+- 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 - fedup1 - 31-05-2012 20:03
(30-05-2012 22:41 )dan g 27 Wrote: People like this piss me off, why wonder there is so much censorship on tv when fucking idiots, who have nothing else to do, but complain about pointless things. Like I said before these people should just pick up the remote and change the channel if they are not happy with what they see in a film or programme, don't drag the rest of us with you.
Today I read an article about how 4 people complained about nudity being shown on the Merchant of Venice on the BBC. Around 250,000 people watched this film last night and only 4 people had an issue with it. It frustrates me so much that such few people can wield so much power over the majority on what we can watch on tv, it disgusts me.
Heres the article I'm talking about
http://www.google.ie/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=3&ved=0CE0QFjAC&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.dailymail.co.uk%2Fnews%2Farticle-2151841%2FMerchant-Venice-Viewers-complain-BBCs-racy-lunchtime-version-Shakespeare-play.html&ei=A6DGT4_BEYW7hAfvsOnWBQ&usg=AFQjCNGrolPf9GVauCgXr00I8JgYLwjEXQ&sig2=w6n60rsrCGjoQ0SM2fFlaA
Easter friday from 1pm till 8pm Quest channel 38 freeview had Lost Tribes on ..This programme contained penises non stop and that was shown in daytime..Ofcom allow penises allday with no fines yet one boob or god forbid a fanny and they get fined or licencse taken off them..Thats why we complain because of ofcoms sexist attitude and its the sexist attitude thats causing problems with Babestation..They allow penises but ban female genatalia thats the problem..Its not just some people COMPLlAINING ITS GONE WAY PAST THAT NOW.
Oh and twat head Ed richards is most likely going to be head of BBC so thats BBC turned into penis land..Still not getting away with his sexist attitude..Not by me anyway. I hope this Leveson enquiry stuffs the lot of the sodding crooks..They are all rogues and got so much back up from other people i now no longer feel i am fighting oftwats alone..We have done something but not saying on here just yet .
RE: Ofcom Discussion - Scottishbloke - 31-05-2012 20:10
Well fedup you'll be even more fedup when the new series of Big Brother kicks off on Tuesday (pardon the pun)
No live coverage yet again, edited down and no doubt to the biased sexist editorial content who will probably continue to show penis's galore without a tit or fanny in sight other than the cunts running this programme and channel 
RE: Ofcom Discussion - eccles - 02-06-2012 23:07
It has been well publicised for a while that Ed Richards was one of the front runners for the Director Generals job.
Will he get it? Dount it. They will try to show that they are thinking outside the box. Or they will appoint an establishment heavyweight seen as a safe pair of hands, someone with experience of running organisations with thousands of employees and complex dispute resolution. An ex general, top civil servant or big business leader looking for the topping on their career and a peerage. Richards falls into neither of those categories.
If he does get appointed he will find out that BBC employees are not compliant wage drones who do what they are told. If he issues a no shagging no nudity rule they will rebel and point out that goes against artistic freedom and possibly the BBC charter and start showing naked Dutch ballet every night (
) until he relents. If he tried imposing that rule without putting it in writing he would have difficulty too. Knock the BBC as much as you like, but BBC employees put up with a wage below commercial rates just so they can produce stuff they think has merit.Also if he does get appointed that will leave the Ofcom Chief Executive job vacant, though another Stepford Censor might be wheeled in.
RE: Ofcom Discussion - continental19 - 03-06-2012 19:46
I guess there's a couple of ways we can look at this, if Ed Richards the twat from Ofcom manages to clinch such a position then it might open up a more tolerant approach concerning censorship pending who takes over the hot seat at Ofcom, however like Eccles has already stated, that this might go the other way, and things will remain the way they are. mmmh well i guess time will tell soon enough.
I still can't believe we're even having these types of talking points considering we're living in the 21st century, why has this country of ours gone back instead of looking forward to the future, is beyond me, its so sad.
RE: Ofcom Discussion - lucent-x - 03-06-2012 20:10
Does anyone know Ofcoms position, if they have one, on the 'Psychic' phone in shows and why on earth they're allowed on TV?
RE: Ofcom Discussion - eccles - 03-06-2012 23:20
When they consulted on turning the babeshows into mandatory PIN protected soft shows they also suggested tightening up on credulous sucker shows, or psychic phone ins as they are sometimes known. In the third and final consultation they suggested psychic shows could be permitted only after 10 and only in the specialist part of EPG.
When it came to decision time they permitted psychic shows in the main part of the EPG after 10 as noone had objected to an option that had not been suggested.
The attitude seems to be that some people find it a comfort, so it is tolerated provided it is marketed as entertainment, rather than communication with the dead, life changing advice is not given and costs are capped.
RE: Ofcom Discussion - lucent-x - 04-06-2012 10:51
(03-06-2012 23:20 )eccles Wrote: When they consulted on turning the babeshows into mandatory PIN protected soft shows they also suggested tightening up on credulous sucker shows, or psychic phone ins as they are sometimes known. In the third and final consultation they suggested psychic shows could be permitted only after 10 and only in the specialist part of EPG.
When it came to decision time they permitted psychic shows in the main part of the EPG after 10 as noone had objected to an option that had not been suggested.
The attitude seems to be that some people find it a comfort, so it is tolerated provided it is marketed as entertainment, rather than communication with the dead, life changing advice is not given and costs are capped.
Oh Ofcom, you utter utter erratic bastards! So you allow the broadcast of bullshit to extort money from vunerable suckers, so long as marketed as entertainment? Which obviously, unless I missed a disclaimer on screen to that effect, it isn't. But then that's ok because someone might find it comforting, I guess you can't put a price on peace of mind... oh yes you can, it's £1.53/min.
RE: Ofcom Discussion - Scottishbloke - 04-06-2012 19:41
What piss's me off most about ofcom is that it's blantanly obvious what the intentions of the babe channels are, and it is to basically create an erotic show. Anybody who accidently stumbles upon them and then decides to watch them for a further 2 hours before then phoning ofcom and complaining about how much they were offended whlist going into graphic detail and infact making it sound like some sort of hardcore porno film is fucking bullshit and this kind of complaint should not be investigated.
It's that obvious that this is a shit stirrer probably from some kind of extreme religious background or some kind of feminst with the intention of bringing them down whilst in the process getting some kind of sadistic pleasure out of bringing misery to so many.
Why is this allowed to happen, it's disgusting. So what are we left with now, watered down rat's piss all because a clear small minority are offended by this kind of entertainment. To fuck with censorship and the morans continuing to complain with their own fucking agenda's. I'm pissed off, with democracy should bring freedom of choice with little to no censorship. Fuck off ofcom you bastards
RE: Ofcom Discussion - eccles - 05-06-2012 01:29
(04-06-2012 19:41 )Scottishbloke Wrote: It's that obvious that this is a shit stirrer probably from some kind of extreme religious background or some kind of feminst with the intention of bringing them down whilst in the process getting some kind of sadistic pleasure out of bringing misery to so many.
Or a rival porn merchant.
Quote:Why is this allowed to happen, it's disgusting.
Why are Ofcom so willing to be knowing tools helping businesses get commercial advantage?
Would trading standards take notice if one takeaway kept phoning up complaining about a rival? Would the police rush in every single time a nightclub compliained people were shagging round the back of another club?
Quote:democracy should bring freedom of choice with little to no censorship. Fuck off ofcom you bastards
RE: Ofcom Discussion - blackjaques - 05-06-2012 06:45
(05-06-2012 01:29 )eccles Wrote:(04-06-2012 19:41 )Scottishbloke Wrote: It's that obvious that this is a shit stirrer probably from some kind of extreme religious background or some kind of feminst with the intention of bringing them down whilst in the process getting some kind of sadistic pleasure out of bringing misery to so many.
Or a rival porn merchant.
Quote:Why is this allowed to happen, it's disgusting.
Why are Ofcom so willing to be knowing tools helping businesses get commercial advantage?
Would trading standards take notice if one takeaway kept phoning up complaining about a rival? Would the police rush in every single time a nightclub compliained people were shagging round the back of another club?
Quote:democracy should bring freedom of choice with little to no censorship. Fuck off ofcom you bastards
Totally agree, guys. Of course, I ask "What is being achieved by all of this censorship"? Are we a better society by not showing a bit of fanny on TV?
What effect do Ofcon think they are having? To me, it's only to satisfy their own very narrow minds and keep politicians happy.
That is the only outcome of all of this heavy-handed puritanism.
You look at the news, you read the papers, there is still loads of unpleasant things going on in Britain. Where is Ofcon's evidence, as an evidence-based regulator, that their draconian dictatorship is having any benefit to the British people?
There isn't any.
No evidence to show that these shows are harmful to justify their bans, no evidence to show that after banning, clamping down on eroticism, there is any benefit at all.
Still, they are happy I suppose and that's about it. That's all they are achieving.