+- 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 - circles_o_o_o - 11-12-2016 12:30
The 28th Oct was the cosplay night on BS, perhaps they breached copyright with one of the costumes. Alice's devil outfit wasn't realistic enough, Lexi's wig made her GoT character look silly, Wonderwoman's tits were unrealistically large.
RE: Ofcom Discussion - lovebabes56 - 11-12-2016 12:33
(11-12-2016 12:12 )winsaw Wrote: in the latest ofcom investigation notice the are 2 babe shows,
first bs are now under investigation for something that happened on meet the babes on 28/10
and 66 where looked into but not forwarded to investigation for misleading the viewer on 1/11, wonder if someone has finally complained the show wasn't adult
That could be Rammy's complaint I bet!!
RE: Ofcom Discussion - JustWantSomeFun - 11-12-2016 21:19
(11-12-2016 12:33 )babelover48 Wrote: [quote='winsaw' pid='1973940' dateline='1481458324']
in the latest ofcom investigation notice the are 2 babe shows,
first bs are now under investigation for something that happened on meet the babes on 28/10
and 66 where looked into but not forwarded to investigation for misleading the viewer on 1/11, wonder if someone has finally complained the show wasn't adult
That could be Rammy's complaint I bet!!
The S66 show wasn't adult, lately I'm surprised anyone has stayed awake long enough to see anything to merit an OFCOM investigation.
RE: Ofcom Discussion - jimmyt73 - 11-12-2016 23:35
(11-12-2016 12:12 )winsaw Wrote: in the latest ofcom investigation notice the are 2 babe shows,Not sure about the BS one,but i have two theories on S66,either someone complained about a Lucy Anne post 10pm appearance or it could be a Ts and Cs issue like Sky 941 still being described as A NON ADULT service at the boottom of the screen after 10pm,though at the level that some have been allowed to perform at the description could be argued to be correct.
first bs are now under investigation for something that happened on meet the babes on 28/10
and 66 where looked into but not forwarded to investigation for misleading the viewer on 1/11, wonder if someone has finally complained the show wasn't adult
RE: Ofcom Discussion - ShandyHand - 17-12-2016 14:25
Although the specifics are OT, this resonates closer to home in a broader sense...
The SNP's Calum Kerr on the government's use of Ofcom in the digital technology field, the plans for data sharing and the "phenomenonally tokenistic" level of debate on such matters in parliament: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/12/12/gov_has_outsourced_its_policy_making_to_ofcom_because_it_is_clueless_calum_kerr/
RE: Ofcom Discussion - ShandyHand - 18-12-2016 12:49
Is the future of the shows' UK broadcasts as IPTV?
Ofcom on how the current platforms need to evolve: http://www.digitaltveurope.net/642431/ofcom-platforms-must-evolve-as-viewing-habits-change/
---
Plus, a couple of catch up bits...
Ofcom have been having a bit of an internal tiff over the summer!
First, a Guardian piece confirms that Ofcom have felt under greater scrutiny since the BBC white paper in May. This atmosphere is said to have led to the binning of their newly appointed chair of content, Bill Emmott, who was in the job for only a few months, in concerns over possible conflict of interests and their ramifications in Ofcom's future courts cases:
https://www.theguardian.com/media/2016/sep/13/ofcom-tv-chief-bill-emmott
The government subsequently blocked the guy's settlement. And he is therefore open to accusations of having an axe to grind in his rebuke on their independence (attached as a file as it was in the FT). However, Emmott is only saying what many others have expressed concerns about and, coming from someone who was formerly about as inner circle as you can get, this is particularly damning. Ofcom stalwart Patricia Hodgson (confirmed in July as overall Chairman until 2018) certainly felt the need for a public rebuttal (also attached).
Without Emmott the content board seem to have got back to their old ways as regards the channels. Viz the regulator's recent rumoured words of warning to BS and the notice of an investigation into MtB as published on December 5th (and previously mentioned upthread). (Props to Dave A on this for the first heads up on this bulletin.)...
Also, Ofcom continue to assess not only swear words on TV but also 'rude' gestures: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/09/30/ofcom_does_a_swear/
Of course, this is the sort of stuff they use to justify, for instance, what a night babe can and can't say or do.
IMO, Ofcom should at least ask on every such survey, and on every single question, if in the opinion of the respondent, such 'offence' justifies the censorship of fta television and if so, when it occurs at what times in the day.
Television should retain the ability to offend in the same way that I maintain the right to add spice to my meals when I have friends round, else we all end up with the blandest possible soup!
RE: Ofcom Discussion - ShandyHand - 11-01-2017 20:56
it's only January and it is already quite evident that this could well prove to be the most challenging year for Ofcom in it's short history. Here's a nice summation of the 'biggies' the regulator faces this year: https://www.theguardian.com/media/2017/jan/08/ofcom-nothing-can-stop-except-perhaps-bbc-regulation
"...a new swirl of motives, doubts and potential sorrows" lie ahead for sure. Some of us might just be hoping that one of these issues (or a combination of them) will indeed prove "a bridge too far" for the regulator... With the nagging thought that such an eventuality can sometimes prove another cliche: "Better the devil you know". (No Kylie jokes please!
)Worthy of more general note from the above are the names of the new head of content, Nick Pollard, the fact that Ofcom have taken on over 50 extra staff to cope with BBC regulation (coming offically in April) and the fact that they have decided against one of Clementi's recommendations for going about this: They are not having a seperate content board for their BBC work but have merely co-opted it into the functions of the main board.
Talking of Clementi: He got the job he created today! http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-38568597 . (Maybe of minor interest could be the fact that he did so despite, apparently, not being the favoured choice of a former Ofcom chair who was on the appointing panel: http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/news/article-4097756/Bias-claim-new-chairman-BBC-set-named.html )
Another subject that holds some tangential implications for the channels was discussed a little in the BS thread recently: Namely how Ofcom wish to handle their side of Brexit. Two of the most pertinent pieces on this are worth linking here for reference I think:
https://www.ofcom.org.uk/about-ofcom/latest/media/speeches/2016/brexit
https://www.ofcom.org.uk/about-ofcom/latest/media/speeches/2016/making-brexit-work-for-uk-consumers-of-communications
In summary, White and Ofcom are broadly in favour of carrying over current EU rules pertaining to broadcasting. (There are some hints towards White being a Europhile in the Guardian link.) Their stated aim being to maintain things that work in favour of the British people. This includes the benefits brought by the employment of "Many [who] work here under EU permits; some estimates suggest up to 40% of people working in the creative industries may be EU nationals born outside the UK." ... Whether Ofcom will be allowed to fully achieve this aim is a matter for the politicians of course.
Finally, some good news was also pointed out in the BS thread yesterday: Two recent complaints against babe channels have resulted in no action being taken. (Thanks to Dave_A for this once again!)... Is it me or do these recent complaints have the air of tittle-tattle compared to, say, the heady days, of "lollipop" gate?!
Bring back eccles that's what I say - that'll sort it!!
RE: Ofcom Discussion - ShandyHand - 15-01-2017 09:09
...And so the brickbats begin!
It seems one of the reasons Ofcom's regulation of the BBC was put back to April may well have been a row over money. The Telegraph begins the new scrutiny of our favourite regulator with the news that they want an extra £5million of licence payers' money (that's from, virtually, everyone of us) to do the job. Oh, and a further £6.5 million set-up costs for 2016-17 - that's the year before they take up the role! The beeb has forced the government to adjudicate:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/01/14/bbc-refuses-pay-ofcom-9m-year-fee-amid-regulation-row/
White is convinced the extra work they will be required to do beyond the old BBC Trust's role requires an extra 77 staff (the £5mil works out at an extra almost £65,000 per staff member every year)... Expect a governmental fudge to ease the burden (and more importantly the bad publicity) of these figures shortly.
Then we have more appropriate mud slinging from The Guardian... This time of the subject of (amongst other general bashing) Ofcom's much lauded "diversity" plans for the beeb. It seems that particular pc buzzword doesn't apply to the make-up of the top table: https://www.theguardian.com/media/2017/jan/15/bbc-board-david-clementi-ofcom-none-of-that-vision
Meanwhile, Ed Miliband has called the Rupert Murdoch take-over of UK Sky “...a defining test of Ofcom and the system of regulation.”: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2017/01/14/fox-looks-head-rising-revolt-sky-bid/ It is interesting that Milband is phrasing this statement this way. As referenced in the link, the decision on whether to refer the deal to Ofcom isn't due until at least March, so is Miliband trying to incite Ofcom into requesting involvement?
If 2017 carries on like this on here I'm going to enjoy other aspects of it beyond the usual t&a fest!
RE: Ofcom Discussion - HannahsPet - 15-01-2017 17:06
Apparently Ofcom been on to S66 about to much flashing Nipples and Panties and pervcam being shown so could get very boring from now on
RE: Ofcom Discussion - Rake - 15-01-2017 17:22
that's bad news if true.