+- 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 - Digital Dave - 07-10-2014 21:06
^^^ Very true, sport would take precedence as it has more chance of making money. Satellite transponder slots are certainly limited, so only the most potentially lucrative channels would be simulcast to the UK.
RE: Ofcom Discussion - SCIROCCO - 07-10-2014 22:44
German Bundesliga is already shown in the UK. I am sure DTM is aswell. No idea what standard German dramas are but can't imagine there will be much demand for their comedies...is there a complete
and utter myth that Euro TV is more explicit than ours? Never see much sex or nudity in the Scandinavian, Italian or French dramas that are on Sky etc....
RE: Ofcom Discussion - mr mystery - 20-10-2014 10:58
Ofcoms latest Bulletin came out today, Studio 66 have been found "in breach" on two separate occasions, one was on the 4th of June and the other was the 6th of June, full details can be found here http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/binaries/enforcement/broadcast-bulletins/obb264/obb264.pdf
Both seem to be for over knickers and under knickers pussy rubbing from what i can make out .
RE: Ofcom Discussion - 8x8 - 20-10-2014 12:26
(20-10-2014 10:58 )mr mystery Wrote: Ofcoms latest Bulletin came out today, Studio 66 have been found "in breach" on two separate occasions, one was on the 4th of June and the other was the 6th of June, full details can be found here http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/binaries/enforcement/broadcast-bulletins/obb264/obb264.pdfYea and:
Both seem to be for over knickers and under knickers pussy rubbing from what i can make out .
"The presenter’s thong also failed to adequately cover the area around her genitals and this area was exposed on a number of occasions during the broadcast."
And:
"Ofcom received a complaint about inappropriate content broadcast at 01:55. We assessed the material broadcast between 01:45 and 02:15 and noted that the female presenter was wearing a one piece swimming costume which failed to adequately cover her genital area."
Who stays up until 2am to complain about the adult content of an adult channel?
RE: Ofcom Discussion - Scottishbloke - 20-10-2014 14:07
Well that would explain the very tame shows lately on Studio66. I'm sick to the back teeth of ofcom, I'm sick to the back teeth of those easily offended, I'm very disappointed that some prick has decided to complain and some prick has decided to take action, I didn't read the full article but I'd imagine it would be based a handful of complaints at most.
Just how stupid are the complainers and ofcom. Studio66 is quite clearly a soft porn channel. Just what is you expected to see when you tuned in, a cooking show or something.
Ofcom I hope you burn in fucking hell..............
RE: Ofcom Discussion - continental19 - 20-10-2014 19:38
Well with Ed Richards stepping down in december i actually thought these complaints were becoming a thing of the past! however i'm clearly mistaken.My question is with the new person stepping into his hot seat will they be relaxed and more tolerable to the adult channels? These idiots who stay up late at 1 or 2am what the on earth do they expect to see when they are scrolling through the adult channels? these people are sad individuals who need to get a life those sad gits
I guess we will no soon enough probably either Jan or feb next year if the new boss of ofcom will be more forgiving towards the adult channels, or it will be much of the same old same old.
Whether ofcom will act upon the latest breach is to soon to say lets hope they will be more forgiving towards studio66. On a personal note i'm thrilled and over the moon that Ed Richards is leaving
:bounce:he's done enough damage to our beloved adult channels. You no what: i reckon if you truly asked him while he's leaving Ofcom, if all the fines were nessesary? if shutting down the likes of babestation and other channels alike, was really nessesary? If you asked him have you saved the UK population from the so called evil of the female form? i reckon he would say no!I wonder what his legacy will be
i'll leave it to the forum to decide.
RE: Ofcom Discussion - 8x8 - 20-10-2014 19:58
The fact that people are complaining about very specific details to me tells me they are fully aware of what the Babe shows can and cannot show. I'm not sure these people are idiots, I think they are probably people with an agenda against the babe shows. They don't want them on TV and a way of trying to get them shutdown is to complain. At the very least complaining stops the shows from showing more than the pathetic ofcom allows. They're idiots because they sit up all night watching something that offends them just so they can complain when ofcom's unfair rules are broken.
RE: Ofcom Discussion - Digital Dave - 20-10-2014 20:35
(20-10-2014 10:58 )mr mystery Wrote: Ofcoms latest Bulletin came out today, Studio 66 have been found "in breach" on two separate occasions, one was on the 4th of June and the other was the 6th of June, full details can be found here http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/binaries/enforcement/broadcast-bulletins/obb264/obb264.pdf
Both seem to be for over knickers and under knickers pussy rubbing from what i can make out .
It's interesting that S66 tried to plead in its defence that other channels feature far harder material in their free promo slots (eg TVX freeview). Coincidentally this is something we discussed here recently.
It turns out TVX comes under the broadcasting code because it's deemed to have 'editorial content' i.e. programmes. Therefore they can advertise those programmes in the style of the programme, even free to air.
Babe channels are one long advert (in Ofcom's view) and therefore come under the BCap code, which is far more stringent. The irony is that in 2010 Ofcom reclassified babe channels as long form advertising for the specific purpose of reining them in.
However, either erotic images in the 900 channels (such as models touching their genital area) free to air at 2am have the potential to contravene 'generally accepted standards' or they don't - you can't have it both ways by allowing them on TVX and not on S66. They are both catering for the adult entertainment market.
Yet Ofcom do attempt to justify their position in a totally lame manner.
Ofcom:
"We also noted the Licensee’s assertion that certain non-PRS ‘adult’ channels (regulated under the Broadcasting Code) broadcast much stronger material by way of free-to-air and unencrypted promotional clips than the Licensee’s channels.
Ofcom noted that these kinds of promotions for ‘adult’ services are typically very short in length, and consist of a rolling series of very brief, tightly cut clips shown on editorial services which are specifically licensed to broadcast ‘adult sex material’, subject to various restrictions.
The content which is the subject of this Decision was of a significant duration and consisted of a series of long, lingering shots. It was also broadcast on a service specifically licensed only to broadcast advertising content.
Further, the content was at odds with both the Guidance and, according to the Licensee, its own internal guidance. We therefore considered that the two kinds of broadcast material were not comparable, either in terms of their content or audience expectations."
A proper lawyer would have a field day with this. The expectations in questions are purely and simply whether generally accepted standards are being breached. Apparently, in Ofcom world a granny tuning into the TVX freeview will not be offended by pussy rubbing because of the content of the channel, whereas if she tuned up the EPG and saw similar images on S66 she would be offended because it's so-called advertising material, even though Ofcom themselves imposed this bogus definition on babe channels in the first place.
Ofcom have also left themselves wide open to a challenge in the visual treatment of free to air erotic images - it seems to be ok (in their words) if it's shot in a fast visual style, whereas long lingering shots are unacceptable. I hope S66 do a sequence of fast cutting shots whilst a model surreptitiously touches her groin, and then quotes this judgement back at Ofcom if a complaint is made.
RE: Ofcom Discussion - eccles - 20-10-2014 23:06
Were the complaints from a rival channel? If so why did Ofcom not reject them out of hand?
Having one channel grass another up when an election is looming is not helpful.
Why does Ofcom quote the 2004 research? It was outdated the instant they published the 2009 version.
I am pretty sure Ofcoms own research stated viewer have the option to turn over.
The rules are slightly different from ads and socalled editorial content. By law editorial content must have "adequate" protection, but for advertising the law is "advertising which may be misleading, harmful or offensive in television and radio services is prevented" - without mention of "adequate" protection. Ofcom cannot say strong sexual content is permitted in babechat channels (advertising) and at the same time as strong sexual content IS permitted in adverts for encrypted channels (also advertising).
Ofcom is also under a legal obligation to make regulatory action proportionate. Threatening a fine because of just two complaints late at night is not proportionate. The same bulletin reported the BBC (again) broadcast six uses of the word Fuck in a Lily Allen Radio 1 show between 5:30 and 6:15. The broadcast could have been pulled after the first use. At that time many children would have been listening. The BBC has prior form of swearing at live events. Despite that they got no more than a telling off.
BBC3 was also found in breach for broadcasting a song using the word "bitch" 25 times in two minutes at 7pm. Interestingly the BBC argued that repeating the word meant "its capacity for offence was blunted, rather than intensified", an argument adult chat channels might like to try. Ofcom estimated that 27,540 children were exposed to this dangerous filth, 9,000 tinies aged 4-9 and 18,000 aged 10-15. Despite the huge numbers of children affected Ofcom simply stated that the BBC was in breach. No warning about sanctions or being forced to attend humiliating meetings.
Proportionate ? No.
RE: Ofcom Discussion - Scottishbloke - 20-10-2014 23:32
This argument that ofcom peddle about protecting the kids is an embarrassment to any sane thinking individual out there. Just how can you possibly justify fining a channel that it quite clearly labelled as adult as being in breach of showing adult material.
SKY Movies are allowed to show 18+ movies at any time of the day and by that I mean anything, movies such as the sessions which has sex and nudity throughout. Up until 8PM for anything 12 or above all you have to do is enter your 4 digit pin number and from 8PM until 5:30AM no pin is required.
So this incident on Studio66 took place at what 2am in the morning and ofcom found them in breach.
So just how do I sum up ofcom, well a few words spring out to me such as Hypocrites, 2 faced liars, double standard cheating cunts with obvious agendas. On a positive note Ed is leaving very soon, perhaps this was his parting shot, not one to leave the building quietly. Whoever takes over as the new Chief Executive needs to rip up the rule book and start again, this nonsense has gone on for too many years.