+- 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 - admiral decker - 26-05-2014 20:56
(26-05-2014 20:36 )circles_o_o_o Wrote: Does bsx have audio description? The mind boggles
No, shopping channels are excluded from the requirement.
RE: Ofcom Discussion - eccles - 31-05-2014 00:37
(26-05-2014 20:36 )circles_o_o_o Wrote: Does bsx have audio description? The mind boggles
I keep imagining the TV sign language people.
![[Image: th_495495812_SignGG3_123_124lo.jpg]](http://img139.imagevenue.com/img.php?image=495495812_SignGG3_123_124lo.jpg)
RE: Ofcom Discussion - gunnar - 31-05-2014 08:10
Don't think Ofcom will be happy until were back in Victorian England.
RE: Ofcom Discussion - eccles - 11-06-2014 22:05
Looks as if Ofcom does not always get its way without a fight.
The CV of barrister Iain Steele of the Blackstone Chambers lists several cases where he has acted for Ofcom. They won the cases, but the interesting thing it that both cases went to Court and both related to apparent bias. (That makes it official - Ofcom is unbiased).
Quote:R (DM Digital Television Limited) v Office of Communications [2014] EWHC 961
(Admin) Acted for Ofcom in a judicial review challenge to its decision to impose a £105,000 fine for breaching the regulatory code of conduct. The Court dismissed an apparent bias challenge based on the presence of Ofcom employees who had investigated the case remaining present with the panel of decision-makers during their deliberations.
R (Satellite Entertainment Limited) v Office of Communications (Court of Appeal, July 2013) Acted for Ofcom in a judicial review challenge to its decision to impose a £130,000 fine on a broadcaster for breaching the regulatory code of conduct. The case raised issues concerning apparent bias and Article 1 of Protocol No.1 to the ECHR.
This link might take keen readers to the CV.
Health warning - do not have a go at the legal system or a barrister.
RE: Ofcom Discussion - hatessexistofcon - 11-06-2014 23:39
Ofcom replied to me after so many complaints about male genitals allowed on tv yet females are blurred out..
Ofcom stated that the showing of male and female genitals would not normally warrant investigation by our review process..Although you think the representation of female genitals is unfair this in itself would not warrant investigation by Ofcom..Please do not hesitate to contact us etc,etc.
So either Ofcom or lying or the Folks who make these docu's are not aware of these rules..We have been trying to find out who the lass is on Sunny Beach who had her genitals blurred out but close long explicit penis shots were shown which was nothing to do with docu..In this docu she did not care throughout and stripped on the bar,,if we can get hold of her and ask her we can prove Channel 4 are sexist double standards .A long time ago erections were banned on UK tv now they are allowed when Ofcom arrived so not showing female genitals is tv's last taboo.
As I've said to all including Ofcom and tv channels i will not give up till i die complaining and the babe channels doing anymore will never happen if lipslips are going to result in fines.
RE: Ofcom Discussion - Block - 21-06-2014 06:51
(31-05-2014 08:10 )gunnar Wrote: Don't think Ofcom will be happy until were back in Victorian England.
It is 7.30 am, On Italian and German TV there is a girl ramming 2 fingers up her arse. On UK TV there is a girl wrapped up in bra and knickers wearing a dress your grandmother would wear!
How is this an equal and fair Europe?
Meanwhile in the UK the temperatures are Scorchio, there are girls walking around in bikini tops in town centres. But hey bikinis on adult channels during the day, god forbid!
Fuck off offcom with your shitty rules, you're not protecting anyone. The rest of Europe has much more relaxed rules and their society has much less sex related problems than our country.
RE: Ofcom Discussion - Darius - 21-06-2014 11:22
Thought I'd post my first post in this thread.
I have to say back in 2013 when I heard the hand-thong had been banned I was devastated. That was the few things that got me watching, and I found it very arousing. Suddenly the shows became quite boring and of course bleeding Ofcom was to blame.
Leave the Babe Shows alone! All you've done is make them worse and worse and worse - I get very little night's entertainment these days on the channels because of how they've treated the channels. You can find full nudity on TV at night that certainly isn't covered, but yet you make the babes cover their genitalia? We can well do without Ofcom. If parents don't want their children watching these shows, they can quite easily lock them. If documentaries can have exposure then so can the channels. The sooner this shit corporation goes down, the better, I say.
RE: Ofcom Discussion - JuanKerr - 21-06-2014 16:03
(11-06-2014 23:39 )hatessexistofcon Wrote: A long time ago erections were banned on UK tv now they are allowed when Ofcom arrived so not showing female genitals is tv's last taboo.
Since when, outside of medical and sex educational programmes, have erections been allowed? Give me some examples.
RE: Ofcom Discussion - blackjaques - 22-06-2014 19:00
(21-06-2014 16:03 )JuanKerr Wrote:(11-06-2014 23:39 )hatessexistofcon Wrote: A long time ago erections were banned on UK tv now they are allowed when Ofcom arrived so not showing female genitals is tv's last taboo.
Since when, outside of medical and sex educational programmes, have erections been allowed? Give me some examples.
The last time watched The Adult Channel there were lots of shots of erections. Erect genitalia is classified in sex works as R18.
Ofcon allow it on UK TV.
I cannot vouch for the gay channels but I'm sure that equal opportunities would prevail on them.
It shows the utter hypocrisy of our television censor (and our government).
RE: Ofcom Discussion - eccles - 23-06-2014 23:28
I remember surprised comments many years ago about an apparent change in Ofcom policy when there was an outbreak of erections on encrypted channels. It may even have been on this forum, but it was many years ago when Rooney had hair. It seems to have been a false dawn, with occasional shortlived outbreaks, possibly when a more adventurous editor got the cutting room keys.
When it comes to encrypted channels Ofcom seems to take a more relaxed view than the free to view ones. The odd transgression does not result in a 3000 word denunciation and summons to Riverside House. That's not to say they approve of transgressions, but they regard boundaries as flexible, like the Ukrainian border, and they know that for every 2 second glimpse of a hardon another 10 shows will play safe.
The difference is held open shots never happen by accident while it is the absence of an erection that is unnatural, and film crew have to go to unusual lengths to avoid showing one.
Ironically while women are offended by images of vaginas (as well as breasts, legs, bums, slutty clothing, anything that might raise the erotic temperature or make them feel inadequate) it is erections that cause fear in some women.
Ofcom get it completely upside down, tolerating what (some) women fear while clamping down on what they just find embarrassing.