+- 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 - shylok - 05-07-2013 10:55
Ofcom has today imposed financial penalties of £85,000 and £20,000 on DM Digital Television Limited in respect of its service DM Digital – a digital satellite TV channel primarily aimed at an Asian audience in the UK and also broadcast in the Middle East and parts of Asia.
This penalty follows Ofcom’s findings, published on 8 May 2012 in Broadcast Bulletin 220, relating to two separate programmes, Rehmatul Lil Alameen, broadcast on 9 October 2011, and POAF Conference, broadcast on 25 November and 4 December 2011.
The programme Rehmatul Lil Alameen featured a live lecture by an Islamic scholar, which included material that Ofcom considered was likely to encourage or incite the commission of crime or to lead to disorder. This was because, on a reasonable interpretation of the scholar’s remarks, Ofcom considered he was personally advocating that all Muslims had a duty to attack or kill apostates or those perceived to have insulted the Prophet.
Ofcom found the broadcaster was found in breach of the Ofcom Broadcasting Code in respect of:
Rule 3.1: “Material likely to encourage or incite the commission of crime or to lead to disorder must not be included in television or radio services”.
Ofcom decided that this Code breach was particularly serious for the reasons set out in the Decision and, taking account of all the circumstances, decided therefore that a financial penalty of £85,000 should be imposed on the licensee DM Digital. In addition the broadcaster has been directed to broadcast a statement of findings on a date and time and in a format to be determined by Ofcom; and not to broadcast this material again.
The programme POAF Conference, included coverage of a conference, held in the UK, of the Pakistan Overseas Alliance Forum. Ofcom found that in the programmes, Dr. Liaqat Malik, the Chief Executive and Chairman of the Licensee, expressed his views on matters of political and industrial controversy and matters relating to current public policy in contravention of Rule 5.4 of the Code. Ofcom also found the programme gave one-sided views on matters of political and industrial controversy and matters relating to current public policy, in contravention of Rule 5.5 of the Code.
The broadcaster was found in breach of the Ofcom Broadcasting Code in respect of:
Rule 5.4: “Programmes in the services...must exclude all expressions of the views and opinions of the person providing the service on matters of political and industrial controversy and matters relating to current public policy (unless that person is speaking in a legislative forum or in a court of law). Views and opinions relating to the provision of programme services are also excluded from this requirement”.
Rule 5.5: “Due impartiality on matters of political or industrial controversy and matters relating to current public policy must be preserved on the part of any person providing a service...This may be achieved within a programme or over a series of programmes taken as a whole”.
Ofcom decided that this Code breach was serious and has imposed a financial penalty of £20,000 in regard to the programme POAF Conference. Ofcom has also directed the licensee to broadcast a statement of the findings on a date and in a form to be determined by Ofcom.
The financial penalties are payable to HM Paymaster General.
The full Sanctions adjudications can be found here.
RE: Ofcom Discussion - munch1917 - 05-07-2013 12:18
(05-07-2013 10:55 )shylok Wrote: ...
This penalty follows Ofcom’s findings, published on 8 May 2012 in Broadcast Bulletin 220, relating to two separate programmes, Rehmatul Lil Alameen, broadcast on 9 October 2011, and POAF Conference, broadcast on 25 November and 4 December 2011.
...
So the programmes were aired almost two years ago, and Ofcom found them in breach over a year ago, and has only just got round to actually imposing it's sanctions! Why such a delay?
They really do beggar belief!!
For those interested, here are the links to the documents on Ofcom's site :
The Broadcast Bulletin 205 which contained the original rulings : http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/enforcement/broadcast-bulletins/obb205/
and the adjucations : http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/enforcement/content-sanctions-adjudications/
RE: Ofcom Discussion - Scottishbloke - 05-07-2013 18:13
First up although I admire you shylok for your research and ofcom findings of channels in breach I can't help but get the feeling that you've somewhat deviated from the subject topic at hand which is a discussion thread about ofcom and our beloved adult channels.
We all know that ofcom isn't as nearly heavy handed when it comes to the rest of the channels and we could be here all night discussing the merits of why this is the case. I personaly blame the channels themselves. They agreed to this shambles of a set-up. Not one of them bothered to challenge the ruling and like I said in my previous post they all seem perfectly happy to take orders from those above who have made our nights viewing nothing more than an insult that such tameness should ever be considered as 18+ material.
(04-07-2013 22:56 )RESPONSIBLE ADULT Wrote: No signing petitions, no writing on forums, no complaining till you are blue in the face. Only one way to get these programmes to improve. That Is to get everyone to stop phoning. But that is an impossibility, because the guys that phone are happy with what they are seeing. All you have to do is read their posts to see what they think of what they wank over. Yes i'm afraid that we will be stuck with such naff programmes as long as the phones keep ringing
Now on the face of it I would say that your post is perfectly crediable however I can't help get the feeling that you're somewhat contradicting yourself here.
I've read your posts in the Studio66 and some of your comments are exactly what I'd call fanboy material such as this one.
(29-06-2013 22:13 )RESPONSIBLE ADULT Wrote: I really like it when Hannah or any other model laugh and joke with the crew. It tells you that they enjoy what they do. Thus making it so much better for us fans.
Now please don't take this as personal but I'm just pointing out here how you are constantly changing your tune.
I may cap and now post videos of some of the shows but I've never ever made a secret of the fact that the show's are just far too tame for my liking
RE: Ofcom Discussion - eccles - 06-07-2013 00:39
Thanks Shylock for flagging up these fines. It really would be interesting to know why it has taken nearly 2 years to get round to issuing fines for what are very serious matters. Perhaps someone would like to submit a Freedom Of Information request. Or even wade through Ofcoms own write up. After another s*** day I really cant face their badly written, turgid, repetitive self congratulatory documents.
Is it off topic? Not entirely because this is what Ofcom should be putting their effort into, broadcasts where there is a very real risk of harm, not harmless images of young women taking their tops off.
Its as if children and impressionable adults could walk into respectable high street chain stores and buy DVDs published by the National Front, Ku Klux Klan and Al Quida without restriction, because political and religious works were exempt from film classification until after lots of complaints had been received and assessed, but wet t shirt videos were restricted to over 18s with proof of age and full nudity was banned.
RE: Ofcom Discussion - mikeboob - 06-07-2013 09:24
Its still 9 months off but yesterday the head of OFCOM confirmed she will be stepping down next March, so presumably the jockeying for position will be starting now. Do OFCOM watchers know anything about the senior figures on the board?
Any liberals, any fascists?
RE: Ofcom Discussion - SCIROCCO - 06-07-2013 10:07
For once OFCON doing their job. The messages blasted out by some of these religious channels are bigoted and nasty. A tasteful flash of vadge is not dangerous, inciting murder is.
RE: Ofcom Discussion - shylok - 07-07-2013 11:34
Hi Guys
Yeah pointed noted SB. However, for the sake of a quick post its useful to see how 'active' OFCON are in related areas of its 'duties'. This allows us to expose double standards etc...
Cheers
Shylok
:-)
RE: Ofcom Discussion - mr mystery - 07-07-2013 14:44
(05-07-2013 18:13 )Scottishbloke Wrote: First up although I admire you shylok for your research and ofcom findings of channels in breach I can't help but get the feeling that you've somewhat deviated from the subject topic at hand which is a discussion thread about ofcom and our beloved adult channels.
Well i have to say i didn't realise that the subject topic in this section was solely supposed to be about Ofcom and the Adult channels, the section is called "Broadcasting Regulations" and the thread is called "Ofcom Discussion", so i for one thought this section was for discussing all Ofcom matters and not just solely for discussions about Ofcom and the Adult TV channels .
There is actually a thread in this section titled "Ofcom & The UK Adult Industry" by the way .
RE: Ofcom Discussion - shylok - 19-07-2013 10:34
Hot off the press and worth a read...
Ofcom has today published a consultation on proposed general procedures for investigating breaches of broadcast licences.
The proposed procedures cover the investigation of breaches of licence conditions that are not already covered by published procedures for specific types of breaches. These include requirements to pay fees, broadcast certain types of content (e.g. programming quotas) and comply with various Ofcom codes (e.g. Code on Television Access Services).
The consultation is open until 27 September 2013 and can be found here. http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/binaries/consultations/general-procedures/summary/generalprocedures.pdf
Ofcom has also today published a revised version of its Procedures for the consideration of statutory sanctions in breaches of broadcast licences. The revised version contains some minor administrative changes to bring the Procedures up to date.
http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/broadcasting/guidance/complaints-sanctions/
***********************
NB: Is this us (can we use this as a way of being heard I wonder?):
Representations from third parties Ofcom recognises that there may be persons/bodies who may be directly affected by the outcome of Ofcom’s investigation and determination of a complaint(s) and who may have interests independent of the relevant broadcaster. Wherever possible, broadcasters should seek to take account of and include the representations of such persons/bodies in their submissions in
response to a complaint and confirm to Ofcom that they have done so.
However, such persons/bodies may make representations on their own behalf direct to Ofcom in respect of a complaint which Ofcom proceeds to investigate.
In such a case, persons/bodies should seek to make representations to Ofcom as early in an investigation of a complaint as possible, setting out if/to what extent their representations differ from those of the broadcaster. Ofcom will as appropriate take those representations into account and include those persons/bodies in its decision making process under these General Procedures.
RE: Ofcom Discussion - Digital Dave - 02-08-2013 10:00
Ofcom have slapped a large fine on Satellite Entertainment Ltd (SEL), the licencee for Essex Babes, Northern Birds, LiveXXX and SportXXX. These are currently occupied by 'those' channels.
The fine is £40,000. This is for broadcasting links on their TV programmes to so-called pornographic websites. As this is something that S66 also did I guess Jamie can expect to be fined shortly as well.
As SEL is a non-trading company with zero funds Ofcom don't have a cat in hell's chance of the fine being paid. Therefore SEL's channels will be shut down, which presumably means the end of 'those' channels.
Link to Ofcom judgement:
http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/binaries/enforcement/content-sanctions-adjudications/satellite-ltd.pdf?utm_source=updates&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=satelliteltdSanction