+- 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: The Freeview vs Sky content debate (/showthread.php?tid=8266)
RE: The Freeview vs Sky content debate - vila - 09-07-2009 04:10
At least anyone with any lingering doubts about the difference between Freeview and Sky and was watching the end of FV just now will have had a spectacular demonstration. Amanda heard Megan's signing-off piece, thought FV had finished and went into full-throttle Sky mode. Her reaction to being told she was still on FV was a treasure.
When Megan came on to finish the show after 5am she made a point of emphasising the difference to Sky viewers by saying that for the final half hour "We have no Freeview rules, we can be as filthy as we like."
Three words come to mind for summarising this situation: puerile, pointless and pathetic.
Edited for typo.
RE: The Freeview vs Sky content debate - Big Boobies - 09-07-2009 06:43
vila Wrote:At least anyone with any lingering doubts about the difference between Freeview and Sky and was watching the end of FV just now will have had a spectacular demonstration. Amanda heard Megan's signing-off piece, thought FV had finished and went into full-throttle Sky mode. Her reaction to being told she was still on FV was a treasure.Hi I must watch that tonight;I presume its at about 4.56ish? I think it confirms what we have all said; that the girls play down for Freeview despite the OFCON rules being the same for all channels. I seriously think we are being conned and it needs sorting; after all the show has been on for a couple of months now and PARTY GIRLS was much raunchier. Please Cellcast loosen up. Who can we vent our feelings to? Anyone wish to take it on? on our behalf.
When Megan came on to finish the show after 5am she made a point of emphasising the difference to Sky viewers by saying that for the final half hour "We have no Freeview rules, we can be as filthy as we like."
Three words come to mind for summarising this situation: puerile, pointless and pathetic.
Edited for typo.
RE: The Freeview vs Sky content debate - TheWatcher - 09-07-2009 09:37
vila Wrote:At least anyone with any lingering doubts about the difference between Freeview and Sky and was watching the end of FV just now will have had a spectacular demonstration. Amanda heard Megan's signing-off piece, thought FV had finished and went into full-throttle Sky mode. Her reaction to being told she was still on FV was a treasure.Thanks for info. I missed this while fast forwarding the last few minutes of freeview show. Just rewatched it. See exactly what you mean. Obviously I did not hear the later comment on Sky.
When Megan came on to finish the show after 5am she made a point of emphasising the difference to Sky viewers by saying that for the final half hour "We have no Freeview rules, we can be as filthy as we like."
Three words come to mind for summarising this situation: puerile, pointless and pathetic.
RE: The Freeview vs Sky content debate - aaron - 09-07-2009 12:10
Anyone who doesn't understand the nature of the problem should read the following thread:
http://www.babeshows.co.uk/showthread.php?tid=8801
Here several members of the forum protest about a gay show being broadcast, even though nobody asked them to watch it. They protest just because it's being broadcast.
Imagine with all the millions of freeview viewers in the country how many must have protested about babestation being broadcast. As with the people here protesting about gay shows, nobody asked them to watch it but there mere fact of it being broadcast is enough to prompt a flood of complaints.
My guess is that once the tidal wave of complaints starts to subside the freeview broadcast of Babestation will no longer be toned down.
RE: The Freeview vs Sky content debate - Shandy - 09-07-2009 17:01
Excellent post Aaron, maybe people might now get that point!
RE: The Freeview vs Sky content debate - TheWatcher - 09-07-2009 17:19
aaron Wrote:Imagine with all the millions of freeview viewers in the country how many must have protested about babestation being broadcast. As with the people here protesting about gay shows, nobody asked them to watch it but there mere fact of it being broadcast is enough to prompt a flood of complaints.
My guess is that once the tidal wave of complaints starts to subside the freeview broadcast of Babestation will no longer be toned down.
If we had never had PartyGirls, We would not be unhappy with the current situation.
But we did have PartyGirls. We know what can be done on freeview.
For the last 3 months of the show, the tits were out from 10pm onwards when many more people could have been watching, hence many more possible complaints.
I am not optimistic about the show getting better in future.
RE: The Freeview vs Sky content debate - vila - 09-07-2009 17:33
TheWatcher Wrote:If we had never had PartyGirls, We would not be unhappy with the current situation.I don't think that's true. The title of this topic is "The Freeview vs Sky content debate". Even if PG hadn't been my introduction to these channels, I for one would still feel cheated at being charged the same £1.50/min for the inferior FV product and insulted that not having a Sky receiver is being used as a measure of how adult/mature/responsible I might be.
TheWatcher Wrote:I am not optimistic about the show getting better in future.I agree. At the beginning we were being told that we should be patient and things would soon loosen up but instead the show has got ever tamer.
RE: The Freeview vs Sky content debate - Shandy - 09-07-2009 18:32
TheWatcher Wrote:But we did have PartyGirls. We know what can be done on freeview.
For the last 3 months of the show, the tits were out from 10pm onwards when many more people could have been watching, hence many more possible complaints.
i bold the last 3 months thing, as thats the key part. the last 3 months of a short licence, it was a limited run, all attention had gone from the mary whitehouse lot and it was the last few months where they just didn't care about the rules. it was a short term thing. Babestation on freeview on the other hand is a long term thing, there's more caution and thought put into a long term goal, trying not to gain complaints and steering clear of being fined. makes perfect business sense really. party girls was the perfect example of knowing they only had a coupla months left, so it didn't matter if they got complaints or fined or threatened to shut down as it was making alot of money being riskier so could just sign it off when its done.
so saying that you know what can be done on freeview isn't really accurate. now if party girls was still running, as a long term channel and not a short term one and doing it, then you could use it as a comparison. its like comparing a holiday with emigrating and living abroad permanently. its just not the same.
vila Wrote:TheWatcher Wrote:I am not optimistic about the show getting better in future.I agree. At the beginning we were being told that we should be patient and things would soon loosen up but instead the show has got ever tamer.
well it took 4 months for party girls, and we're only 2 months in to babestation on sky, so shouldn't you wait til then before giving up hope? lol
RE: The Freeview vs Sky content debate - Josh - 09-07-2009 18:56
The thing with Party Girls was that the hot action seemed to spill over onto Babestation with some hot girl on girl action and some great solo stints. Babestation has been in decline for a while now. Camilla is by far the best girl on the show. She is the only one that pushes the boundaries. The other girls do sexy, but its tame when compared to other channels. Pre 12am, the Sky content is only slightly better when certain girls are on. They use a few extra words like filthy. Its still pretty tame though. I'm not trying to say the calls are tame, just the visual content. It cant be easy on the girls either having to be so restricted. People ranting will have no effect on Pimpcast though. Money means more than popularity and pleasing the viewers. If Babestation 1 was half as good as Party Girls, then dont think many people would be complaining.
RE: The Freeview vs Sky content debate - vila - 10-07-2009 08:41
Shandy Wrote:As usual my point is ignored so I put it in bold red.vila Wrote:TheWatcher Wrote:I am not optimistic about the show getting better in future.I agree. At the beginning we were being told that we should be patient and things would soon loosen up but instead the show has got ever tamer.
well it took 4 months for party girls, and we're only 2 months in to babestation on sky, so shouldn't you wait til then before giving up hope? lol
Josh Wrote:Camilla is by far the best girl on the show. She is the only one that pushes the boundaries.I won’t disagree that she’s the best, at least she is pre-12am. She’s always been top for me since PG days, except when Anna was doing her stuff, but I don’t think she pushes the boundaries. Between 12am and 5am she often does exactly the reverse. I’ve seen her do a whole section hardly moving except for an occasional change of pose and without disturbing her clothing even for a nipple flash.
Quote:Pre 12am, the Sky content is only slightly better when certain girls are on . . . . .Come on!!! There’s no comparison! The only time it isn’t vastly better is when the daytime girls are on, doing their usual stuff (which I happen to like, so that’s not a complaint).
Its still pretty tame though. I'm not trying to say the calls are tame, just the visual content.
Quote:They use a few extra words like filthy.Huh?????
Typical Sky-only: “Come on guys, unzip and unload - get it out, get it up and get into that sexy babe.” “We wanna make you shoot your load and we’re gonna be absolutely filthy as we can be.”
Typical Freeview: “Why not call us for a cheeky chat.”
FFS!!!