Ofcom Discussion

Prob yes when there multi million pounds businesses could be ruined if they lose there channels. you cant win against the goverment without spending millions in lawyers or lobbyists.

Until Apple Vodafone or Google start there own adult channels then its always gonna be like that

(05-08-2013 15:41 )Scottishbloke Wrote:  ...
My take on all of this is that Nightshows should start at 9PM. By that I mean they should start proper. I am somewhat confused as to how Studio66 claim to have moved their nightshow to a new start time of 2130.
...

The rules have always talked about a gradual transition, not an abrupt flip. I have some sympathy for the argument that it takes a few minutes to shoo Gran out of the room, BUT the rules should be applied impartially, should be knowable, and should be proportionate.

A few years back Channel 4 had a 9pm documentary about pole dancers and was showing tits in an erotic context within 30 seconds of the watershed. Ofcom ruled that it was in context and viewers were warned. There have been more recent examples of inconsistency. This is despite the major channels having much larger audiences, having inertia audiences, and their fruity content being well publicised.

Knowable? These days the rules do state when tits can be shown (10pm) and when gestures and language can be stronger (midnight), but the limits on acceptable gestures and language are not defined. Nowhere is it defined what clothing is acceptable when, apart from toplessness. Just a vague reference to offence. So the rules fail a basic test for the validity of law.

Proportionate? I don't see the BBC being called in for a detailed compliance meeting over a nip slip or their repeated broadcast of the F word during the daytime.

Look at other breaches in the same bulletin for consistency:
Murder Files: The Sketchbook Killer (Channel 5) 20:00-21:00
Images of a hammer murder. A woman being tied to a bed, tortured, including an attempt to rip her tongue out. Images of a man holding a gun to a womans head. A clip of a woman pulling a bicycle over herself for protection, accompanied by a description of her being attacked, with injuries to her lung, thigh and loss of a finger. A shortened reconstruction of a hammer attack. Photographs of body bags. Etc.

Ofcom quote their own research saying prewatershed violence causes as much concern as sexually explicit content and offensive language (15 percent).

Five argued that the show only attracted 2% of the child audience.

Despite this Ofcom did no more than rule that the show broke scheduling rules. No compliance meeting. No warning about not doing it again.

Inside Hollywood (5 USA) 18:55
This contained sexual scenes in clips from a film trailer "a woman being held down by a man". While "there was no nudity, but the clear impression was of the couple having sex, possibly against the woman’s will" - in other words apparent rape. Five admitted an editing mistake. Again, Ofcom ruled they had broken the rule, no more.

Fight Night Live (Sky Sports 1) 20:00
The first 6 minutes contained repetitive flash photography. Well established rules state that audiences must be warned, for the simple reason that repetitive flashes can trigger epileptic seizures. These can have serious medical consequences. "Ofcom was concerned that, in circumstances where there was the potential to cause serious harm..." Genuine risk of actual bodily harm from a well documented medical condition. They did at least record this as a "serious" breach, but took no further action.

In the Alice In Wonderland world that Ofcom inhabits, a breach by a large broadcaster with an audience of millions is repeatedly treated more leniently than a breach by a broadcaster 100s of times smaller, late at night, with a small self selecting audience.

Ofcom are just digging a hole for themselves with each bizarre ruling.

No its just a fact of life. Ofcom are not willing to really do anything to one of the Major 6 Broadcasters because Serious Questions would be asked if one of them lost there licences. not to mention politicians scared of them taking sides in any election

Face it Wank channels are disposable and have to tow the line thats how it is complaining wont change anything. a poor wank channel is better than no wank channel

What's concerning me at the moment is all this talk of a gradual transition of dayshows into night ones. At which point does it become a nightshow.

Whilst other channels outside of this EPG can broadcast material for grown up's from 9PM onwards with the BBC now being allowed to start even earlier at 8PM the channels that are called the Adult ones are being treated with kid gloves.

Just which audience is more likely to be offended I wonder, the ones who are watching the BBC or the ones who have switched over to the adult ones with the sole purpose of seeing well an adult show.

Give it time yet but soon it'll be midnight before even the tit's can come out by which point a lot of us who are working early the next day will not still be up to see this. I remember back in the day when full nudity was permitted as soon as the clocks struck 9PM.

These present bullshit rules are exasperating, not to mention the fact that the shows these days are so predictable that it feels like every day is groundhog day

^^^ Just tonight, on Dave, a repeat of QI treated us to a 'Fucking hell' at 9.03pm .... no gradual transition there then!

It's a bizarre rule. Imagine if this applied to speed limits on roads, you're in a 20 zone, there's a 30mph sign, but you can't go straight to 30, you have to make a 'gradual transition' to 30mph, at what point would you be speeding or not? Madness.

I'm not being funny, but from channel's 900+ on sky are all porn channels so it really shouldn't matter what's broadcasted 24/7. If the girls take there clothes off @ 11am or 11:30pm, it shouldn't matter as they're 'Adult Channels'. If ppl don't want the free channels like Babestation etc, then take them away from the viewing packages or better still, put pin codes or block the usage from the Support Controls on the viewing box! Look @ what Ofcom has done 2 SEL. Your lucky if you see the girls remove there shoes after 1am nowadays!

(06-08-2013 06:32 )HannahsPet Wrote:  Face it Wank channels are disposable and have to tow the line thats how it is complaining wont change anything. a poor wank channel is better than no wank channel

The problem is HP that once a wank channel becomes too bad then it ceases to be of any use to the wanker whatsoever (there is a clear threshold). Simply put, to enjoy a good wank, the material being broadcast needs to be sufficiently wank worthy.

I can indeed testify that the epic wanks I used to enjoy to say Bangbabes (in its 2k10 prime) are a lot less enjoyable than what I have to the wank fare on offer today. The wank channels have worsened noticeably and therefor so has both the quality and frequency of my wanking.

I suspect many others experience the same wanking dilemma...

All of the above problems are in cause by the 'regulator - OFCOM' who are indeed supreme wankers...

Thanks

Shylok

(07-08-2013 05:39 )shylok Wrote:  I can indeed testify that the epic wanks I used to enjoy to say Bangbabes (in its 2k10 prime) are a lot less enjoyable than what I have to the wank fare on offer today. The wank channels have worsened noticeably and therefor so has both the quality and frequency of my wanking.

I suspect many others experience the same wanking dilemma...

i really find it a terrible struggle wanking at the visualisation of zoe stollery in hotpants, its torture ...

I had a wank, but didnt enjoy it at all fuck you ofcom!

(07-08-2013 05:39 )shylok Wrote:  I can indeed testify that the epic wanks I used to enjoy to say Bangbabes (in its 2k10 prime) are a lot less enjoyable than what I have to the wank fare on offer today. The wank channels have worsened noticeably and therefor so has both the quality and frequency of my wanking.

Fucks sake mate, keep it light a bit too much information for my liking if you get my drift

Please keep all talk of wanking to the wank thread if you don't mind thank you very much

What one chooses to do whilst watching these shows is well personal. I only watch the channels purely from an artistic point of view and will deny all knowledge if any tents were being pitched in the process

When was the last time OFCOM ever pulled in record companies about their performers sexy video? I can't ever recall OFCOM saying they were in breach. Sometimes I wonder how much they get away with in comparison to the babe channels?