Adult broadcaster fined £90k by Ofcom

The more i read these forums the more annoyed i get with ofcom. Over the years the babe shows have been getting tamer and tamer,and ofcoms reason for all of this: Well these sex channels are free to air, plus young teenagers can accidentally stumble on them and thats pretty much it. What a LAME excuse.
I think the real problem with ofcom is not what the Babe channels are broadcasting oh no, i think ofcom has problems with the parents and lack of responsibility. A perfect example was a few yrs back friends of mine who have a teenage son decided to block the babe channels just by a simple pin number, the reason was they didn't want to have these channels on the SKY EPG guide and from that moment on they have had no problems anymore SIMPLES.
The bottom line is that SEX Channels are meant to show Bums, Boobs, and Fannies or Pussies and thats it. And with Ofcom trying these cheap lame excuses in the 21st century is stupid, they no it, we no it. and if parents are not responsible for there children and what they watch, then it's down to them, and them alone. It's not what the Babe channels are showing, all they are showing are beautiful naked woman looking and being sexy, after all they are sex channels, and this is what they do.

(10-08-2011 19:01 )continental19 Wrote:  The more i read these forums the more annoyed i get with ofcom. Over the years the babe shows have been getting tamer and tamer,and ofcoms reason for all of this: Well these sex channels are free to air, plus young teenagers can accidentally stumble on them and thats pretty much it. What a LAME excuse.
I think the real problem with ofcom is not what the Babe channels are broadcasting oh no, i think ofcom has problems with the parents and lack of responsibility. A perfect example was a few yrs back friends of mine who have a teenage son decided to block the babe channels just by a simple pin number, the reason was they didn't want to have these channels on the SKY EPG guide and from that moment on they have had no problems anymore SIMPLES.
The bottom line is that SEX Channels are meant to show Bums, Boobs, and Fannies or Pussies and thats it. And with Ofcom trying these cheap lame excuses in the 21st century is stupid, they no it, we no it. and if parents are not responsible for there children and what they watch, then it's down to them, and them alone. It's not what the Babe channels are showing, all they are showing are beautiful naked woman looking and being sexy, after all they are sex channels, and this is what they do.

A spot on post but just one thing I can't resist asking.....Fannies OR Pussies? Please explain the distinction assuming you're not using the American definition?

(10-08-2011 19:44 )Webbiola Wrote:  

(10-08-2011 19:01 )continental19 Wrote:  The more i read these forums the more annoyed i get with ofcom. Over the years the babe shows have been getting tamer and tamer,and ofcoms reason for all of this: Well these sex channels are free to air, plus young teenagers can accidentally stumble on them and thats pretty much it. What a LAME excuse.
I think the real problem with ofcom is not what the Babe channels are broadcasting oh no, i think ofcom has problems with the parents and lack of responsibility. A perfect example was a few yrs back friends of mine who have a teenage son decided to block the babe channels just by a simple pin number, the reason was they didn't want to have these channels on the SKY EPG guide and from that moment on they have had no problems anymore SIMPLES.
The bottom line is that SEX Channels are meant to show Bums, Boobs, and Fannies or Pussies and thats it. And with Ofcom trying these cheap lame excuses in the 21st century is stupid, they no it, we no it. and if parents are not responsible for there children and what they watch, then it's down to them, and them alone. It's not what the Babe channels are showing, all they are showing are beautiful naked woman looking and being sexy, after all they are sex channels, and this is what they do.

A spot on post but just one thing I can't resist asking.....Fannies OR Pussies? Please explain the distinction assuming you're not using the American definition?

lol i was trying to cover both fronts, thanks for the reply.

Ofcom have been busy and sanctioned several other broadcasters, making a rare departure from fining adult channels.

More FM Ltd (formerly One Gold Radio Ltd)
"Ofcom’s field engineers took measurements and visited the Minehead transmission site and reported that a new transmitter and antenna array had been installed, without consultation with Ofcom – itself a breach of the Code - and that the station was transmitting a directional high powered signal several times greater than that permitted under the terms of the Licence. This created a risk to the safety of members of the public which Ofcom’s Senior Radio Monitoring Broadcast Engineer described as being of “major concern”. Ofcom’s field engineers also found other transmission related irregularities." 27/7/2011
Sanction: To reduce the period for which the Licence is to be in force by a period of twelve months.
Accepted that a super-high transmitter is not good, but broadcasters cannot even replace their equipment without getting permission from nanny?

Voice of Africa Radio Ltd
"VoAR is a community radio station serving the African community in Newham, East London...analysis established that radio programmes were not broadcast by the Licensee on its allocated frequency for a number of days between 18 December 2010 and 1 January 2011...when the station was off air the Licensee had been unable to access the transmitter site where an equipment failure had occurred; the Licensee believed that incoming interference from unlicensed broadcasters had impacted upon VoAR’s signal and this had exacerbated the situation...The Committee was also concerned with the manner in which the Licensee had responded to Ofcom’s investigation, which was not as cooperative as it should have been...the Committee sought clarification over inconsistencies between the Licensee’s initial response to Ofcom in January 2011, when it had been asserted that the service was off-air for only a few hours, and subsequent statements in which the Licensee admitted that the station had been off air between 16 and 24 December 2010 and had experienced further technical difficulties which required another visit to the transmission site on 29 December." 3/8/2011
Decision: To impose a financial penalty (payable to HM Paymaster General) of £1,000.00
A small community broadcaster is fined £1,000 for what?For being off air and loosing audience.
Gives the impression that Ofcom thought they were lying and punished them accordingly.

Bit worrying if Ofcom are now prepared to put time and effort into fining a brodcaster just £1000. This suggests even minor could result in a formal sanction. Theamount may be small but the impact of being sanctioned should not be underestimated.