+- 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: Whos Who At The Content Board (/showthread.php?tid=31832)
RE: Whos Who At The Content Board - RESPONSIBLE ADULT - 01-11-2011 17:52
I'm afraid I am unable to read the full content of this post, the reason being, after reading snippets. I find it so depressing that this chosen clique of people have the power to decide what is suitable for me to watch. I am now more than ever sure that this contravenes in some way my human rights. It's not just the adult channels that concern me, but all that these people taint on their way. It is simply unjust and basically wrong. And what really scares me as much as the censorship, is the programme makers jumping through fucking hoops obeying their rules.
I will have to disagree with Scottishblokes last comment, because any Tom,Dick or Harry would do a much fairer job. That bring's me to my final point. I can't see many bricklayers or painter and decorators in the list.
RE: Whos Who At The Content Board - blackjaques - 01-11-2011 19:27
(01-11-2011 17:52 )RESPONSIBLE ADULT Wrote: I'm afraid I am unable to read the full content of this post, the reason being, after reading snippets. I find it so depressing that this chosen clique of people have the power to decide what is suitable for me to watch. I am now more than ever sure that this contravenes in some way my human rights. It's not just the adult channels that concern me, but all that these people taint on their way. It is simply unjust and basically wrong. And what really scares me as much as the censorship, is the programme makers jumping through fucking hoops obeying their rules.
I will have to disagree with Scottishblokes last comment, because any Tom,Dick or Harry would do a much fairer job. That bring's me to my final point. I can't see many bricklayers or painter and decorators in the list.
An excellenr critique, sir, of the current situation.
I ask the question again ( for regulars; please forgive me for repeating myself) What are Ofcon achieving by their censorous regime?
RE: Whos Who At The Content Board - Sootbag1 - 02-11-2011 22:52
(01-11-2011 17:52 )RESPONSIBLE ADULT Wrote: I am now more than ever sure that this contravenes in some way my human rights.
Which specific "human right" do you consider has been breached because of the regulation of babe channels by Ofcom?
(It's a serious question BTW).
RE: Whos Who At The Content Board - Scottishbloke - 02-11-2011 22:58
Sootbag I think it's pretty obvious what human right has been breached, the Freedom for Adults To Make Informed Decisions without some fascist organisation telling us what we can and cannot watch, this is a serious breach of Human Rights and no way for a government running a Country that's suppposed to be in a democracy.
RE: Whos Who At The Content Board - StanTheMan - 03-11-2011 01:38
As each day passes, I'm sensing more and more that this has gone from a simple gripe over Ofcom's clamping down, to a serious and very important discussion about what's happening. People seem to be getting genuinely concerned about the situation, and rightly so. This clampdown on sexual content is beginning to stain the whole of the entertainment world and is in danger of labeling every man who shows the slightest interest in pornography a pervert and potential risk to society.
Mary Whitehouse was at the head of a small group of individuals who carried no real threat to broadcasters and film makers, but what we have now is a governing body that are being allowed to set laws as and when they please, impose ridiculous fines and revoke licenses for minor breeches... oh, and not forgetting finding a channel in breech AFTER viewing the recording and admitting they, wait for it, weren't in breech.
If only George Orwell was alive today to see his predictions coming true.
RE: Whos Who At The Content Board - Scottishbloke - 03-11-2011 02:02
I remember the days we used to laugh at Mary Whitehouse, nobody in parliament ever took her seriously, mind you nobody in Germany ever took the Nazi Party seriously either and now we are heading for censorship the likes of which we've never seen before, the big question has to be answered how the hell did we ever find ourselves in this situation in the first place. I personally blame Tony Blair and New Labour, how we were decepted into thinking New Labour at the time was a forward thinking and in touch with the modern world of today government, and how wrong we were. I found this interesting warning from the Conservative Party from 1997 warning about New Labour - New Danger, did we fuck up ever voting them into power in the first place, make your own mind up
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qVUrXu3Y9Kg
RE: Whos Who At The Content Board - blackjaques - 03-11-2011 06:24
(03-11-2011 02:02 )Scottishbloke Wrote: I remember the days we used to laugh at Mary Whitehouse, nobody in parliament ever took her seriously, mind you nobody in Germany ever took the Nazi Party seriously either and now we are heading for censorship the likes of which we've never seen before, the big question has to be answered how the hell did we ever find ourselves in this situation in the first place. I personally blame Tony Blair and New Labour, how we were decepted into thinking New Labour at the time was a forward thinking and in touch with the modern world of today government, and how wrong we were. I found this interesting warning from the Conservative Party from 1997 warning about New Labour - New Danger, did we fuck up ever voting them into power in the first place, make your own mind up
Whilst I fully agree about Blair & Co's attitude to certain things, we cannot blame them for the current gov'ts policy on Tv & Ofcon. The Con-Dems could change it easily but choose not to. THEY are colluding in Ofcon's blatant stance on censoring erotic adult entetainment. It is THEIR fault as well as Ofcon's.
RE: Whos Who At The Content Board - Scottishbloke - 03-11-2011 14:06
Yes I do agree with you, this coalition Government has got a lot to answer for, but the fact still remains that it was New Labour that brought back this mindset by introducing Ofcom and giving them all those powers, it didn't happen overnight, 1997 was when Tony Blair came into Government and Ofcom was introduced at the tail end of 2003 taking over from their predecessor ITC who at the time only monitored the mainstream channels and not the full spectrum or extent which Ofcom do at present. But you do wonder if we'd ever have been in this situation if history had taken a different turn of events, I am however the eternal optimist and do think they'll come a time when we look back and ask just what all the fuss was about in the first place, I just hope that when this time comes that the babe channels are still in existence and are able to ride out this storm without suffering any more casualties.
RE: Whos Who At The Content Board - eccles - 04-11-2011 02:00
Some good points there and nice to see Stan back in the harness. Interesting to think that Sky was effectively a pirate channel outside ITC control for quite a few years. Does that mean the creation of Ofcom was a massive extension in regulator scope?
And yes, there is a deeper issue apart from trouser action. The Content Committee have massive powers of arbitrary censorship. The powers used to keep babeshows under their thumb could be applied to News stories they didnt like ("The tone of this story could incite violence against Palestinians/Jews/The Syrian embassy..."), Travellers, any genre of comedy, religions, pro/anti Scientology etc.
And there is no independent appeal mechanism. Mary Whitehouse had no real power, she just headed up a pressure group. Ofcom are the regulator and set broadcasting limits. It really is anti democratic.
As for the question posed a while back, "What human right is being breached" its the right to free expression. To allow an arm of Government to decide what is and is not allowed is a dangerous first step.
RE: Whos Who At The Content Board - Sootbag1 - 04-11-2011 22:00
(04-11-2011 02:00 )eccles Wrote: Interesting to think that Sky was effectively a pirate channel outside ITC control for quite a few years.
Not sure where the impression that Sky was a pirate channel has come from? Sometimes Sky (the television satellite platform) is mixed up with Sky (any number of channels operated by BSkyB). Perhaps you could clarify what you mean?
(04-11-2011 02:00 )eccles Wrote: The Content Committee have massive powers of arbitrary censorship.
No they don't. Censorship can only be applied pre-broadcast (or pre-publication) ie. preventing something being shown. The babe channels are not required to have their content vetted prior to broadcast, they're simply required to follow clear guidelines. If the babe channels are unable to follow those guidelines, then they should say so at the time that they apply for their licence. Ofcom only have the ability to apply retrospective action, not to censor before broadcast.
(04-11-2011 02:00 )eccles Wrote: As for the question posed a while back, "What human right is being breached" its the right to free expression. To allow an arm of Government to decide what is and is not allowed is a dangerous first step.
It might be worth while reading this page. You're refering to Article 10 of the Human Rights Act. However, this right to freedom of expression is specifically limited to that which is permitted by law, and can also be limited in order to pursue a legitimate aim (which includes the protection of morals). Which kinda explains why there's not hardcore porn on at 3.00pm every afternoon!
Nobody has ever sued Ofcom's rulings on the babe channels under the Human Rights Act simply because broadcast regulations do not breach Article 10.