Ofcom Discussion

I wonder if ofcom have cleared there desks out yet as come the end of the week I'd imagine they'll be booted out. Good ridence to the fucking rats who done nothing to improve the public service but spend the majority of there time on whinging about offensive channels mainly the babe ones. RIP TO THE BASTARDS.

(04-05-2010 18:52 )Scottishbloke Wrote:  I wonder if ofcom have cleared there desks out yet as come the end of the week I'd imagine they'll be booted out. Good ridence to the fucking rats who done nothing to improve the public service but spend the majority of there time on whinging about offensive channels mainly the babe ones. RIP TO THE BASTARDS.

Wishful thinking, my friend. I would hope that you're right but fear that Ofcon are going to be around for some time yet.
The UK has NEVER wanted explicit sex on its screens, whether that be from "English Establishment" Mediawatch or the feminazis in the Labour Party. Strange bedfellows, yes?

It is SO important that this stuff is not allowed on TV to some people that it's a (religious) crusade.

I hope I'm proved wrong.

(04-05-2010 18:52 )Scottishbloke Wrote:  I wonder if ofcom have cleared there desks out yet as come the end of the week I'd imagine they'll be booted out.

The key word here is 'imagine'.

(04-05-2010 18:52 )Scottishbloke Wrote:  I wonder if ofcom have cleared there desks out yet as come the end of the week I'd imagine they'll be booted out.

Has anyone actually contacted their MP/candidates about this?
If not don't be surprised when they ignore your wishes.

(04-05-2010 20:26 )H-H Wrote:  

(04-05-2010 18:52 )Scottishbloke Wrote:  I wonder if ofcom have cleared there desks out yet as come the end of the week I'd imagine they'll be booted out.

Has anyone actually contacted their MP/candidates about this?
If not don't be surprised when they ignore your wishes.

My MP use to be Tessa Jowell until they changed the boundaries and now i've got the anti-christ, she is the Leader of the House of Commons, Minister for Women and Equality, Lord Privy Seal as well as the Deputy Leader of the Labour Party.



Yes you've guessed it it is Harriet Harman a leading feminist so no chance in getting a straight answer about the babe channels or getting rid of Ofcom.

(04-05-2010 22:11 )Gold Plated Pension Wrote:  

(04-05-2010 20:26 )H-H Wrote:  

(04-05-2010 18:52 )Scottishbloke Wrote:  I wonder if ofcom have cleared there desks out yet as come the end of the week I'd imagine they'll be booted out.

Has anyone actually contacted their MP/candidates about this?
If not don't be surprised when they ignore your wishes.

My MP use to be Tessa Jowell until they changed the boundaries and now i've got the anti-christ, she is the Leader of the House of Commons, Minister for Women and Equality, Lord Privy Seal as well as the Deputy Leader of the Labour Party.



Yes you've guessed it it is Harriet Harman a leading feminist so no chance in getting a straight answer about the babe channels or getting rid of Ofcom.

Go on, ask her where she stands on the disabled having a sex life. And since some cannot visit the newsagents or a sex shop that leaves them seriously disadvantaged when it comes to solo-entertainment.

With this being election night do you not think ofcom would turn a blind eye if lets say a babe channel were to put on an explicit show as they'd be more concerned about keeping there jobs.

(06-05-2010 06:21 )Scottishbloke Wrote:  With this being election night do you not think ofcom would turn a blind eye if lets say a babe channel were to put on an explicit show

It wouldn't be elction night when they received any complaints that were made.

(06-05-2010 06:21 )Scottishbloke Wrote:  With this being election night do you not think ofcom would turn a blind eye if lets say a babe channel were to put on an explicit show as they'd be more concerned about keeping there jobs.

Some wild speculation there, SB.

Ofcunt are just doing what the law says. Of course, what the law says and what Ofcum claim it means they're allowed to do is open to debate.

The fact is anything the BBFC pass 18+ is deemed unsuitable for sale to persons under 18. So, if Ofcon's concerns over material intended for adults being received by under 18s were applied in a "joined-up" fashion (as the Comms Act states) then the PIN system would not, in Ofcrap's opinion, offer suitable protection to the under 18s from any material rated 18+. However, this is not the case. PIN is apparently perfectly adequate to stop under 18s accessing "more adult material" on $ky Movies at 8pm (when lots of kids are watching TV) but, supposedly totally inadequate to stop the same kids accesssing R18-type material broadcast well after the 9pm watershed (when small and 'vulnerable' kids are in bed). Clearly, something doesn't add up. What doesn't add up is Ofcom's totally biased, unfounded, illegal, unethical and reprehensible treatment of adult sex channels and their viewers.

The fact is, according to the High Court: The risk to children from hardcore sex at R18 is so insignificant that it CANNOT be used to justify a blanket ban on such material. As I've said before, that's the law of this land. Ofcom can argue what the hell they like, they have no evidence to back-up any of their fantasy paranoid claims, the fact remains that the material they choose to ban has been declared harmless, PROTECTED SPEECH by the High Court and thus Ofcom, through their own beligerence, ignorance and bigotry are breaking the law by imposing an unjustified (and unjustifiable) ban on such material.

As it is clear none of the adult service providers are willing to launch a legal challenge - perhaps because its not in their financial interests - it looks as if we'll either have to rely upon political pressure (i.e. constituents writing to their MP's to get Ofcom working within the law) or, a viewers' association (like BACVA) launching a Group Action against Ofcom's illegal ban (but that requires serious funds).

It took 16 years for someone to find the confidence to challenge the BBFC's illegal ban on hardcore at R18. It's already been 6 years since Ofcom imposed their illegal ban on TV. We might have to wait another 10 years before one or more of the adult channels grows the balls (or finds the finanicial incentive) to take on Ofcom in court. The channels/viewers cannot lose because Ofcom haven't got one shred of evidence to build a case on. A Judicial Review of Ofcom's Code would find it completely lacking in the evidence of harm Ofcom claim to be preventing (exactly the same position the BBFC were in). When the law talks about harm, that harm has to be real, proven, proveable, moreover, it has to be of such a type that it necessitates, demands and justifies a draconian restriction upon EVERYONE's fundamental Human Right to Freedom of Expression. Clearly, the scale of such harm to warrant such a restriction has to be huge, self-evident, widespread, devastating. As it stands, Ofcom can only offer the excuse of a "precautionary approach" because the evidence they need to justify their actions is NONEXISTENT, indeed, to use such a "precautionary approach" to impose a blanket ban was declared ILLEGAL by the High Court in May 2000.

I thus conclude that Ofcom should be worried about their jobs no matter what the babe/adult channels do.

Interesting argument, but you omitted the fact that after the High Court Ruling. ( Wanker of the Day) Jack Straw, Home secretary at the time, overturned the high courts ruling and backed ofcunt.