The UK Babe Channels Forum
Ofcom Discussion - Printable Version

+- 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 - 28-04-2013 02:30

(25-04-2013 22:41 )eccles Wrote:  Aren't these the changes that were announced a year ago? If there is anything on the (pretty rubbish) DCMS website I cant see it. These changes are about lifting the burden of regular reviews from the big broadcasters as well as enabling Ofcom to reduce spending. It is based on the idea that public service broadcasting (BBC, ITV, Five) does not need a major shake up and is more or less trustworthy.

Unfortunately that is a million miles away from standards regulation, particularly for untrusted operations, like babe channels run by pornographers whose motivation is to make shedloads of money from sexchat phonelines and subscriptions to porn sites.

Ownership of ITV vs Standards on sex channels, different things.

itv,ch4 and ch5 are far from trustworthy they are still churning out programmes containing explicit close ups of male genitals and sodding well clouding out/pixellating out or deleting from programmes female genitals..I find this highly offensive,sexist and and misandrist..

I am still fighting and my constant emails to number 10 along with some mothers and friends about government cuts and oftwats excessive wages may have paid off..All of a sudden they decide to make Ofcom more efficient and looking into them out of all the hundreds of civil servant workers,,mmm,67 grand plus £400,000 wages and variations in between to say us straight men and lesbians cannot see female genitals on tv but gays and women can see real life penises,,not on its seriously offensive and bloody sodding well cannot believe it goes on..My mother says how digusting things are like "come dine with me" have gone and folk are slowly sussing Ofcom that their complaints are going UNHEARD..So what is the point of these sexist misandrists if they don't do out..You are going to get caught out oftwats,with more public knowledge and your illegal sexist stancetowards men your not fit for purpose.

RE: Ofcom Discussion - mido - 28-04-2013 09:27

(28-04-2013 02:30 )fedup1 Wrote:  You are going to get caught out oftwats,with more public knowledge and your illegal sexist stancetowards men your not fit for purpose.

Im confused, I went through my EPG and cannot find boystation or chatman-tv if anything there is blatant sexism towards women and homosexual males by providing no content....I cant think what your mother saw on Come Dine with Me that offended her so much :-s

RE: Ofcom Discussion - eccles - 28-04-2013 14:57

(28-04-2013 09:27 )mido Wrote:  
(28-04-2013 02:30 )fedup1 Wrote:  You are going to get caught out oftwats,with more public knowledge and your illegal sexist stancetowards men your not fit for purpose.

Im confused, I went through my EPG and cannot find boystation or chatman-tv if anything there is blatant sexism towards women and homosexual males by providing no content....I cant think what your mother saw on Come Dine with Me that offended her so much :-s

I think fedups point is that ordinary broadcasting is biased and features a level of male nudity that is never seen for the female. Personally it annoys me that there is precious little eye candy in family viewing and I have to wait until everyone else has gone to bed and switch on a specialist channel to see leg, cleavage, mini skirts or a bikini clad bum. Ronnie Corbett FFS has said that some of the dance routines in The Two Ronnies could not be made today.

RE: Ofcom Discussion - fedup1 - 29-04-2013 23:37

(28-04-2013 09:27 )mido Wrote:  
(28-04-2013 02:30 )fedup1 Wrote:  You are going to get caught out oftwats,with more public knowledge and your illegal sexist stancetowards men your not fit for purpose.

Im confused, I went through my EPG and cannot find boystation or chatman-tv if anything there is blatant sexism towards women and homosexual males by providing no content....I cant think what your mother saw on Come Dine with Me that offended her so much :-s

She liked come dine with me in beginning but now its turned disgusting with folk wretching,,hairs in stuff,,crudeness etc ..She used to enjoy it but now its stupid,crude and disgusting for her to tolerate so cant watch it anymore...

RE: Ofcom Discussion - Scottishbloke - 03-05-2013 16:34

I've got to say and this is what I find most ironic is the ones who are doing the most damage on the channels all herald from the once untouchable BBC. Jimmy Savile and now Stuart Hall who were all put in a position of trust and look at the damage they have caused.

So I beg the question here, what's more dangerous. Channels within the 900+ section which are designed for adult viewing with models who have consented and ofcourse are all legal operating on channels which can be easily blocked from the SKY EPG if people so wish to do so.

Or - Minors tuning into pedo's at the BBC. The scandals lately have all come from within the mainstream industry yet ofcom still feel the need to keep such stict tabs on the 900's when we all know which channel's possess the most danger when it comes to the youngsters of today and it begins with a B and it ain't Babestation Cool

RE: Ofcom Discussion - SCIROCCO - 03-05-2013 18:13

Valid points. What is worse is many were involved in shows aimed at young people. The fact that many women at the BBC turned a blind eye to further their careers is vomit inducing. The same women who complain that babeshows are vile yet are happy to co-exist with sex offenders to earn a wage. Double standards indeed...

RE: Ofcom Discussion - matt38 - 03-05-2013 18:40

Just to follow up a bit from our north of the border friend, but in saying what is more dangerous to the young people of this country then I for one will put forward Corrie Street, strange i know, but if you remember a son who got the idea from here murdered his own mother, as i can not think of one case where a babe channel has resulted in a direct case of murder, then lets get the Street banned, as this has more the potential to inflict huge damage to the young people's minds of this country.

Serious but tongue in cheek also.

RE: Ofcom Discussion - Scottishbloke - 03-05-2013 19:15

And also following on from our Coronation Street Theme. Let's not forget this man. The latest in a long list of scandals from mainstream TV. This time ITV to be arrested. I must stress however that he is innocent until proven gulity. Nonetheless more damage and danger that any of the Babe Channels have on our nation.

[Image: news.jpg]

Full Story - Here - http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2317606/Bill-Roache-arrested-Coronation-Streets-Ken-Barlow-charged-rape-15-year-old-girl-1967.html

RE: Ofcom Discussion - mido - 03-05-2013 19:46

(03-05-2013 19:15 )Scottishbloke Wrote:  The latest in a long list of scandals from mainstream TV. This time ITV to be arrested. I must stress however that he is innocent until proven gulity. Nonetheless more damage and danger that any of the Babe Channels have on our nation.

These stories (which as you say are not proven guilty at this stage) have taken best part of 30 or 40 years to come out. Although they are in the news and are a current affair, I don not see or agree your suggestion that the nation is being damaged and in danger because of an actor in coronation streets alleged off set activity

Besides, do you know for sure what the girls, the producers, the people on the show get up to when the cameras are not rolling that we dont know about for fact?

RE: Ofcom Discussion - matt38 - 03-05-2013 20:23

The case i refer to is Daniel Bartlam,from last year, who killed his mother with a claw hammer, copied from a street storyline, but having said this the kid was into violent films and console games.