+- 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 - SCIROCCO - 02-10-2013 07:03
OFCON are living in the Mary Shytehaus era. I work in an office where the majority of staff are female. None seem to be remotely bothered about normal adult on adult porn. My lovely female colleague moved in with boyfriend and found his stash of lesbian porn. She watched it out of curiousity and was amazed at the beauty of the girls, the make up and camera work. It was a Viv Thomas DVD. Instead of arguing with him she complimented him on his taste.
Porn is mainstream. I would rather a teenager watched some sex than take drugs or drink White Lightning on a park bench...
RE: Ofcom Discussion - Addison - 02-10-2013 16:35
You could easily argue that watching porn and channeling sexual tension 'safely' through masturbation is more socially responsible than getting drunk, having unprotected sex and precipitating an unplanned/unwanted pregnancy.
RE: Ofcom Discussion - eccles - 04-10-2013 01:54
(02-10-2013 00:12 )eccles Wrote:(01-10-2013 18:35 )matt38 Wrote: Need to know if someone watched that Channel4 programme last night about porn, I saw a few minutes and some school kids about aged 14/15 were discussing what type of porn they had seen if any, some had, some not, my query is, I wonder if someone from Ofcom was watching because it might have opened their eyes to what kids watch, and from what I could tell these kids all seemed normal teenagers.
I saw a small part of this...
Finally managed to sit through the whole documentary without interruptions or company, and all I can say is what a load of unbalanced shite.
I have better things to do, but might just put in a complaint to Ofcom about lack of balance, but to do that I would have to sit through the whole thing again taking notes.
It wasn't just the constant appalled look on the presenters face. Or the awful way he was using his 4 year old kid for human interest. It was the sheer abuse of so called science.
20 porn addicts had brain scans, and what do you know, they showed signs of addiction. So what? It would have been surprising if they did not.
A young man with porn addiction was filmed as he drove his car round, saw an attractive woman and immediately had to pull into a pub, rush into the loo and have a J Arthur. The man freely owned up to masturbating 20 times a day. That's not normal and his lack of control says no more about ordinary people than seeing a gambling addict have a bet they could not afford or an alke with a tin of Special Brew at 9am.
The presenter typed "porn" into Google and was presented with a series of extreme images that he appeared to examine in detail, including (what I hope was) a woman dressed as a school girl being fisted by someone purporting to be her father - he watched that for a while. I dont know about you, but my experience of search results is different, with far fewer extreme links and I don't click on those ones. Instead he seemed to concentrate on the horror stories.
He quoted a survey of young males (14-16?) saying their experience of porn was that it was getting "more extreme", but totally failed to quantify what their starting point was, or whether that meant the internet was getting more extreme or just that their personal experience was getting stronger, possibly because their parents were relaxing adult filters, or the boys themselves were searching differently.
The presenter even seemed shocked at the idea that introducing sex education at a young age helps prevent 80% of teenage pregnancies. (There was no mention that it might also help catch paedos if young kids are taught that sex with them is wrong and can be stopped). While it might be uncomfortable to discuss sex with a 4 year old, that is hardly "robbing him of his childhood". Young kids are far more bothered about other things, like bullying and homework.
In short, an unbalanced piece.
RE: Ofcom Discussion - munch1917 - 07-10-2013 16:41
As much as I dislike linking to the Mail, here's an article on a recent Ofcom report into things such as internet use :
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2444171/Nearly-60-parents-online-protection-filters-family-computer.html
The headline is that nearly 60% of parents still don't use filters on their internet service, but as expected, it's typical media statistical twisting, as the actual report states :
Quote:the majority of parents (85%) also provide some kind of mediation to keep their child safe online. Parents of 5-15s use a combination of approaches to mediate their child's internet use, including : having regularly talked (at least monthly) to their children about staying safe online (45%), having rules relating to parental supervision (53%) or using some kind of technical mediation (62%) which includes 43% having installed parental controls.
So, yes, nearly 60% of parents don't have filters installed, but 85% do actually do something to keep their children safe and monitor their net useage!
********
Link to the Ofcom page with the report :
http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/market-data-research/media-literacy-pubs/?a=0
Direct link to the report :
http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/binaries/research/media-literacy/october-2013/research07Oct2013.pdf
RE: Ofcom Discussion - eccles - 08-10-2013 01:11
In todays Broadcast Bulletin Playboy there is a ruling against Playboy for broadcasting the first 5 minutes of ExGirlfriends without encryption. Playboy admit a fuck up.
Amazingly Ofcom accept it.
Oddly Sky gets done again for a misleading promotion on Sky Poker. Sky claimed it would be double jeopardy for Ofcom to take it into account as the Advertising Standards Authority had already done so, and Ofcom published their finding in a recent Broadcast Bulletin. Notwithstanding that Double Jeopardy refers to something different (being tried a second time having been found innocent the first time), I have some sympathy for their point. They are accumulating double punishment (black marks held by two separate authorities) for one offence. Either it is an advert, and regulated by the ASA or it content and regulated by Ofcom, but it cant be both and there were no decency considerations. Having published the ASA finding in a previous Bulletin Ofcom cant even claim they need to have an official finding on their system, as they already have one.
RE: Ofcom Discussion - Scottishbloke - 09-10-2013 20:55
I've been watching the shows now for some years, goalposts are constantly being moved, Babestation is the perfect example of this. They seem to go through a period of handthong activity to it then coming to an abrupt halt without reason. This channel as we all know is not regulated by ofcom as it has a Dutch Licence.
I also see things that were a complete no no say 6 years ago. Over the top pantie rubbing was allowed as was girl on girl contact but full nudity wasn't, now its the other way around.
What I find baffling for example is take that European channel eurotic tv. It has stricter rules during the day than any of the UK based channels does yet the nightshows are a hell of a lot more relaxed.
Eurotic TV used to transmit shows on our satelite back in 2005 but guess who put a stop to it, Ofcom ofcourse
It then makes a minor comeback last year but this time it's them that decides to pull the plug, it wasn't doing all that well. The dayshows were too tame to entice any UK viewers to phone them but unfortunately they were only able to bring us the 1st hour of their nightshow which had to then follow Ofcom rules which really must have pissed off the rest of it's European customers.
Different countries with equally baffling rules when it comes to censorship.
I think what needs to be called into question is the panel that comes up with all of these rules in the first place. It's all handpicked by the government, they wouldn't dare say put a couple of people on the panel who were perhaps once involved within the adult industry as to give the rules a bit more structure to them because it's just a shambles where opinion is being overruled over fact.
RE: Ofcom Discussion - eccles - 10-10-2013 02:43
Quote:I think what needs to be called into question is the panel that comes up with all of these rules in the first place. It's all handpicked by the government, they wouldn't dare say put a couple of people on the panel who were perhaps once involved within the adult industry as to give the rules a bit more structure to them because it's just a shambles where opinion is being overruled over fact.
Contrast that with newspaper regulation where the papers are fighting the government to have at least one ex editor on the regulation panel. The only Content Committee member I can recall who was involved in popular entertainment of any form was Floella Benjamin.
RE: Ofcom Discussion - HannahsPet - 17-10-2013 07:48
does look like that channel was taken off by Ofcom
one of the girls joking that playboy and rlc are black screen maybe offcom switched off the wrong channels
RE: Ofcom Discussion - JuanKerr - 17-10-2013 13:24
(17-10-2013 07:48 )HannahsPet Wrote: does look like that channel was taken off by Ofcom
What channel? And how long as it been off?
RE: Ofcom Discussion - mr mystery - 17-10-2013 14:58
The company that holds the licence of Channels 935, 936, 940, 942 (those showing a black screen and being talked about) is Satellite Entertainment Limited and not the company that was using these channels, SEL is officially listed as "non trading" and currently described as in "Dissolution", it would have been impossible for a non trading company in Dissolution to hold on to a Ofcom TV broadcast licence and for those channels to broadcast on TV for much longer, in fact i'm surprised they haven't gone down before now .