Ofcom Discussion

It is for me!

(03-08-2011 11:45 )schmoo Wrote:  It is for me!

Really? Well in that case I'm guessing you could watch the weather or 5 News and still get off

i just wish one of the channels would risk putting out a decent nights show but as has been said before none of them have the bottle,i dont think any of them know what they are and are not allowed to do simply because they are getting away with putting out shite shows and still getting folk to ring in ,if it were a consumer show and you paid these prices for something which didnt live up to expectations or worth the money you would expect a refund!

The problem with making regular complaints to Ofcom, whether about Adult channels overstepping the mark, or about "regular" tv showing stuff that it shouldn't, is that you get labelled as a "vexatious complainer". You are then threatened with legal action if you continue to make complaints, even if those complaints are valid.

I know this because it happened to me. When Ofcom was first created, and there was the big consultation when we all thought R18 would be allowed on tv, I was one of the people who responded to the consultation - obviously in favour of stronger (ie R18) material being OK to broadcast (encrypted).

After the dust settled, and we ended up with the vague softcore rules we have now (all in the name of child protection), I submitted a complaint about an encrypted show which had actually shown fisting (which is not even allowed in R18). That complaint was ignored, dismissed, not even investigated. The reply I got did not even mention my complaint. It simply said that as I was a supporter of stronger material being broadcast, I was obviously not complaining for valid reasons. If I made more similar complaints I would be treated as a "vexatious complainer" etc etc etc. So even though I had recorded evidence showing a broadcast which was even stronger than R18, nothing was done.

Expect the same chilly response to any complaints you make this time.

Sorry.

Yet strangle when one channel repeatedly complains about another they take it seriously.

Exactly Eccles, they're to busy grassing each other up instead of doing the smart thing of taking on Ofcom together. It's also giving them an excuse for putting on tame shows because i'm sure that if the big 4 companies joined forces instead of all this bullshit reporting on each other, they'd have enough money to be able to take on Ofcom without jeopardizing their businesses and be able to put on shows to cater for everyone i.e. shows that are little stronger for those of us who want stronger and weaker ones for those that want weaker.

Just my take on things.

If this is the case that the channels are grassing up each other up then it is a dumb move. They may think by doing this that it puts the other company out of business so that they get more viewers and money but all it does is allow ofcom to make the rules stronger and no one benefits from Ofom doing this.

im sure i read somewhere that ofcom cant do anything if a channel has a dutch broadcasting licence if this is true why dont all the babe channels get a dutch licence . they dont have to change the content of the shows but if at any time there is a slip they wont get a heavy fine

oldboy the foreign licence argument has been done to death in another thread. If anyone bothers to enforce the rules (because there is a sufficiently motivated complainant who knows how to apply pressure) a channel must be registered in the country where it has its main operations/management decisions are made. Getting a dutch licence would not help a UK channel if shortly after that licence was pulled and they were left with no licence at all. One operator is said to have mixed UK/Dutch licences, but does not go further than Ofcom allows so the complaints brigade have no reason to challenge the dutch licence. But they could.

Many thanks for the summary Eccles, very useful for me.