't exist. Dayshows should also be at the same strength as nightshows too. If free pin protection is given the go ahead then ofcom really shouldn't have an axe to grinde with any of the channels. But in saying that the fact that all channels can be blocked anyway surely should be reason enough not to have restrictions placed on the channels.

The government and ofcom should work towards educating parents into being responsible on how to safe guard their children. If kids are up late watching the babe channels like ofcom seem to think they do then it should be the parents and not the channels that get fined.

Besides there is no evidence anyway to suggest that this type of entertainment would seriously effect a minor anyway. Horror films - Yes. Late night babe channels - No. This is bullshit ofcom lies to fit their own agenda. Ofcom are not qualified and never have been to hold such an opinion or try to pass it off as fact.

Well its a shame Mr Ed The Talking Horse wont be going soon, lets hope he doesnt throw himself into his work, like The Queen did when her eldest sons marriage broke up. Official visits here and there "Hello, and what do you do?", drafting laws, advising Ministers, rewarding diligent workers, meeting religious leaders, closing things ... what, you thought I meant HM Queen?

Slight aside, according to the BBC Trust there was no competition for the DG post, they just decided who they wanted and contacted him. Bit of a slap in the face for previous candidates who were rejected without even a look in. Lets hope noone bears a grudge.

Ed Richards has been doing the job for 6 years now. It is now public knowledge that he has gone for another job. There is a natural limit to the lifespan of Chief Execs and he must be reaching it. He cant innovate without overturning policies he championed in the past. He cant progress within Ofcom and now has 6 years experience of being Chief Exec of a large organisation, not to say a powerful regulator that has been steered through deep cuts as well as expanding to include postal regulation. A lot of organisations that would not have looked at him 6 years ago would now leap at the chance to employ him at double his salary.

He cant move to a senior position with a broadcaster either, even if he wanted to, not for a few years, game keeper to poacher in one move would create too big a stink. The only way would be a couple of years out a non broadcasting organisation. Could be private sector - he would bring establishment respectability and he has political connections. Or it could be the Arts sector, culture is close enough to broadcasting but avoids conflict of interest.

Vice chancellor of a university somewhere? Chief exec of a charity for a few years? Director of Leisure Services at a council heavily cutting spending? The Royal Opera House will need a new Chief Executive soon. Channel 4 will need a new Deputy Chairman, one of the few broadcasting jobs our kid could take.

Or wait until May 2015, he could stand as an MP and end up as next Culture Secretary.

Well very good point there eccles. BTW I would have thanked your post but I forgot just like you forgot to thank my post too :)

But getting back to ED. Yes very good point in order for him to progress further he is going to have to readdress his policies and the way ofcom and him have written up the broadcasting rules.

He needs to ask himself why he has been rejected twice now for the top job at the BBC despite this time being the bookies red hot favourite to succeed.

Also it's worth noting that had ED been successful the new Chief Executive at ofcom could have perhaps been a she with a very feminist attitude towards the babe channels. She could have infact had a far worse agenda such as trying to close the lot of them down.

Also I have reposted this quote from eccles too. Sorry mate :rolleyes:

(29-10-2012 04:45 )eccles Wrote:  Since inception Ofcom has not banned a single Euro porn channel aimed at the UK (unlike its predecessors) despite having the power to do so. You can go into WHSmiths and openly buy a magazine where UK businesses openly advertise equipment to receive Euro porn channels.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_...579719.stm

If you follow this link the reason ofcom haven't done this is because it's illegal and is forbidden throughout the European Union. It's called satellite jamming and it's long been outlawed. Irrespective if it's a hardcore porno channel or not ofcom are not allowed to block the signal.

Also, to follow on from SB's point, Euro porn channels are not 'aimed at the UK', they are receivable in the UK but the user has to make a effort (new receiver and dish aimed at the right satellite).

Correct me if I'm wrong here but isn't receivable just the same as being aimed at because you could use the same logic of reasoning when it comes to the UK SKY satellite. To put you in the picture here various satellites can be picked up within the UK including Astra1, Astra2 and Hotbird. With a dome you can pick up even more.

I know a man that manages to pick up Russian channels. We already have to make an effort to recieve the UK one which is Astra2 which is commoningly referred to as Eurobird. The only difference being with the other ones is to point the dish in a different direction which sometimes requires a bigger dish.

So ofcourse all these satellites cover the European footprint. Aimed at and receiving the signal is exactly the same thing hence the reason my point still stands. Ofcom cannot block any Euro porno channels and neither can the UK government either.

Given the quango nature of Ofcom, I'm not sure big-ED will have had his authority diminished too much by publically going for another job, he seems to have a nice little pfeifdom going on there.

One thing to bear in mind is that Ofcom is about more than just TV regulation. In particular, they are also responsible for the 4G mobile broadband spectrum. As that takes off, it may become a big thing with it's impact on business especially. They are already preparing for the next generation, 5G, which will apparently involve major reshuffling of the broadcast signals to make room in the air-waves.
It may well be that things like this will lead to a move to break Ofcom down into smaller bodies, each concentrating on one sector. That may well be the point at which big-Ed steps aside, maybe 'given' a nice job elsewhere to keep him sweet as his empire is split up, or perhaps he'll move off to one of those splits, maybe overseeing the mobile broadband sector will seem like a better long term prospect than regulating TV content.

So all is not doom and gloom, I feel there is more to come in this soap opera

Plenty of good points from Munch and Scottishbloke.

I doubt that Ofcom will be broken up into smaller sector specific units. The trend is towards bigger units because that means fewer Chief Executives, Boards, HR, Legal and Finance departments each with its own senior management. It's the difference between 5 CEs at £150,000 each or one at £200,000, and it might be possible to embarass them into accepting £150,000. Total headcount and total wages are less. If top wages stay high they make nice presents for exMinisters.

The point I raised about foreign porn channels being widely advertised in family magazines sold in WHSmiths is that - I think - Ofcom still has the power to ban foreign porn channels. Either it acts consistently and says they have potential to offend people who go out of their way to get them, and members of their households, and potential for harm to children. Euro porn channels used to be available during the day. Alternatively Ofcom accepts that the right of adults make informed decisions about what they view in the privacy of their own homes, but can they ban it on Sky channels without being inconsistent?

By "ban" I mean "proscribe" not jam. Ofcom and the Home Office used to have the power to make it illegal to sell receiving equipment, decoder CAMs, subscription cards, subscriptions, to advertise or even to editorialise in magazines. These days channels tend to use industry standard decoders (CAMs) so they cant be banned, but channel specific decoder cards, subscriptions, renewals and adverts can.

For reference and anyone interested, What Satellite has adverts for Free-X, Dorcel, Satisfaction TV, SCT, Redlight, Elite (not the UK one), Private Spice, Penthouse, InXWorld, French Lover TV, Daring, Hustler at prices from £69 to £129 per year (card only), many in HD.

The final point is that "aimed at" refers to the main audience, usually defined by maximum power, ease of reception, language used and timing. "Receivable" refers to anywhere in the transmitter footprint.

(24-11-2012 01:11 )eccles Wrote:  The final point is that "aimed at" refers to the main audience, usually defined by maximum power, ease of reception, language used and timing. "Receivable" refers to anywhere in the transmitter footprint.

Precisely! It's odd that you seem to understand the term 'aimed at' because I was actually questioning your use of it. In my view you were wrong in your previous post.

These Euro-porn channels are not aimed at the UK, they are "receivable" in the UK. As you define, these terms are not the same thing so it's a shame that SB misunderstood my point.

(22-11-2012 16:30 )continental19 Wrote:  Well once again the door had been slammed in our faces one again due to the fact that Ed Richards, didn't get the job at the BBC!! Just when we all thought there was light at the end of the tunnel only for the end of the tunnel to cave in
So where does that leave us all? Well as far as I'm concerned 2012 is a year I want to forget in a hurry, after ofcoms interference, I'm just hoping that 2013 will be a more positive step in the right direction concerning our babe channels, when is Ofcom going to allow us the freedom to choose what we want to watch in our own homes, instead of acting like bloody dictators!!
I just have this gut feeling that while the Dictator Ed Richards is sitting behind his desk over looking the Thames at Ofcom HQ nothing much is gonna change, however we must never give up hope we must all keep the faith

Its been a bloody awful year sexist beyond belief,,would like to say more but as the forum open i best not.