Ofcom Discussion

(07-10-2019 12:05 )babelover48 Wrote:  Would we be able to gauge who else might the complaints be about from thr times & date, if one is about Mikki and another is about Jamie and its it possible that complaints may involve web only shows too?

Possibly girls very rarely seen or no longer at the channel maybe , heather or gigi ?

What about if s66 had the shows as pin-per-view (not pay-per-view)? Surely then there would be no case to answer.

^ The shows have traditionally held that putting them behind any wall on TV would stop the passing trade that is their lifeblood there.

Could any of channels sue for damages because of the complaints ? i guess it would be costly

i would say it was unlikely

(08-10-2019 17:53 )russmeyer Wrote:  Could any of channels sue for damages because of the complaints ? i guess it would be costly

Against Ofcom no as a statutory body only enforcing regulations.

Against complainant's no as we live in a slightly less terrible place than Trump's America you can not sue whistleblowers or complainant's for alerting authorities of wrongdoing.

Against the girls and producer's for ignoring company practices (Studio66 said that the material failed to meet it's own standards and guidelines!) well I doubt it, but these are strange times and anything is possible.

I am now off to feed my pet unicorn.

I really cannot understand the mentality of anyone wanting to spend their time making complaints such as these. The channels are locked by default on a new Sky box, so can only be watched if the subscriber overrides this. They are complaining about a bit too much thigh or buttock, not that anything might be described as pornographic. What on earth do they get out of it?

I was round a friend's house the other day and he and his Mrs were watching the music channels.

This was playing:




Now his Mrs got all twisty knickers over this.

"I used to like this song but now I don't, why the fuck do they have to have half naked girls parading about; silly little bitches, I ought to make a complaint"

And there you have it.
She's not saying that because she has lofty morals, she's saying that because she's a last orders beauty queen.

(11-10-2019 10:55 )Wardjackson Wrote:  I really cannot understand the mentality of anyone wanting to spend their time making complaints such as these. The channels are locked by default on a new Sky box, so can only be watched if the subscriber overrides this. They are complaining about a bit too much thigh or buttock, not that anything might be described as pornographic. What on earth do they get out of it?

I would hazard a guess and say the majority of the complaints made to Ofcom about the babe channels, aren't by the general public offended by what they see , but are made by people connected to rival channels. or by fanboy's of one particular channel (sawboss)trying to grass up a rival channel (Babestation) of their beloved channel (S66)

Ofcom once released information that one unnamed babe channel had been recording breaches by a rival channel(Bang Babes), and offered to send DVD's of the incidents to Ofcom by courier .
Also there has been incidents of producers saying they had sent complaints to Ofcom about girls from rival channels.
Babe channel Girls themselves have also taken to social media in order to complain about and highlight girls from rival channels breaking the rules .

I wouldn't be surprised if some complaints are made vindictively by girls or producers etc that have been lot go or sacked in order to get back at their former employer .

(11-10-2019 15:04 )Dave_A Wrote:  

(11-10-2019 10:55 )Wardjackson Wrote:  I really cannot understand the mentality of anyone wanting to spend their time making complaints such as these. The channels are locked by default on a new Sky box, so can only be watched if the subscriber overrides this. They are complaining about a bit too much thigh or buttock, not that anything might be described as pornographic. What on earth do they get out of it?

I would hazard a guess and say the majority of the complaints made to Ofcom about the babe channels, aren't by the general public offended by what they see , but are made by people connected to rival channels. or by fanboy's of one particular channel (sawboss)trying to grass up a rival channel (Babestation) of their beloved channel (S66)

Ofcom once released information that one unnamed babe channel had been recording breaches by a rival channel(Bang Babes), and offered to send DVD's of the incidents to Ofcom by courier .
Also there has been incidents of producers saying they had sent complaints to Ofcom about girls from rival channels.
Babe channel Girls themselves have also taken to social media in order to complain about and highlight girls from rival channels breaking the rules .

I wouldn't be surprised if some complaints are made vindictively by girls or producers etc that have been lot go or sacked in order to get back at their former employer .

That is really sad. Are there really “fanboys of one particular channel”? As someone who, for example, used to really look forward to nipslips on Fernanda’s shows, I would not have dreamt about complaining about anything on BS if it might lead to a tightening of rules. I also have to say that I cannot understand how anyone could be offended by the content currently being complained of. There was more flesh on show in the womens’ athletics championships (in a strict Muslim country) than you can see some days on the Babeshows TV channels!!