Ofcom - Current Investigations

(08-11-2011 21:49 )the fat parky Wrote:  Ofcom had 4,500 complaints about an episode of the X-factor - that's quite impressive.

I hope they were all about having Gary Barlow instead of Cheyl Cole.

Interesting to be forced to sit through the results show for "Celebrity" Come Dancing on Sunday. Among the usual granny friendly costumes, the opening sequence featured Alex Jones in a revealing plunging front costume, and Ola watserface was showing quite a bit of clevage later on. Still too many surgical stockings and fumpy costumes overall though.

(22-11-2011 03:55 )eccles Wrote:  Apart from formally announcing the Playboy fine, todays Broadcast Bulletin had almost no content. Sod all ongoing invesigations, very few complaints even made and rejected. However the few findings published were worring even if not babe related.

Sky Sports was done over for a cricket sponsorship comment. They were sponsored by Jaguar Cars and the commentator said "Well, that bit of rain hasn‟t changed the performance at all.". Whats worrying is that Ofcoms own guidance says that double ententres are permitted. Ofcom said "yes but" it could be seen as endorsing the cars.

So yet again the idiots at Riverside House dont understand their own rules.

It would be interesting to see if anyone involved in the case has any legal training.

Mercedes-Benz sponsored travel news on Forth Radio with this message "Forth One Travel with Mercedes-Benz of Edinburgh at Willowbrae Road, your Mercedes-Benz dealership in the City with 100% after-sales customer recommendation in 2011." The sponsorship message had been pre-cleared with the Radio Advertising Clearance Centre. Ofcoms case was that this was based on a survey not a 100% sample of all dealerships or all customers. In other words pedantic fine print for something that had already been checked.

A lorry driver was shown on Motorway Cops. He was caught drinking super strength lager while driving and using his other hand to gesture to an undercover policeman. He claimed the filming and broadcast was an invation of his right to privacy both while being questioned at the roadside (a public place) and being shown to the cells. Ofcom conceded the second point but decided there was an overriding public interest in seeing drink drivers getting caught. Im not sure I entirely agree with the sentiment that some sod is fair game for the TV just because a camera crew decides to shadow a police team, but my opinion in beside the point. Ofcom took over 10 pages to convey what I have compressed into one paragraph.

A woman complained that a documentary about Dr David Southall included 20 year old footage of a woman in a studio audience discussing cot death. Ofcom ruled that as the original broadcast was with her consent then including the footage in any program ever was also ok. Her point was that at the time she was young vulnerable and coming to terms with her babys death, but she had put that behind her in the intervening 20 years, and was suddenly faced with questions from students who had seen her on TV. Its tempting to say "Get over it" and "Come on, TV companies cant ring round everyone who was in a studio audience 20 years ago", but is there an issue about whether people can be allowed to put painful episodes behind them? Would the response be the same if it were a murder victims school mates confronting someone they thought could have stopped it? Or a Hillsborough relative? Will the Dowlers be faced with their TV appearances being trotted out in 10 or 20 years time when they dont expect it? Rather than acknowledge that this raises difficult issues about moving on and practicality, Ofcom took the narrow technical line that implied consent to broadcast was given 20 years ago by a young nieve grieving teenager, so further consent was unnecessary.

so the good and the bad nights we are watching at the moment are down to the producers of the shows not ofcom"s hammer on their door!

Check out this latest bullshit, Storm have been found in breach of rule 4.2 of the BCAP Code whatever the fuck it is. 1 fucking complaint, surely there must have to be more than that to launch an investigation into this, in saying that it's fucking Ofcom were talking about here, infact it wouldn't surprise me if the complaint came from one of the Ofcom panel members themselves. Does anybody remember life before Ofcom when we had The ITC previously, they wouldn't give a fuck unless the complaint was in it's thousands but even then they never bothered too much what was broadcasted on an Adult Channel hence the reason it's in the Adult Section. What are people expecting to see on these channels, fucking cartoons or something Anyway here is the fucking bullshit story if anybody can be fucked to read it http://www.melonfarmers.co.uk/ow.htm

Another new piece of deranged lunacy was "Ofcom does not prohibit nudity in adult sex chat services ... we would caution against the use of naked presenters when broadcasting this content."

Ofcom cautions against something they specifically permit.

(21-03-2012 20:25 )Scottishbloke Wrote:  Anyway here is the fucking bullshit story if anybody can be fucked to read it http://www.melonfarmers.co.uk/ow.htm

One day I'll learn not to read these reports. They genuinely make my heart sink - the stupidity of Ofcom defies belief!

(23-03-2012 02:31 )eccles Wrote:  Another new piece of deranged lunacy was "Ofcom does not prohibit nudity in adult sex chat services ... we would caution against the use of naked presenters when broadcasting this content."

Ofcom cautions against something they specifically permit.

(21-03-2012 20:25 )Scottishbloke Wrote:  Check out this latest bullshit, Storm have been found in breach of rule 4.2 of the BCAP Code whatever the fuck it is. 1 fucking complaint, surely there must have to be more than that to launch an investigation into this, in saying that it's fucking Ofcom were talking about here, infact it wouldn't surprise me if the complaint came from one of the Ofcom panel members themselves. Does anybody remember life before Ofcom when we had The ITC previously, they wouldn't give a fuck unless the complaint was in it's thousands but even then they never bothered too much what was broadcasted on an Adult Channel hence the reason it's in the Adult Section. What are people expecting to see on these channels, fucking cartoons or something Anyway here is the fucking bullshit story if anybody can be fucked to read it http://www.melonfarmers.co.uk/ow.htm

why can channel 4 show close ups of penis`s at half past 8 at night then ? is it because ofcom are gay,i wouldnt mind but i was eating at the time,well i would mind actually but my point is,it was channel 4 half 8 cox out ???????? wtf
are ofcom gay or wot ???????????????????????????
when i said i wouldnt mind i was gonna say because i was eating sausage an mash at the time an it put me right off me tea

(21-03-2012 20:25 )Scottishbloke Wrote:  1 fucking complaint, surely there must have to be more than that to launch an investigation into this

Ofcom don't need any complaints to investigate something. They can investigate even if nobody complains.

Remember this. OFCOM are puritanical cunts who fleece the British tax payer rotten. Yet another quango that David Cameron (and his 'I'll bend over a take it for a sniff of Westminster power' mate Clegg promised to get rid of when they prostituted themselves for our votes! The fucking terrible liars!

OFCOM can burn in hell as far as I am concerned. A real embarrassment to our new 'liberal' government!

S

(23-03-2012 13:19 )shylok Wrote:  Remember this. OFCOM are puritanical cunts who fleece the British tax payer rotten.

OFCOM are not fleecing the tax payer at all. Why do you say that?

Ofcom don't cost the taxpayer fuck all. I used to also use this line to justify having them abolished. But with the 500 Billion or so budget that the UK government has Ofcom cost them a mere few pennies when you look at the bigger picture. We don't pay any tax's to Ofcom whatsoever, the only ones who suffer are the TV channels and us but purely only from a viewing point of view as they are making our late night entertainment a fucking miserable experience. The contradictions in their rulebook is shockingly inconsistent. The babe channels are going down to the shitter so to speak, calls are literally drying up, why do I know this is because any time I've phoned them I more or less get through instantly with very few waiting to speak to the models. Ofcom have crippled the whole Adult Entertainment industry in the UK. I honesty think unless at least 2 thousand have complained about a certain channel or programme then no investgations should take place, aswell as that the complaint has to be justified and the Babe Channels should be immune from this down to the very nature of the programmes. If you watch an Adult Channel then you should expect to see a naked women, the only advice that should be given to the easily offended from Ofcom is how to block the Adult EPG and no further action should take place. No point having a Parental control button if Ofcom are going to ignore this, it simply just contradicts why it's in place in the first place, fuck off Ofcom, burn in hell you bastards.