Serious Ofcom warning for Bang Media

This is the most asinine thing I've ever read!!! Ofcom keeps stating that so and so is unsuitable for children. OK, we know that, which is why these channels are for ADULTS, and if you have a watershed time, than why criticize when things are more explicit AFTER that time???? If they don't think this stuff is appropriate, than give us what we want on an encrypted channel!

The complaints are RIDICULOUS!!! Who the hell is turning to these channels and complaining? Ofcom needs to lay out in SPECIFIC detail what the channels are allowed to show after the watershed. That way, there won't be any offences made. Why can't they give us this much? They state well that yes indeed these instances were only done to give us sexual arousal. DUH!!!!!! Why else would these channels exist?!!!

If THIS is what Ofcom is fining Bang Babes for, then they might as well go ahead and fine EVERY channel, because Babestation and Elite and BabeWorld does crotch rubbing, ass spreading(Covered), oral sex simulations, nipple licking etc all the time! If they won't even allow this to be on after the watershed, which was created for a reason, than the night shows will be almost as tame as the day show!

Seriously, who the fuck is watching these channels at 3:20 in the morning, spots some 'outer labial detail' and thinks "that's it - too far - now I'm offended". Unfortunately there is no face-palm smiley for me to end this post so this one will have to suffice

(10-05-2010 16:56 )mrmann Wrote:  Who the hell is turning to these channels and complaining?

Rival channels complain to Ofcom. This quote from Bob says it all.

(13-01-2010 21:49 )Bob Paradiso Wrote:  Actually chaps we were running our tape loop at that time. We always record live - without fail. Someone from a rival channel (I know who) got someone to make a malicious complaint about our text number being shown at that time, apparently they had an issue with us saying 'text the studio' when there were no girls on. Pretty darned obvious I'd say!!

It is an absolute fucking joke that the channels think it's a good idea to grass each other up, yet Chilly is right, the overwhelming majority of complaints come from the channel operators themselves, or from stooges, as in the case of Paradiso.

I think to deter such stupidity, any channel found to be making a vexatious/malicious complaint against a rival should have their licence immediately revoked.

What would be left would be one genuine complaint every year or two, which would leave Ofcom without a leg to stand on when trying to harass these channels. The viewers would gain and the channels' future would be more secure, yet the masterminds who run some of the channels are too dumb to see it.

Can this thread be kept solely for specific posts about the BangBabes/Ofcom situation.
Anything else should go into one of the other existing threads in this section.

The Ofcom bulletin repeatedly says of Bangbabes output that

"The material shown was so strongly sexual that it would have exceeded the likely expectation of the vast majority of the audience"

Bangbabes should be challenging them on this. Note they are not saying the vast majority of television viewers, just the vast majority of the audience. In other words, the vast majority of people who tune in to Bangbabes at 3am would be offended by a presenter's "anus and extensive labial detail".

So, anyone here offended by that? . . . . . .

Thought not.

Off you go Bangbabes - challenge the ruling.

(10-05-2010 13:54 )TheWatcher Wrote:  This is the link for the report mentioned in the previous post
http://www.ofcom.org.uk/tv/obb/prog_cb/obb157/

Very interesting reading.

The usual content/context manipulation from OFCOM I see...

Who do these fools think they're kidding!

(11-05-2010 13:40 )Grawth Wrote:  The Ofcom bulletin repeatedly says of Bangbabes output that

"The material shown was so strongly sexual that it would have exceeded the likely expectation of the vast majority of the audience"

Bangbabes should be challenging them on this. Note they are not saying the vast majority of television viewers, just the vast majority of the audience. In other words, the vast majority of people who tune in to Bangbabes at 3am would be offended by a presenter's "anus and extensive labial detail".

So, anyone here offended by that? . . . . . .

Thought not.

Off you go Bangbabes - challenge the ruling.

Challenge an Ofcom ruling, Grawth? Bang Media? Are you 'avin a larff?

BM will kneel before their Masters, pucker up and kiss their hairy arsehole as per fucking usual.

We, the fans and audience of these channels, gave BM all the ammo they needed to expose Ofcom as the ignorant, fascist, lying fucks they are back in February. Ok, my little poll wasn't completely scientific, there were 'interpretation' problems (all because of Ofcom's use of vague terms like 'exceeded expectations' (doesn't matter if its a pleasant surprise or totally shocking and enraging - its a misleading term and quite likely chosen by Ofcom because its open to interpretation (i.e. "SPIN"))).

BM and, indeed, all the babe channel operators, should press Ofcom for the HARD EVIDENCE of the supposed 'harm' that Ofcom are ACTUALLY KNOWN TO BE PREVENTING by banning R18-type content (or actually anything remotely resembling 'adult' entertainment) from our TV screens. As I've explained many times in various threads on this forum, without real evidence of harm, Ofcom have NO LEGAL RIGHT to ban any fucking thing, indeed, like the BBFC in 2000, they (Ofcom) are actually breaking the law of this land by acting in contempt of a High Court precedent (a precedent which has seen HMCE forced to allow hardcore material into the country (despite a nationwide mail order ban on R18) and which prevents Ofcom proscribing any foreign-based adult broadcaster beaming UK-legal hardcore into Britain).

Ofcom are anything but transparent, consistent or accountable. They quite clearly operate under two completely different interpretations of 'the law'. They SHOULD proscribe ANY foreign service which breaches their R18 broadcasting limit but they CHOOSE not to. I say choose because, as I'm sure you recall, Ofcom DID proscribe one 'violent porn' channel back in 2005/6. They certainly have the powers to ban foreign channels but choose not to use them for some reason...and that reason, as far as I can tell, is the Law of this Land and the High Court ruling of 2000 which DECLARED R18-type hardcore perfectly safe for CHILDREN to view.

So, what is it Ofcom think they know that the Law Courts of this land don't recognise as reality? And more to the point, where the fuck is Ofcom's EVIDENCE to support the need/necessity for their IRRATIONAL and UNLAWFUL actions?

(12-05-2010 10:20 )Winston Wolfe Wrote:  

(10-05-2010 13:54 )TheWatcher Wrote:  This is the link for the report mentioned in the previous post
http://www.ofcom.org.uk/tv/obb/prog_cb/obb157/

Very interesting reading.

The usual content/context manipulation from OFCOM I see...

Who do these fools think they're kidding!

They are kidding no-one. They are, however, keeping their masters happy, and that's what it's all about.
Britain is a much better place for having banned full R18 from our screens. Oh yes!

Bang Media have yet again been found in breach of the broadcasting code. All five complaints were upheld today.
A statutory sanction is looming.

http://www.ofcom.org.uk/tv/obb/prog_cb/o...sue158.pdf

Worth reading the above, and ask yourself if what is described doesn't happen on other channels on a regular basis...
Someone obviously has a serious vendetta against Bang Media.