Babestation - Ofcom Related Chat & Discussion

(06-10-2010 23:08 )vila Wrote:  There was a right silly arse behind the camera on BS1 last night.

~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~

I bet you anything that it has to do with Offcom, and that their rules are so petty that they even had a certain amount of time that is allowed for certain things like finger/ear sucking etc. Sounds stupid, but I wouldn't be surprised if that was the reason. Very silly indeed. Babestation is all over the place in terms of censorship, as some nights it's very tame and with censorship like you mentioned, and then other nights it's less censored with Karina, Moist and even Georgie. Very weird. With Elite, you can always know what to expect in terms of censorship, but not so much with Babestation.

(07-10-2010 21:55 )mrmann Wrote:  I bet you anything that it has to do with Offcom, and that their rules are so petty that they even had a certain amount of time that is allowed for certain things like finger/ear sucking etc. Sounds stupid, but I wouldn't be surprised if that was the reason. Very silly indeed. Babestation is all over the place in terms of censorship, as some nights it's very tame and with censorship like you mentioned, and then other nights it's less censored with Karina, Moist and even Georgie. Very weird. With Elite, you can always know what to expect in terms of censorship, but not so much with Babestation.

I have to agree mate. Bloody Ofcom can stuff themselves like turkeys for disservice and delibrately influencing how the channels should play ball with them sotus speak, censorship is just as ridiculous and it just feels they want the channels to be as tame as possible. Not like it all the time mind you but when it's implemented you notice it straight away. My major gripe is the OSG'S and OTT advertising. Whether it would be XXX pics or incessant plugging of BSXtreme. It ruins our shows because you don't know what the girls are going to say next. A complete recipe for anarchy altough I don't personally phone up the girls it still ruins it for them and us. Why the hell do the producers do it so much? for effect probably and to market as agressively as possible. They feel they need to plug BSXtreme every step of the way. If we don't want it then it's our personal choice.

FAVOURITE BABES

| 1: PAIGE TYLER | 2: SOPHIA KNIGHT | 3: GRACIE LEWIS | 4: CHARLIE O'NEAL | 5: ANASTASIA HARRIS | 6: ADELE TAYLOR | 7: TAMMY TAYLOR | 8: ROSIE LEE | 9: CAITLIN WYNTERS | 10: ELLA JOLIE |

(07-10-2010 21:55 )mrmann Wrote:  

(06-10-2010 23:08 )vila Wrote:  There was a right silly arse behind the camera on BS1 last night.

I bet you anything that it has to do with Offcom, and that their rules are so petty that they even had a certain amount of time that is allowed for certain things like finger/ear sucking etc. Sounds stupid, but I wouldn't be surprised if that was the reason. Very silly indeed. Babestation is all over the place in terms of censorship, as some nights it's very tame and with censorship like you mentioned, and then other nights it's less censored with Karina, Moist and even Georgie. Very weird. With Elite, you can always know what to expect in terms of censorship, but not so much with Babestation.

If it was Ofcom surely it would affect all channels equally?

(08-10-2010 00:55 )vila Wrote:  

(07-10-2010 21:55 )mrmann Wrote:  

(06-10-2010 23:08 )vila Wrote:  There was a right silly arse behind the camera on BS1 last night.

I bet you anything that it has to do with Offcom, and that their rules are so petty that they even had a certain amount of time that is allowed for certain things like finger/ear sucking etc. Sounds stupid, but I wouldn't be surprised if that was the reason. Very silly indeed. Babestation is all over the place in terms of censorship, as some nights it's very tame and with censorship like you mentioned, and then other nights it's less censored with Karina, Moist and even Georgie. Very weird. With Elite, you can always know what to expect in terms of censorship, but not so much with Babestation.

If it was Ofcom surely it would affect all channels equally?

It does affect all channels equally; but some producers have more gumption and spine, than others.

Its a brave Producer who is confident enough about The Rules to push it.

Ofcom rules are huge, incomprehensible and vague. First there are a set of vague rules that refers to "Generally Accepted Standards". The so-called "Guidance" talks about viewer expectations, but does not state what they are, and refers to the latest public opinion survey - based on about 60 people. But that survey does not clearly state "THIS is the limit of acceptabilty to X% of the public on THAT type on channel at such and such a TIME." In fact it is almost impossible to decide where the public consider the boundary between acceptable and unacceptable lies from the survey. But Ofcom felt confident enough to levy a 1/4 Million Pound fine based on that vague waffle. Its even worse because Ofcom "interpret" their own survey and "take note" of it, which is code for cherry pick the bits they want. Even worse, Ofcom have been known to reference both the latest survey and the previous one in the same ruling, despite one of them being 5 years out of date. To be "definitive" a Producer should read the mountains of verbal diahorrea known as the Broadcast Bulletins, and try to work out exactly whether torn stockings are: a Breech of The Code, Context, Aggravating Factors, or simply OK. Having one babe fill the screen inrcreases the sexual temparature, but does having 5 "women" in longshot. Like an Escher drawing, each is more sexual than the other. The wrong type of shoes constitutes sexual context. It can only be a matter of time before Ofcom fine someone for having a babe dressed in several plain clothing and shouting insults at the audience. On the plus side, once that happens, Anne Robinsons days will be numbered.

And with running a babeshow consequently being akin to sailing a small boat in gusty conditions - taking sail in, turning into the waves, then going on a broad reach and getting the spinnaker out, No! Reef it in again - it's a wonder anybody still watches at all. During the 'dry spells', where tame becomes the universal watchword following an Ofcom attack, it kinda reminds me of when I used to watch Old Come Dancing around 1990, knowing that one day some woman's tit would spill out of that tight little Latin dress - and it never did. The resultant mixture of anticipation and ultimate frustration is identical to that which Ofcom is, in its infinite wisdom, ensuring that the viewing -and paying! - public (who they purport to serve) must therefore endure.
But, because we're basically all a bunch of dirty men and little better in the eyes of the sensationalist media's Surface Gloss Branch than the 'R' word (even though the hypocrites of the tabloid press are actually inclined toward all manner of perversions themselves), we are never going to get proper representation from this hyper-prudish totalitarian democracy. Which means we can't help shape the babechannel shows the way we'd like.
Bother.

Missing key events. Talking bollocks. Making stuff up.
~~~SAVE THE KRILL!~~~

(09-10-2010 01:28 )eccles Wrote:  Its a brave Producer who is confident enough about The Rules to push it.

Ofcom rules are huge, incomprehensible and vague. First there are a set of vague rules that refers to "Generally Accepted Standards". The so-called "Guidance" talks about viewer expectations, but does not state what they are, and refers to the latest public opinion survey - based on about 60 people. But that survey does not clearly state "THIS is the limit of acceptabilty to X% of the public on THAT type on channel at such and such a TIME." In fact it is almost impossible to decide where the public consider the boundary between acceptable and unacceptable lies from the survey. But Ofcom felt confident enough to levy a 1/4 Million Pound fine based on that vague waffle. Its even worse because Ofcom "interpret" their own survey and "take note" of it, which is code for cherry pick the bits they want. Even worse, Ofcom have been known to reference both the latest survey and the previous one in the same ruling, despite one of them being 5 years out of date. To be "definitive" a Producer should read the mountains of verbal diahorrea known as the Broadcast Bulletins, and try to work out exactly whether torn stockings are: a Breech of The Code, Context, Aggravating Factors, or simply OK. Having one babe fill the screen inrcreases the sexual temparature, but does having 5 "women" in longshot. Like an Escher drawing, each is more sexual than the other. The wrong type of shoes constitutes sexual context. It can only be a matter of time before Ofcom fine someone for having a babe dressed in several plain clothing and shouting insults at the audience. On the plus side, once that happens, Anne Robinsons days will be numbered.

Yes, this does indeed demonstrate just why OFCOM have these people over a barrel. If OFCOM were to get their way, none of these women would be allowed to open their legs at all (fully clothed or not). That is clearly OFCOM’S ultimate mission for all of these unencrypted shows.


So, the producers of these programmes need to ask themselves a question: exactly what kind of Adult Entertainment are we been forced to provide? Aren’t adults supposed to get intimate with one another, reveal and share all with one another? If this is indeed what adults should be doing, then clearly, demanding that they contradict themselves with constant concealments cannot be adult and amounts to nothing but foolishness: Because surely this level of concealment can only satisfy the immature and those just arriving at puberty…. Leaving adults with no entertainment at all.

Demanding that humans suppress and live in a total state of denial leads to nothing but emotional and psychological problems (this is what these people simply do not understand.) If you try to force humans to suppress their natural instincts you can be certain that unhealthy behaviours will emerge; because there is no outlet for the natural ones.

Had it not been for the versatility of the human imagination, magazines, and now the internet; British society would be overrun with MENTAL INSTITUTIONS as a result of unhealthy suppressions which stem from their religious cultural heritage.

It's almost as though someone's mission out there is to send us all back to the dark days of "things we just don't talk about and certainly don't do". It's not even a Victorian mentality; in fact it's distinctly Twentieth-century in it's outlook.(citation needed) See, I always thought that babestation in the old days was a shining attempt to get further forward along the path of socio-sexual enlightenment; it seemed to be a tacit suggestion that, at the start of a new millennium, we're all big enough and intelligent enough to understand that there are elements of our humanity that we don't need to be ashamed of, fearful of, or living in denial of; that, in fact, it is healthy to embrace these aspects of humanity; that we are intensely sexual animals whose great advances, social and technological, have all been born of the need to survive - all underpinned by the primal desire to perpetuate our species and succeed. And sex is the most vital element in that motivating force.
To insist that those of us who, disadvantaged by the modern Western modus vivandi and seeking some kind of gratification or release, must simply accept censorship of that which we instinctively desire is mindless stupidity of the most amazing magnitude.
Therefore, may I take this opportunity to thank Babestation for all that it has done over the years to create this really very special area of televisual adult entertainment. It may not be able to deliver 100% of what we as red-blooded adult human males (and indeed, not forgetting our female comrades!*bows in deference*) really want to see, but my goodness it's gotta be better than the the dark ages 'Pre-BS', when I used to have to check around for a naughty late-night doc about strippers/drunken holidaying Brits or make sure I caught that week's ep of Eurotrash in order to get my fix of naughty nakedness on the box.
May history record Babestation as a cultural turning point and may it never die!

Missing key events. Talking bollocks. Making stuff up.
~~~SAVE THE KRILL!~~~

(09-10-2010 13:27 )Krill Liberator Wrote:  It's almost as though someone's mission out there is to send us all back to the dark days of "things we just don't talk about and certainly don't do". It's not even a Victorian mentality; in fact it's distinctly Twentieth-century in it's outlook.(citation needed) See, I always thought that babestation in the old days was a shining attempt to get further forward along the path of socio-sexual enlightenment; it seemed to be a tacit suggestion that, at the start of a new millennium, we're all big enough and intelligent enough to understand that there are elements of our humanity that we don't need to be ashamed of, fearful of, or living in denial of; that, in fact, it is healthy to embrace these aspects of humanity; that we are intensely sexual animals whose great advances, social and technological, have all been born of the need to survive - all underpinned by the primal desire to perpetuate our species and succeed. And sex is the most vital element in that motivating force.
To insist that those of us who, disadvantaged by the modern Western modus vivandi and seeking some kind of gratification or release, must simply accept censorship of that which we instinctively desire is mindless stupidity of the most amazing magnitude.
Therefore, may I take this opportunity to thank Babestation for all that it has done over the years to create this really very special area of televisual adult entertainment. It may not be able to deliver 100% of what we as red-blooded adult human males (and indeed, not forgetting our female comrades!*bows in deference*) really want to see, but my goodness it's gotta be better than the the dark ages 'Pre-BS', when I used to have to check around for a naughty late-night doc about strippers/drunken holidaying Brits or make sure I caught that week's ep of Eurotrash in order to get my fix of naughty nakedness on the box.
May history record Babestation as a cultural turning point and may it never die!

This is a fantastic post Krill!! You are absolutely correct about how much of an improvement these channels are from how things once were in the days before satellite TV. But for those of us who can remember how these channels used to be in their inception; our frustration is just that bit more intense.

I'd like to say that Krill Liberator and Intense1 deserve a HUGE round of applause for their contributions to this thread! I've not heard such intelligent and 'bang on the money' opinions on the subject of babeshow censorship for a long long time.

Bravo!