Adult broadcaster fined £90k by Ofcom

(25-06-2011 23:36 )StanTheMan Wrote:  

(25-06-2011 17:13 )schmoo Wrote:  Some excerpts from the published judgement:

*****
• the vulnerability of children and of others whose circumstances appear to Ofcom to put them in need of special protection (section 3(4)(h)).

So that's everyone on the face of the planet then..

These are the same kids who can get off the school bus, walk to the local newsagent and buy a copy of Hustler Extreme.

(26-06-2011 09:44 )William H Bonney Wrote:  Despite the hysteria shown by some people in this thread, I think in reality there's not much Ofcom can do about the babe channels, whether it likes them or not. They don't seem to have succeeded in their attempt to force the channels to go encrypted and I don't see what else they can do. Cellcast for example have been broadcasting for over 8 years and are virtually never mentioned in Ofcom bulletins, so it shows quite simply that if a channel is a sensible and responsible broadcaster there's not really much Ofcom can do about it. I don't want to spoil anyone's fun with their anti-Ofcom rants, but Ofcom isn't the threat to the babe channels that some people make out, otherwise the babe channels would have been put off air years ago.

William, with all the respect in the world, that's nonsense. Sure, Ofcom have no power to ban the channels outright, but that doesn't stop them making life very VERY difficult for them. And sure, Babestation never gets mentioned by Ofcom in their bulletins. You see the reason behind that being that they are 'sensible and responsible'. I see the reason behind that being that they're a bunch of money-grabbing, Ofcom arse-licking bunch of fools who play everything by the book. They're the babeshow equivilent of the teacher's pet and a complete waste of air space.

Just becuase Ofcom can't ban the channels outright doesn't mean they're not a threat.

(27-06-2011 16:31 )StanTheMan Wrote:  William, with all the respect in the world, that's nonsense. Sure, Ofcom have no power to ban the channels outright, but that doesn't stop them making life very VERY difficult for them. And sure, Babestation never gets mentioned by Ofcom in their bulletins. You see the reason behind that being that they are 'sensible and responsible'. I see the reason behind that being that they're a bunch of money-grabbing, Ofcom arse-licking bunch of fools who play everything by the book. They're the babeshow equivilent of the teacher's pet and a complete waste of air space.

Just becuase Ofcom can't ban the channels outright doesn't mean they're not a threat.

But they don't always play things safe, considering that they show more than the other channels. I think it's because of the Dutch license, which buys them just a bit more freedom, and also because they pay off Ofcom? Would that be possible?

(27-06-2011 16:41 )mrmann Wrote:  But they don't always play things safe, considering that they show more than the other channels. I think it's because of the Dutch license, which buys them just a bit more freedom, and also because they pay off Ofcom? Would that be possible?

Babestation show more?? A bit more freedom?? Have you been sniffing the Bostick again, mrmann? How do you think they got their nickname "Tamestation"?

(27-06-2011 16:45 )StanTheMan Wrote:  

(27-06-2011 16:41 )mrmann Wrote:  But they don't always play things safe, considering that they show more than the other channels. I think it's because of the Dutch license, which buys them just a bit more freedom, and also because they pay off Ofcom? Would that be possible?

Babestation show more?? A bit more freedom?? Have you been sniffing the Bostick again, mrmann? How do you think they got their nickname "Tamestation"?

Haha! Yeah I get that, and it's about 90% accurate, but that 10% is one of the only reasons why I still watch. I'm referring to the on the back, legs open position that we get from time to time, because the women are allowed to show more than on the other channels. If you search through the vid threads of Stevie, Jada, Karina, Camilla, Michelle, and even some of Tiffany, Georgie and a few others, you will see that they've all shown more than most of the other channels show. Rarely ever do the other channels allow this, and they usually have their women keep their legs together when in this position, whereas Babestation does not.

I thought their nickname was 'Scamstation' now.

Babestation again. I thought we had done this one to death, but heres a thought. Under the rules about which country regulates, helpfully detailed by GPP, there are clear rules about which country a channel should be regulated in. Dual registration is a nonsense that will not stand up to scrutiny. A show might be simulcast on two different channels, say Freeview and Sky, one registered on paper in Dutchy and one in Anglia, and it will be tolerated as long as the channel does not step out of line, but if they piss off the regulator enough one or other registration will give.

It does not allow them to show harder material. It doesnt even get Ofcom off their back as they have some UK registered channels.

(26-06-2011 12:39 )event horizon Wrote:  

(26-06-2011 12:17 )Censorship :-( Wrote:  Cellcast's channels are, I believe, licensed in the Netherlands, not by Ofcon.

nope, only sky 906 has a dutch licence, the other cellcast channels are licensed by ofcom

That is correct. Ofc@m Licenses.

Sky Channel 909 Get Lucky TV - Babestation Blue

Get Lucky TV

Content: Adult Chat, Adult Sex Chat, Category E, Light entertainment, QuizTeleshopping

Company: Grandiose Limited, C/- Peripatos Ltd, 1 Howard Road, Southampton Hampshire S015 5BB

Tel: 02380 230 500

Sky Channel 910 Lucky Star - Babestation Xtra

Lucky Star

Content: Adult Chat, Adult Sex Chat, Category E, General EntertainmentTeleshopping

Company: Escape Channel Limited C/- Peripatos Limited 1 Howard Road, Southampton, Hampshire. S015 5BB

Tel: 023 80230500

Currently Ofc@m are investigating a complaint against Get Lucky TV for transmission on Sunday 10th April 2011. It looks like it could be an advertising complaint rather than explicit content.

(27-06-2011 22:39 )eccles Wrote:  It does not allow them to show harder material. It doesnt even get Ofcom off their back as they have some UK registered channels.

Quite. It's evident to anyone (I'd have thought) that Babestation don't have any kind of 'special' licence to transmit harder material. I have never ever witnessed any of this 'harder' material that mrmann and a couple of others insist exists.

Anyone care to provide a link as means of example? *



*Oops don't count.

(28-06-2011 15:11 )StanTheMan Wrote:  

(27-06-2011 22:39 )eccles Wrote:  It does not allow them to show harder material. It doesnt even get Ofcom off their back as they have some UK registered channels.

Quite. It's evident to anyone (I'd have thought) that Babestation don't have any kind of 'special' licence to transmit harder material. I have never ever witnessed any of this 'harder' material that mrmann and a couple of others insist exists.

Anyone care to provide a link as means of example? *



*Oops don't count.

Stan, check out the exmples I gave, regarding those women I've mentioned, and you will see that they all have shown more than the other channels allow, other than Sport of course

I'm not good with computer skills, so I'm not going to compile every cap of vid clip, but it's there to see.

This is coming from a NON Babestation fan BTW