+- 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 - ceasman - 08-10-2019 10:20
(07-10-2019 12:05 )babelover48 Wrote: Would we be able to gauge who else might the complaints be about from thr times & date, if one is about Mikki and another is about Jamie and its it possible that complaints may involve web only shows too?
Possibly girls very rarely seen or no longer at the channel maybe , heather or gigi ?
RE: Ofcom Discussion - Spike1876 - 08-10-2019 13:48
What about if s66 had the shows as pin-per-view (not pay-per-view)? Surely then there would be no case to answer.
RE: Ofcom Discussion - ShandyHand - 08-10-2019 13:54
^ The shows have traditionally held that putting them behind any wall on TV would stop the passing trade that is their lifeblood there.
RE: Ofcom Discussion - russmeyer - 08-10-2019 17:53
Could any of channels sue for damages because of the complaints ? i guess it would be costly
RE: Ofcom Discussion - lovebabes56 - 08-10-2019 20:06
i would say it was unlikely
RE: Ofcom Discussion - Striker21 - 11-10-2019 08:29
(08-10-2019 17:53 )russmeyer Wrote: Could any of channels sue for damages because of the complaints ? i guess it would be costly
Against Ofcom no as a statutory body only enforcing regulations.
Against complainant's no as we live in a slightly less terrible place than Trump's America you can not sue whistleblowers or complainant's for alerting authorities of wrongdoing.
Against the girls and producer's for ignoring company practices (Studio66 said that the material failed to meet it's own standards and guidelines!) well I doubt it, but these are strange times and anything is possible.
I am now off to feed my pet unicorn.
RE: Ofcom Discussion - Wardjackson - 11-10-2019 10:55
I really cannot understand the mentality of anyone wanting to spend their time making complaints such as these. The channels are locked by default on a new Sky box, so can only be watched if the subscriber overrides this. They are complaining about a bit too much thigh or buttock, not that anything might be described as pornographic. What on earth do they get out of it?
RE: Ofcom Discussion - Bandwagon - 11-10-2019 14:07
I was round a friend's house the other day and he and his Mrs were watching the music channels.
This was playing:
Now his Mrs got all twisty knickers over this.
"I used to like this song but now I don't, why the fuck do they have to have half naked girls parading about; silly little bitches, I ought to make a complaint"
And there you have it.
She's not saying that because she has lofty morals, she's saying that because she's a last orders beauty queen.
RE: Ofcom Discussion - Dave_A - 11-10-2019 15:04
(11-10-2019 10:55 )Wardjackson Wrote: I really cannot understand the mentality of anyone wanting to spend their time making complaints such as these. The channels are locked by default on a new Sky box, so can only be watched if the subscriber overrides this. They are complaining about a bit too much thigh or buttock, not that anything might be described as pornographic. What on earth do they get out of it?
I would hazard a guess and say the majority of the complaints made to Ofcom about the babe channels, aren't by the general public offended by what they see , but are made by people connected to rival channels. or by fanboy's of one particular channel (sawboss)trying to grass up a rival channel (Babestation) of their beloved channel (S66)
Ofcom once released information that one unnamed babe channel had been recording breaches by a rival channel(Bang Babes), and offered to send DVD's of the incidents to Ofcom by courier .
Also there has been incidents of producers saying they had sent complaints to Ofcom about girls from rival channels.
Babe channel Girls themselves have also taken to social media in order to complain about and highlight girls from rival channels breaking the rules .
I wouldn't be surprised if some complaints are made vindictively by girls or producers etc that have been lot go or sacked in order to get back at their former employer .
RE: Ofcom Discussion - Wardjackson - 11-10-2019 15:58
(11-10-2019 15:04 )Dave_A Wrote:That is really sad. Are there really “fanboys of one particular channel”? As someone who, for example, used to really look forward to nipslips on Fernanda’s shows, I would not have dreamt about complaining about anything on BS if it might lead to a tightening of rules. I also have to say that I cannot understand how anyone could be offended by the content currently being complained of. There was more flesh on show in the womens’ athletics championships (in a strict Muslim country) than you can see some days on the Babeshows TV channels!!(11-10-2019 10:55 )Wardjackson Wrote: I really cannot understand the mentality of anyone wanting to spend their time making complaints such as these. The channels are locked by default on a new Sky box, so can only be watched if the subscriber overrides this. They are complaining about a bit too much thigh or buttock, not that anything might be described as pornographic. What on earth do they get out of it?
I would hazard a guess and say the majority of the complaints made to Ofcom about the babe channels, aren't by the general public offended by what they see , but are made by people connected to rival channels. or by fanboy's of one particular channel (sawboss)trying to grass up a rival channel (Babestation) of their beloved channel (S66)
Ofcom once released information that one unnamed babe channel had been recording breaches by a rival channel(Bang Babes), and offered to send DVD's of the incidents to Ofcom by courier .
Also there has been incidents of producers saying they had sent complaints to Ofcom about girls from rival channels.
Babe channel Girls themselves have also taken to social media in order to complain about and highlight girls from rival channels breaking the rules .
I wouldn't be surprised if some complaints are made vindictively by girls or producers etc that have been lot go or sacked in order to get back at their former employer .