+- 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 - arron88 - 30-04-2012 15:14
(30-04-2012 14:58 )mr mystery Wrote: Yes so could i , so fuck the UK courts take it to the European court instead ,How are you going todo that then? Doesn't it have to go through UK courts first?
RE: Ofcom Discussion - Scottishbloke - 30-04-2012 15:30
I'm with Mr Mystery on this one arron. The Babe Channels have got a viable case which if it failed in the UK Courts could then be brought to the European Courts instead, afterall we're all in the European Union so this avenue should be looked at as a realisitic prospect if all else fails. I agree with Mr Mystery that an impartial judge would look at the facts and deem Ofcom to be unfit for purpose.
Fair enough have TV regulation but it has to be fair across the whole board of channels but ever since day 1 Ofcom have had it in for the Babe Channels, they have tried to destroy them and have allready succeeded disposing of Bangbabes TV aswell as Babestar TV and fining Sportxxx so much in fines they simply couldn't afford to pay them which ended up with them going bust.
3 Channels have allready been destroyed, the latest and only victory in terms for the babe channels has been Babestation when Ofcom failed to pull the plug on them too, this was a lucky escape for them and the Dutch Licence went a long way into protecting Cellcast from following the rest down the RIP Babe Channels List. But make no mistake about this that unless action is taken against Ofcom then this persecuation is going to continue.
RE: Ofcom Discussion - fedup1 - 30-04-2012 18:49
Ofcom bang on about protecting kids yet show male kiddie penises on channel 4(daddy daycare plus some jungle tribe docu) and just at about 9.05pm a vagina is onscreen showing vaginal hole urethra(embarassing bodies)..
What the kids are doing is sexting each others genitals ,looking up porn on their laptops and allowing contraception at 13 promoting sex at 13 and again underage...So the government is protecting kids by allowing the above and ofcom are hell bent on fining anyone who shows a fanny lip..
I have asked so many people on the labia minora debate and most females shout girl power..Other people could not give a shiny shite so again ofcom is on its own with its FANNY LIP PHOBIA.
RE: Ofcom Discussion - rj242 - 30-04-2012 19:08
There is no point in comparing the babechannels to movies/tv shows because as artistic works they can get away with scenes of sex and violence by claiming that they are essential to the plot and not gratuitous (often lies but an arguable point). If the babechannels wanted to show harder stuff then they need to apply for the same licence as the porn channels whose 9pm freeview slots show more than the babechannels at any time. There must be reasons why the channels apply for a teleshopping licence (probably cost or broadcast hours).
You guys are also seriously underestimating the cost of legal action and the idea of a law firm taking this case on "no win, no fee" is a pipe dream. You also need to consider the amount of time it would take as you have to go through the entire UK court process including appeals and then head to Europe where there is a huge case backlog already - the whole thing would take years while the legal bills keep adding up.
The other reality is that the babechannels are probably only going to be around for another few years anyway - more and more girls are doing cam shows and as broadband speeds increase and technology becomes cheaper this will be the future.
RE: Ofcom Discussion - StanTheMan - 30-04-2012 20:17
(30-04-2012 19:08 )rj242 Wrote: There must be reasons why the channels apply for a teleshopping licence (probably cost or broadcast hours).
Yes, and that reason is because Ofcom didn't give them a choice. Their premium rate telephone service means they have no option but to be classed as teleshopping. If they were to drop the phone-in and text service I see no reason why they wouldn't then be allowed to broadcast the same strength as the fta film channels, but that would defeat the object of the type of show they produce.
RE: Ofcom Discussion - Scottishbloke - 30-04-2012 21:16
Whether or not they are charging a premium rate number to call or text the show is completely irrelevent, this is primary an excuse for Ofcom to classify them as teleshopping channel's. I also see no reason why it would take them so long to go through the legal system, I also don't think that the web based show idea is the way ahead, just look at how unsuccessful Babeworld TV has become since going down this route.
Also it's worth pointing out too that eurotic tv also has a live stream but has that stopped them also broadcasting on the big screen too - No. A web based show is a financial disaster and is in my opinion a cowards way out. No I say bring the legal challenge on and I'm sure it would be dealt with fast and swift. It didn't take all that long for Lady Chatterley Lover book to be given the go ahead after it was first banned in this country for obscenity.
Legal challenges take less time to achieve a positive outcome than people give them credit for. With the amount of evidence against Ofcom I could see this reach a conclusion in a matter of days, if not hours.
RE: Ofcom Discussion - shankey! - 30-04-2012 21:29
(30-04-2012 21:16 )Scottishbloke Wrote: Whether or not they are charging a premium rate number to call or text the show is completely irrelevent, this is primary an excuse for Ofcom to classify them as teleshopping channel's. I also see no reason why it would take them so long to go through the legal system, I also don't think that the web based show idea is the way ahead, just look at how unsuccessful Babeworld TV has become since going down this route.
Also it's worth pointing out too that eurotic tv also has a live stream but has that stopped them also broadcasting on the big screen too - No. A web based show is a financial disaster and is in my opinion a cowards way out. No I say bring the legal challenge on and I'm sure it would be dealt with fast and swift. It didn't take all that long for Lady Chatterley Lover book to be given the go ahead after it was first banned in this country for obscenity.
Legal challenges take less time to achieve a positive outcome than people give them credit for. With the amount of evidence against Ofcom I could see this reach a conclusion in a matter of days.
havent made any comments relevant to ofcom recently but i will add that the channels have bowed every time ofcom has asked them and not once put up any fight over what ofcom wants of the channels ,example no topless till 10pm they all complied , no touching genital area ,no contact on 2 4 1s no hand panty only covered with hand no cupping of vaginal area , no spitting they all did as they were told , whether its in the rule book as legit or not ,in fact if ofcom said tommorow jump through a hoop they all would cause they are spineless selfish gits who know they will still get the likes of the NEW custumer which has recently emerged who is happy with namby pampy bugger shite shows which we are getting , not one of them has stated that they are behind the petition , pity because they could have used it as an advert on the screens which i am sure would have got peoples attention rather than charging for pics of babes we can all see free via the web !
RE: Ofcom Discussion - Scottishbloke - 30-04-2012 21:56
Yes well we don't see what goes on behind the scenes, I'm sure the Babe Channels have their reasons for not supporting the petition, maybe it has something to do with not pissing Ofcom off more than they have to or maybe it's because Government website petitions are simply not allowed to be advertised on the TV, I mean come to think of it other petitions are out there which also haven't been mentioned on the telly either.
As far as the watershed is concerned, it allways worked well before in the past before the dawn of the digital era and with even more safety measures now in place Ofcom should really be satisfyed that everything is firmly in place to protect the minor's. But no that's apparently not enough.
I know this opt into porn on the web has been thrown around for some time but hear me out first, I wonder if that would work with regards to the babe channels, or better still you could have an opt out so that they can be permantly removed from your EPG if you so do wish.
We have the technology so what's the problem, if they were really doing their jobs properly they would be looking into finding a solution that suits all parties.
RE: Ofcom Discussion - mrmann - 30-04-2012 22:10
Just give me a good quality web show that I can transfer to my TV screen, keeping the good quality, and I'll pay a small fee to watch uncensored babe channels.
The channels could still shoot in their studios with the TV cams, though the main issue would be the device to transfer the computer feed to the TV (They have this already, but not very good and hard to find, at least that's what I think). It would be exactly like it is now, only uncensored, if the women are up to it, and web based with good enough quality to watch on the TV screen. Because of the possibility of uncensored content, there would likely be a viewing fee, but that would be fine with me if it wasn't too high.
RE: Ofcom Discussion - oldboy1047 - 30-04-2012 22:15
lets face it providing they stay within ofcom rules the channels are probably quite happy as things are.if the girls could show more they would probably want more money and would they get more calls?.as it is the channels are obviously making money and have always got an excuse for not putting on better shows so i dont think theres much chance of them challenging ofcom as much as we would like to see them do it.so while ofcom are still here i think we just have to put up with it or switch off