Daytime nudity - blatant double standards

(20-06-2010 17:42 )TheDarkKnight Wrote:  

(20-06-2010 17:30 )DanniPandemos Wrote:  There would be a double-standard if Ofcom allowed daytime nudity from foreign-based channels, but they don't.

They do, see above.

Sorry, should have made it clear that I'm talking about the Sky platform. Ofcom can't be expected to do anything about satellite signals on platforms with no links to the UK.

(20-06-2010 17:49 )DanniPandemos Wrote:  Sorry, should have made it clear that I'm talking about the Sky platform. Ofcom can't be expected to do anything about satellite signals on platforms with no links to the UK.

erm...that's debateable.

And potentially disasterous from a 'morality' point of view.

Even terrestrial broadcasters can reach the UK from the continent. If what you're saying is true, all I'd have to do is go to France and start pumping anything I liked over the top of your BBC/ITV/Sky broadcasts.

Who's going to do anything about that if not OfCom?

Any and every broadcast that is recievable in the UK falls under OfComs remit. They have to go through Europe to prosecute anyone outside the UK, but the methods and channels by which to do so are well known to them already and fully enshrined within European legislation.

(20-06-2010 17:58 )TheDarkKnight Wrote:  Even terrestrial broadcasters can reach the UK from the continent. If what you're saying is true, all I'd have to do is go to France and start pumping anything I liked over the top of your BBC/ITV/Sky broadcasts.

Who's going to do anything about that if not OfCom?

Any and every broadcast that is recievable in the UK falls under OfComs remit. They have to go through Europe to prosecute anyone outside the UK, but the methods and channels by which to do so are well known to them already and fully enshrined within European legislation.

The issue of broadcasting over the top of UK-derived signals would undoubtedly be addressed were it to occur.

Maybe Ofcom isn't too concerned with the content of non-Sky/Freesat foreign-derived broadcasts because relatively few people have the capability to receive them and they just don't consider it worth the hassle and resources.

(20-06-2010 18:08 )DanniPandemos Wrote:  ...Maybe Ofcom isn't too concerned with the content of non-Sky/Freesat foreign-derived broadcasts because relatively few people have the capability to receive them and they just don't consider it worth the hassle and resources.

Pretty much.

But it still shows up the hypocracy of their stance. I recieve them, why aren't I being protected? Why isn't my family? My children? These broadcasters specifically broadcast British pornography, starring British actors and made by British producers. They charge you in pounds as well as Euros. Why would they do that if they weren't specifically targetting UK audiences? Why would they target UK audiences if there weren't enough customers to make it commercially viable for them to do so? If it's commercially viable for them do target the Brits, why is it not commercially viable for OfCom to bring them under the UK regulations?

The reason is that to stop the broadcasts, OfCom would have to prove that the broadcasts are harmful in a European court. This is something which UK censores have failed to do (and fucking disasterous, from their point of view, when they tried) and which statistice prove to be the actual opposite of reality.

OfComs position has more holes in it than a block of Swiss cheese.

On virgin one last night at 8 pm there was this thing called naked office, full frontal nudity of both sexes. Apparently it was some form of experiment. thought, as usual in these cases the 'guru' kept her clothes on and was telling everybody else to strip naked.

(20-06-2010 11:24 )Charlemagne Wrote:  

(20-06-2010 01:13 )StanTheMan Wrote:  Not sure where I should have put this, so I've put it here.

The other day I happended across a French film on TVMONDE (channel 799). It had a young naked lady stood in front of a wash basin.

Just as AstonV mentioned is that in France that nudity in films is classed as 'Art'.
Maybe the babeshows should try and run a daytime show with an art class setting.

Having lived in France for some while I'm not sure they actually class it as 'Art'

I just think they (the French) are more relaxed about nudity than us Brits.....as they are about many things.

Plus they have a healthy disregard of Rules

Danni, TDK is right. Ofcom have banned just one very hard porn channel circa 2005. The rest remain untouched - dozens of them.

There's no mandatory PIN is there TDK? (least there didn't used to be). The subscription (about £60/year - yeah 5 quid a month not a week or a night!) doubles as proof of age and its yours to view as you like, kids n all.

It's hard to explain the full story suffice to say when Ofcom said that they couldn't block hardcore channels in the UK under TVWF 22(a)&(b) that was the end of the story (well it should have been...). But OFCOM broke EU law I believe (as per) and created this double standard too. R18 is legal and safe for kids - so sayeth The High Court in 2000. The Right to broadcast R18 in the UK wasn't revoked by Ofcom under TVFW - 1+1 = 2 yes?, oh no, 1+1 = fart according to Ofcom.

Do you want to add this one to the impossible answers letter? (see below)

(20-06-2010 21:45 )IanG Wrote:  ...There's no mandatory PIN is there TDK?...

Nope.

The channels are encrypted, so you need a card to view them (obviously), but once your cards in the reciever, there's nothing to stop them being viewed.

Basically, exactly the same level of 'protection' you have with Sky sports etc. (less actually, Sky Sports can't be hacked yet, these adult channels can and are, quite regularly)

(20-06-2010 21:45 )IanG Wrote:  ...Do you want to add this one to the impossible answers letter? (see below)

Sorry, missed that bit. Yeah, why not.
I'd like to see them explain this one away.

(20-06-2010 02:12 )thinwhiteduke Wrote:  Why didn't you tell us at the time...

Sorry, man, it hardly seemed worth it... didn't even raise a hard-on in me