+- The UK Babe Channels Forum (https://www.babeshows.co.uk)
+-- Forum: Night Shows (/forumdisplay.php?fid=1)
+--- Forum: Babestation (/forumdisplay.php?fid=99)
+---- Forum: BABESTATION TV (/forumdisplay.php?fid=2)
+---- Thread: 'Tamestation' (/showthread.php?tid=12351)
RE: 'Tamestation' - Censorship :-( - 14-10-2009 23:35
(14-10-2009 18:58 )vila Wrote:(14-10-2009 18:38 )vostok 1 Wrote:(14-10-2009 17:37 )vila Wrote: Television X is encrypted and is subject to the same 'no R18' rule but it hasn't folded.
One of the reasons why TVX and the Adult channel continue to be successful could be attributed to ambiguous advertising, (does their freeview ever state the the content broadcast over the air waves is 18 certificate "soft core"?) as well as locking subscribers into 12 month contracts.
Plus TVX have been diversifying into the Babe Show free to air sector at the expense of previously encrypted/subscription based EPG channel slots.
I don't know of any ambiguous advertising. I had both channels back in OnDigital days and I was under no illusions about what was on offer. Ditto for the short time I had TVX on FV.
The broadcasters of the so-called 'adult channels' often use such tactics e.g promising XXX content, or 'we can only show soft content FTA, but we go hard after encryption’, or words to that effect.
How many subscribers do you think they would get if they were honest, and said e.g. X amount per month, for strictly 18 certificate softcore content, every night!. Not many, would be my guess.
RE: 'Tamestation' - HEX!T - 14-10-2009 23:38
all i can add is a whole hartedly agree with most posts here. babestation are a cop out and have been for a while.
RE: 'Tamestation' - Censorship :-( - 14-10-2009 23:42
(14-10-2009 19:00 )matt38 Wrote: Compared to some of the other in depth posts here this is going to seem rather limp and tame. But did anyone see the nude girls, exposed pussy and arse, rubbing their pussies, fingering their bums and showing it all to camera, you probably did'nt because this was being shown on Film4, in the movie Import/Export, the time this was being shown 11.30ish on Freeview. Yet we can't see this stuff clothed after midnight, one word MADNESS.
Presumably, "Import/Export" has an uncut 18 video certificate from the BBFC, which means that, according to Ofcon's censorship code, it can be shown on any channel after the watershed.
Not that this means it will be shown that way by the broadcaster e.g. “Inside Deep Throat” also has an uncut 18, but C4 have shown it on numerous occasions in a specially censored form.
RE: 'Tamestation' - Censorship :-( - 15-10-2009 00:07
(14-10-2009 14:52 )IanG Wrote: SNIP
Ofcom, indeed, this bloody Government, are doing all the wrong things for all the wrong reasons because they refuse to trust the scientific evidence in favour of their cultural brainwashing in unproven and psychologically damaging 'British values' and insane beliefs.
It's not just 'this bloody Government', the Tories would be just as bad; Video Recordings Act, anyone?
Do you think that, had the Tories been in power when the campaigners were calling for the 'extreme' porn law, they would have said no? I doubt it. However, I'm not sure if the Tories have an equivalent of Harriet 'Hatesmen'/‘Harmsmen’ (take your pick); I wouldn't be surprised if she is the driving force behind much of Labour's repression - the woman is obsessed!
RE: 'Tamestation' - vila - 15-10-2009 01:13
I know we shouldn't pay too much attention to what Opposition leaders say when an election is looming, but I noted David Cameron's words when he was talking about drastically trimming Ofcom:
"Give Ofcom, or give a new body, the technical function of handing out the licences and regulating lightly the content that is on the screens."
RE: 'Tamestation' - IanG - 15-10-2009 02:40
(15-10-2009 00:07 )Censorship :-( Wrote:(14-10-2009 14:52 )IanG Wrote: SNIP
Ofcom, indeed, this bloody Government, are doing all the wrong things for all the wrong reasons because they refuse to trust the scientific evidence in favour of their cultural brainwashing in unproven and psychologically damaging 'British values' and insane beliefs.
It's not just 'this bloody Government', the Tories would be just as bad; Video Recordings Act, anyone?
Do you think that, had the Tories been in power when the campaigners were calling for the 'extreme' porn law, they would have said no? I doubt it. However, I'm not sure if the Tories have an equivalent of Harriet 'Hatesmen'/‘Harmsmen’ (take your pick); I wouldn't be surprised if she is the driving force behind much of Labour's repression - the woman is obsessed!
Cen., the VRA 1984 was never at fault - the law the Tories passed only allows the BBFC to interfere (i.e. censor) on the basis of harm - to "prevent any harm which may be caused". The Tories even included the provision for the independent Video Appeals Committee to settle any disputes between the BBFC and the film maker/distributor. Democratic principles are respected in the VRA.
It is entirely down to NuLabour that Ofcom exist, that there's no equivalent independent Television Appeals Committee or, indeed, even a legal means for a licensee to appeal any decision made by Ofcom under their own bastard code - there's self-serving, dictatorial fascism for you! Ofcom are NOT allowed to make law in this land yet, they have been granted exactly that power over any and all broadcast licensees - they act as judge, jury and legislature - in any democratic society that is totally and utterly incredible. NuLabour make shit authoritarian laws because they don't understand or even believe in democratic principles.
Now, in 2000 the High Court found that the BBFC hadn't been applying the VRA correctly with regard to R18. R18 now contains hardcore because the BBFC could provide no evidence to support their view that they were "preventing any harm which may be caused" to children by denying adults the right to view hardcore at R18.
Let's not forget that real and explicit sex has been available on video at 18 (i.e. from HMV and Virgin) since The Lover's Guide series in the early 1990s and in films such as Romance, The Idiots, 9 Songs, Baise Moi etc. To suggest children understand the subtleties of 'context' of a film rated 18, when it shows two or more people indulging in explicit oral, anal or vaginal sex as any R18 'sex work' might, is utterly ridiculous.
This is the whole crux of the issue. R18 contains hardcore because the High Court decided the material does not pose a significant risk to children - i.e. legal precedent, The Common Law and the UK Constitution says R18 is not harmful if viewed by persons under 18. Sure, we don't allow people to sell it to the under 18s but, that's not a reason not to allow it into people's homes on video/DVD or TV. Only if it could be PROVEN dangerous to children's wellfare can a public body like the BBFC or Ofcom lawfully ban it - and if that proof existed then the High Court would not have ORDERED the BBFC to allow hardcore at R18 and thus be bought by adults to watch at home where it might then be viewed by minors.
Neither the VRA nor the Comms act forbid the sale or viewing of R18-type material for adult audiences. For Ofcom to choose to ban R18 outright they MUST provide EXTRAORDINARY evidence of significant risk to minors to support that decision because it is NOT something they are LEGALLY permitted to do under ANY law of this land.
Ofcom are in fact required BY LAW to act in total compliance with the HRA 1998. They are to read and apply the Comms act in total compliance with the HRA 1998, the TVWF Directive and the Case Law of the ECHR. They are ordered by the Comms act to respect and uphold Freedom of Expression in exactly the same way (i.e. 'joinned-up regulation') as the BBFC. Ofcom have done none of the above and are acting far beyond their legal remit.
The BBFC regulate R18 for viewing in the home - they make it totally compliant with ALL UK obscenity law. ONLY obscene material CAN be lawfully banned and restricted. R18 is NOT obscene. R18 is thus NOT a danger to anyone who might see it.
So, how can Ofcom justify a ban on the broadcast of R18 under their remit to "protect the under 18s" when in 2000 the High Court decided that the risk to children was so small that it couldn't outweigh the rights of adult viewers?
Unless and untill Ofcom produce the necessary evidence for their 'precautionary approach' they are as guilty of unlawful censorship and human rights abuses as were the BBFC in 2000.
RE: 'Tamestation' - BarrieBF - 15-10-2009 10:52
(14-10-2009 23:35 )Censorship :-( Wrote: The broadcasters of the so-called 'adult channels' often use such tactics e.g promising XXX content, or 'we can only show soft content FTA, but we go hard after encryption’, or words to that effect.
How many subscribers do you think they would get if they were honest, and said e.g. X amount per month, for strictly 18 certificate softcore content, every night!. Not many, would be my guess.
No, they would still have plenty. According to the accounts of Portland Enterprises who own TVX, most of their subscribers remain after the initial 12 month contract has expired.
By the way, one thing you seem to have completely forgotten is that hardcore versions of TVX programmes can be seen on the TVX website and membership of the website is free to TVX subscribers.
RE: 'Tamestation' - dirk362 - 15-10-2009 20:44
Well it may come as no surprise to many here, but I'm fed up with the way in which the cellcast channels are run lately, and so in a knee-jerk hissy-fit reaction, I am as of tomorrow boycotting them completely.
This means I'll be capping little to none of their output (unless it's a very special occasion), so I'm sad to say that will be the last of the uploads from me for their channels of BS1, BS2, PL and PG.
My attention has turned to channels that actually give their viewers what they want to see, so it's Elite TV, Club Paradiso, Live960 and SportXXX for me from now on.
I applaud IanG for his post above, although it's a shame that no one has managed to legally challenge Ofcom to date, and they continue to have an iron fist around the output we see on our screens, totally illegally I might add. Doubt the Tories will honour much of their current rhetoric, but hey, perhaps if they come to power we can challenge them to make good on this.
RE: 'Tamestation' - StanTheMan - 15-10-2009 21:02
(15-10-2009 20:44 )dirk362 Wrote: This means I'll be capping little to none of their output (unless it's a very special occasion), so I'm sad to say that will be the last of the uploads from me for their channels of BS1, BS2, PL and PG.
Not wishing to sound ungrateful, dirk - indeed anyone who goes to the trouble of uploading clips for the benefit of others should be applauded, but let's face it, when did the channels you'll now be boycotting last broadcast anything worthy of an upload?
RE: 'Tamestation' - Winston Wolfe - 15-10-2009 21:58
[i]RE: 'Tamestation'
(Yesterday 20:00 )matt38 Wrote:
Compared to some of the other in depth posts here this is going to seem rather limp and tame. But did anyone see the nude girls, exposed pussy and arse, rubbing their pussies, fingering their bums and showing it all to camera, you probably did'nt because this was being shown on Film4, in the movie Import/Export, the time this was being shown 11.30ish on Freeview. Yet we can't see this stuff clothed after midnight, one word MADNESS.
Presumably, "Import/Export" has an uncut 18 video certificate from the BBFC, which means that, according to Ofcon's censorship code, it can be shown on any channel after the watershed.
What does that tell ya then? That it ain't really about what is shown onscreen... I agree the censorship in the UK is beyond a joke, but as far as these channels are concerned, the "do gooders" at OFCOM see them more as "advertising" than "entertainment".
If people in positions of power don't like you, then you got a big fuckin problem. They will look for any reason to clamp down on these channels. As I said on another thread, a big part of it is the "premium rate" element of the shows.
Winston Wolfe