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 - Scottishbloke - 05-12-2014 19:41 I'll never get carried away with anything concerning ofcom like I used to do in the past. The reason being is I don't wish to make bold predictions only for my hopes to be dashed so quickly. By the looks of the pic Steve looks more like a porn tycoon - If so I wouldn't mind seeing more on show - to fuck with the handthong - A kebab wouldn't go a miss I think A lot of changes have taken place in 2014, out has gone 2 old fashioned cunts. Lets hope 2015 proves to be the real turning point with cunts on the telly rather than Ofcom HQ RE: Ofcom Discussion - Mellow - 05-12-2014 20:04 Sky news is reporting today that the next Chief Exec could be a woman. http://news.sky.com/story/1386533/treasury-heavyweight-leads-race-for-ofcom-job RE: Ofcom Discussion - eccles - 06-12-2014 01:54 (05-12-2014 20:04 )Mellow Wrote: Sky news is reporting today that the next Chief Exec could be a woman. Rumoured to be Sharon White, but that could be smokescreen or could fail at one of the many hurdles, unless this is an official leak after the selection process has been gone through but not been signed off. Here is some info from 2012: Sharon is currently Director General for Public Spending at HM Treasury. Prior to this role Sharon was formerly a Director General at the Ministry of Justice and the Department for International Development. In Oct 2013 she was appointed second permanent secretary at the Treasury with responsibility for managing Britain’s public finances, including overseeing a fiscal squeeze expected to last until 2020 FT Oct 30 2013, though she was appointed head of spending in March 2012, presumably 1 rung lower on the departmental ladder. [Hmm, where I work internal job moves are banned for the first 2 years. She is moving after just over a year. Encouraged to apply perhaps? Or jumping a sinking ship?] Nuffield College Oxford 2012 Wrote:Sharon joined the Civil Service in 1989 and worked at the Treasury in the early 90s. She spent time in Washington at the British Embassy analysing US welfare reforms and then worked on the same subject at the Downing Street policy unit. She then worked on international development at the World Bank before taking the role of policy director at the Department for International Development. After beginning a family Sharon returned to domestic policy at the Department for Work and Pensions and the Ministry of Justice, before returning to the Treasury in late 2011. Guardian Wrote:It doesn't seem long since Lord Richard Best, that indefatigable housing activist and networker; then head of the Joseph Rowntree Foundation, said he had roped an outstanding young civil servant into one of the philanthropy's projects for social good. She was, he said, not just smart, but intensely aware of issues around social justice. [Just what we need, another "socially aware" interventionist] Quote:Before becoming a civil servant, she worked for a church in a deprived area of Birmingham.FT Oct 30 2013 Oh shit. A religious connection. Of course it might just have been an employment thing rather than a vocation, and her views may have matured, but still worrying. Is she an active Church member, and thus part of an opinionated minority? Socially interventionist? Morally driven to protect people from themselves? Who knows. Ah, it seems the Telegraph (Nov 29 2010) knows, having written this in Nov 2010: Quote:Chote and his wife, Sharon White, married in 1997. The couple live in Hampstead, London, have two young sons, and are regular churchgoers. Worked in the policy unit of good old Catholic Tony eh? Not compulsory to be religious, but I doubt it would have been an impediment either. Sharon Whites husband, Robert Chote, is, or was an elected member of the Parochial Church Council of Hampstead Parish Church, unless there is another person of that name. He was reelected for 3 years in 2010. Its not an onerous duty, with just 5 meetings a year, but it does suggest that he and, by extension, his family, are not representative of the ordinary population and may be more moralistic. EXECTIVE SUMMARY Mum with young kids Religious Track record of following the government line and not rocking the boat Kept her maiden name Feminist? Socially aware But ... bean counter focussed on short term finances rather than deeper consequences? RE: Ofcom Discussion - Scottishbloke - 07-12-2014 20:52 Fuck's sake It doesn't exactly bode well for the future - I said in one of my previous posts that the next Ofcom Exec would be handpicked to continue to support the ludicrous current set of rules in place. I've afraid to say it but for as long as ofcom or any other kind of Government censor we've got no chance of seeing any sort of significant changes. Expect hypocrisy to feature firmly on the menu RE: Ofcom Discussion - gunnar - 07-12-2014 21:43 These articles are worth a read http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/health-and-families/features/no-female-ejaculation-please-were-british-a-history-of-porn-and-censorship-9903054.html http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/the-uks-sexist-new-pornography-restrictions-arent-just-an-act-of-state-censorship-but-could-be-the-first-step-towards-something-even-worse-9903830.html http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2014/12/02/uk-porn-law-sexist-female-ejaculation-ban_n_6254678.html They relate to the whole ATVOD situation and show that certain sections of the mainstream media may be willing to oppose this censorship. The ironic thing is that certain of the sexual acts which have been banned, are what tory MP's have been getting up to for many years. It is clearly a case of do as I say not as I do. Next they'll be wanting us to doff our caps as a member of the landed gentry goes by. RE: Ofcom Discussion - MARCCE - 09-12-2014 16:14 There are some very good comments made under this article. Seems the general public don't all turn into pumpkins at the sight of an exposed nipple. http://www.theguardian.com/media/greenslade/2014/dec/09/no-more-page-3-step-up-their-campaign-against-the-sun#comment-44760081 RE: Ofcom Discussion - Scottishbloke - 09-12-2014 17:06 Only in the UK would you get such a campaign. The page 3 girl is iconic and is more than just a pair of nice boobs to look at. It has launched many careers down the years such as Samantha Fox in the 80's and Jo Guest and Melinda Messenger in the 90's aswell as some of the babes that currently grace our screens. I personally don't see this latest campaign going far at all. If you don't like that page then nobody is forcing you to look at it. I don't give one fuck about horoscopes, maybe I should start a campaign claiming that it's a dark art akin to witchcraft and should also be ended. Bottom line is, let and let live and mind your own fucking business RE: Ofcom Discussion - Snooks - 09-12-2014 17:31 Surely cwpussylover is better qualified . RE: Ofcom Discussion - gunnar - 09-12-2014 17:32 That bird who was in the Guardian article and is the founder of no page 3 is pretty hot RE: Ofcom Discussion - MARCCE - 09-12-2014 18:01 (09-12-2014 17:06 )Scottishbloke Wrote: Only in the UK would you get such a campaign. The page 3 girl is iconic and is more than just a pair of nice boobs to look at. It has launched many careers down the years such as Samantha Fox in the 80's and Jo Guest and Melinda Messenger in the 90's aswell as some of the babes that currently grace our screens. Certainly Melinda Messenger, Linda Lusardi and Jayne Middlemiss became popular figures on mainstream tv. I haven't seen page 3 in years so if they got rid of it I wouldn't notice but it's the same old arguments about the harm it supposedly does with absolutely zero evidence to prove that. One of the main ones they continually put forward is young girls insecurities when they see those pictures. It's a fact of life that teenagers are insecure about almost everything. I'd suggest that showers after PE lessons in school cause far greater trauma to kids that age than a pair of tits on page 3. No prizes for guessing what would be next in the campaigners sights if they were to win this battle. |