+- 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 - Current Investigations (/showthread.php?tid=20358)
RE: Ofcom - Current Investigations - blackjaques - 24-07-2011 19:52
(22-07-2011 23:59 )eccles Wrote:(22-07-2011 20:21 )blackjaques Wrote: So here we are on a Fiday night. I am a male who is nearer 60 than 50. I have had quite a difficult week in work and would like to relax and be entertained by some very attractive females on the tele.Ofcom have a legal duty to take account of different demographics including, er, older people. Also disabled people who don't have easy access to licenced sex shops and tend not to go clubbing.
I am unable to do this fully as Ofcon tell me that there are kids and other "vulnerable" people who need protecting against such images.
Yet strangely I don't recall seeing any assessment of this.
Quote:How many kids are watching? Can Ofcon quantify this?
Have you asked?
I asked for this information from them and all I got back was statistics which claimed that kids were watching "Premium Channels" as they knew the PIN.
To me "Premium Channels" could mean Box Office or anything else. It is not specific, i.m.o. to totally ban a legally available and certificated film classification.
The only accurate stats they could produce would be actual figures from households where they subscribe to Playboy TV & Television X. If there a significant numbers of children proved to be watching then Ofcon must consult with the Police and each local authority's social services to apprehend/censure/arrest the parents and, if neccessary, take those children into care.
They would never, of course, take this action as it is open to question from other people apart from us as consumers of pornography.
In other words, the child protection argument is, and always has been, a convenient smokescreen to censor a film genre which Ofcon do not approve of and to continue to operate a policy which has won them favour with successive governments.
As you may have gathered by now, I don't like Ofcon.
RE: Ofcom - Current Investigations - eccles - 24-07-2011 23:30
Was shown this on Mumsenet.
And before the posting police object, yes, I know the thread is titled "current" investigations, and I cant belive Sachsgate was 3 years ago.
Not a lot of support on the forum for dragging the BBC over the coals for the juvenile pranks of a pair of known tossers. If anything the Mums seem to be taking the piss out of Daily Mail type comments.
"It is a bit like turning on porn and complaining about the sexual content"
![[Image: mumsnetsachsgate.png]](http://img685.imageshack.us/img685/7776/mumsnetsachsgate.png)
RE: Ofcom - Current Investigations - eccles - 24-07-2011 23:58
While on the subject of Mumsnet, thought Id share this discussion about babe channels of Freeview
![[Image: mumsnetpickgo1.png]](http://img193.imageshack.us/img193/7431/mumsnetpickgo1.png)
When challenged Pickgo backed off a bit
![[Image: mumsnetpickgo2.png]](http://img43.imageshack.us/img43/844/mumsnetpickgo2.png)
and said "Seriously got no objection to swearing, nudity or straightforward (iykwim) sex on view." Not bad from a mum who was specifically complaining about free to view babe channels. And no "context" bs. Dislikes porn production. Mixed comments about babe channels on TV, some mild objections to the babe channels, about 2/3 not bothered. A lot of comments basically saying "just delete the channels if you dont like them" or "hide the remote". Ofcom where is your mandate?
iykwim = if you know what I mean
RE: Ofcom - Current Investigations - Roquentin - 25-07-2011 00:42
Very interesting Eccles. Of the ones not bothered, would you say they were happy enough in a liberal kind of way, its just not their bag? or was it because they werent aware of it/hadnt thought of it much?
I cant help but think that if I had grown up in a skybox household with a single parent mum, then I would've definitely had nightly access to babechannels. Oddly I'm not sure what to think about that. Part of me is pleased I grew up in the early nineties before widespread internet access etc. Maybe it doesnt make much sense to try to regulate it now.
RE: Ofcom - Current Investigations - StanTheMan - 25-07-2011 13:54
pickgo Wrote:... it's just yuk IMHO and should not be socially acceptable.
And she thinks we're the ones with problems?!
RE: Ofcom - Current Investigations - eccles - 25-07-2011 20:17
Roquentin, a quick look suggests they are aware of it, just not their sort of thing. As for being yuk and should not be socially acceptable Stan, thats more or less what I feel about Dirty Sanchez and Jackass. Dont want them banned, just think they are rubbish. At least that'show I read it.
PS. Dont google Dirty Sanchez, I didnt really want to know what it was. Theres worse but knowing it now doesnt make me happier.
RE: Ofcom - Current Investigations - StanTheMan - 25-07-2011 22:04
(25-07-2011 20:17 )eccles Wrote: PS. Dont google Dirty Sanchez, I didnt really want to know what it was. Theres worse but knowing it now doesnt make me happier.
Would anyone need to google it? I think everyone's aware of that show, aren't they?
RE: Ofcom - Current Investigations - eccles - 25-07-2011 22:12
(25-07-2011 22:04 )StanTheMan Wrote:(25-07-2011 20:17 )eccles Wrote: PS. Dont google Dirty Sanchez, I didnt really want to know what it was. Theres worse but knowing it now doesnt make me happier.
Would anyone need to google it? I think everyone's aware of that show, aren't they?
Couldnt remember the name of Jackass. Turns out its a sex act.
RE: Ofcom - Current Investigations - mikedafc - 27-07-2011 16:24
Are Ofcom investigating Channel 4 for its Sex Education Show which shows explicit nudity before the official 9pm watershed?
RE: Ofcom - Current Investigations - Rammyrascal - 27-07-2011 17:24
probably not
