+- The UK Babe Channels Forum (https://www.babeshows.co.uk)
+-- Forum: Channels (/forumdisplay.php?fid=8)
+--- Forum: UK Babe Channels (/forumdisplay.php?fid=9)
+---- Forum: Broadcasting Regulations (/forumdisplay.php?fid=138)
+---- Thread: Ofcom Discussion (/showthread.php?tid=14756)
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360 361 362 363 364 365 366 367 368 369 370 371 372 373 374 375 376 377 378 379 380 381 382 383 384 385 386 387 388 389 390 391 392 393 394
RE: Ofcom Discussion - Scottishbloke - 23-04-2012 16:07
Obviously after Ofcom's failed attempt to bring Babestation down because they do indeed have a Dutch Licence, Ofcom have more or less conceded defeat in that one but will ofcourse hold a grudge against Cellcast after losing round 1 so they have as expected attacked the Ofcom licenced ones such as Blue and Xtra, but yet again whether the show had full nakedness or not it was hardly all that explicit to warrant a fine, what a sad state of affairs our channels have now become for what a bit of late night naughtiness well excuse me but correct me if I'm wrong but I thought that was the very purpose of a late night babe channel in the first place, bring on the more watered down rat's piss in the months to come then
RE: Ofcom Discussion - mrmann - 23-04-2012 16:11
This is what happens when you give too much power to a body of individuals. They can do what they please, and decide for all of us what is right and what is wrong.
A normal body part on channels that can be blocked, and shown late at night is not a cause for harm.
RE: Ofcom Discussion - eccles - 23-04-2012 22:20
Whats interesting is that Ofcom state that there was a glimse of anus at 9:30 but they have not threatened the channel with sanctions or given a we-dont-expect-this-again warning.
RE: Ofcom Discussion - eccles - 26-04-2012 00:42
(18-04-2012 20:59 )eccles Wrote: Who will be the next BBC DG – today's odds from Ladbrokes. (20 March)
...6/1 Ed Richards...
from the Guardian
Todays odds on Ed Richards becoming the next Director General of the BBC, courtesy of Oddschecker:
PaddyPower: 11/4, same as George Entwhistle (Caroline Thompson 9/4)
Bodog: 5/1 (George Entwhistle 2/1, Caroline Thompson 7/2)
Basically hes in the top 3 and its looking close.
RE: Ofcom Discussion - Scottishbloke - 26-04-2012 06:21
Read this bullshit quote from Ofcom with regards to their war on the babe channels on on this occasion Get Lucky TV.
Ofcom noted that between 21:01 and 21:30, the female presenter on the left of the screen wore a high leg thong that revealed her outer genital area. In addition, at approximately 21:07 she was on all fours, with her bare buttocks to camera and briefly pulled tightly on her thong on three occasions to reveal her anal area. While wearing this very skimpy clothing, she adopted sexual positions such as lying on her back with her legs open to camera thrusting forward with her hips, and kneeling facing the camera miming sexual intercourse. The same presenter later but before 21:30: rubbed oil onto her outer genital area and breasts (through her top); slapped her buttocks; massaged her breasts and stroked her outer genital area; and while kneeling with her buttocks side on to camera, pulled her thong down to under her buttocks and gyrated her hips. In Ofcom's view, the revealing clothing and sexual positions and other inappropriate images, including that of anal detail, were intended to be sexually provocative in nature. In light of this behaviour and imagery, Ofcom concluded that this material was clearly unsuitable for children.The broadcast of such sexualised content was inappropriate to advertise „adult sex chat so soon after the 21:00 watershed.
This broadcast was therefore in breach of BCAP Code Rule 32.3.
Are Ofcom off their fucking heads ofcourse it's obviously not suitable for children, hence the reason we have the watershed, hence the reason they are all grouped together in the one section which is clearly labeled Adult, does Ofcom seem to think that the babe channel's have suddenly become family viewing. Picture the scene we'll watch the cartoons son and then we'll watch a bit of late night babe channel material before it's time for your bed if you're a good boy.
Don't know about you but I'm fucking sick of this bullshit. If anybody can be fucked to read more of this then the full bullshit story link can be viewed here
http://www.melonfarmers.co.uk/ow.htm
RE: Ofcom Discussion - blackjaques - 26-04-2012 20:24
Scottishbloke, EVERYTHING in the Adult section of the EPG is not suitable for children accoerding to those arseholes.
The encrypted channels cannot show full R18 because Ofcon tell us that children are watching them. Yes, even @ 3 o'clock in the morning.
They are the biggest bunch of bullshitters (next to politicians) that this country has ever produced.
RE: Ofcom Discussion - The Truth - 26-04-2012 20:32
I for one will definitely be at the gates when the Tyrannical Ruling Arm of ofcom is broken,an event of which David Scumeron said would happen.(lying hipocrite)
RE: Ofcom Discussion - dan g 27 - 26-04-2012 20:56
It would be great if you British people could get a vote if you want Ofcom interfering in your lives or not
RE: Ofcom Discussion - StanTheMan - 26-04-2012 22:56
(26-04-2012 06:21 )Scottishbloke Wrote: Are Ofcom off their fucking heads ofcourse it's obviously not suitable for children, hence the reason we have the watershed, hence the reason they are all grouped together in the one section which is clearly labeled Adult, does Ofcom seem to think that the babe channel's have suddenly become family viewing. Picture the scene we'll watch the cartoons son and then we'll watch a bit of late night babe channel material before it's time for your bed if you're a good boy.
An adult babeshow, after the watershed, 'not suitable for children'. Even for Ofcom this is a staggeringly stupid comment!
Surely, when a channel is given the guilty verdict and reads that, they must challenge it... not the decision, but the remark itself??
RE: Ofcom Discussion - eccles - 27-04-2012 01:36
What I like about the Ofcom Broadcast Bulletins (wait! spot choking and hear me out) is how much more erotic they are than the channels. Lovingly crafted descriptions of presenters stocking and underwear. Tantilising descriptions of positions, moves and reveals, usually repeated 3 times.
The sheer legal illiteracy is illustrated by the way the refer time and time again to previous decisions, despite those having no legal status. Only a decision by a High Court judge or above establishes precedent. And if a channel dares to reference previous decisions Ofcom say that each case is determined on its merits and circumstances are different.
What would also be interesting to know is the duration of the revelations and the severity. "reveal her anal area" could mean a subsecond flash of the outer area.