+- 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 - ShandyHand - 22-01-2020 16:20
^ Time and/or a high profile mistake (or two) will eventually do for Ofcom and their moralistic censorious attitude IMO. Like all juggernaut bodies that become too big for their boots I see them as eventually over reaching themselves and becoming an embarassment to some future government.
It might help if their errors lie in the over censoring of some mainstream programme but its more likely a form of breakup or enforced rebrand will come from leftfield (from our perspective) given Ofcom regulates on a multitude of areas.
There are two problems with ending Ofcom however... 1. TV regulation is always needed, so what rules do their successor's enact? (They may well simply adopt Ofcom's two tier approach - a system that keeps the babeshows very effectively held to a ridiculously high standard) and 2. Regulators take their tone from government policy... while government policy is often kneejerk and informed by the need to control (left and right of the political spectrum in this country may have their own reasonings but both are about control at the end of the day; neither have proven themselves libertarians for many a year now). We are in backlash period against personal freedoms atm that plays right into this aim. So, its actually the zeitgeist excuses for same that need to be seen for what they are... Ofcom is simply current weapon of choice.
What is actually required is for the powers that be to have no excuses left to weild. No wiggle room to argue for further controls.
Its important to note at this point that this zeitgeist is not actually public opinion, its an exaggeration of it, a hype, a calculated bastardisation of it proporgated by various organisations that benefit from the 'something must be done' reaction to various 'scandals'. Want a 'something' done as a government? Get together in a backroom with your covert third party organisation; suggest evidence is needed to reach an invitable conclusion; vola twisted survey (or broadly intrepreted one) is produced by third party to back preordained action.
Government has colluded with the (best intentioned but over reaching) NSPCC in this manner recently in order to bloster their push to internet censorship. Ofcom similiarly pervert their survey results all the time in order to lie about how cutting back on sex/nudity/etc on screen is a massive priority for the public. Actually their own numbers show the public (despite endless propaganda pushing the agenda) has many bigger fish to fry in terms of what they deem as requiring action. And Ofcom have to conflate many offense categories to get the relevant numbers as high as they do even then... But the presentation methods used for their summeries and judgements are key. They want to find justification in the numbers and so they do.
The polarising nature of the social media bubble plays into said aims of all these self perpetuating controlling bodies. Twitter in particular with its endless tirades of SJW's, drunk on meaningless little victories over this or that coroporation, fuels the convient idea that the wider public think along the same censorious lines as these identity politics obsessives. They do not. Anyone that looks to present twitter as the arbitor of public consciousness does so for a reason - again it is a perversion of the truth adopted to offer a required excuse.
There is no over arching conspiracy to all this. Just disparate groups that have learnt to work the system to achieve their own ends. The death of Ofcom is not actually a requirement in any turn around. What we need instead is for the public to get annoyed enough at their names being taken in vain. We need a backlash on the current judgemental backlash. We need Boris to be held to account on his recent statements over maintaining personal liberties. We need identity politics to be labelled for the dodgy belief system it is. We need the currently budding feeling of 'had enough of this shit' to spread and bear fruit in the right areas.
It seems to me the battle between personal liberty and authoritarianism is never really won or lost, it only ebbs and flows like the tides. Only public apathy tends to allow those in power the space to exert their egostical desire to leave their mark where none is actually required; that is the one true enabler to the forces we oppose. And that is what needs to change in order for the tide to turn once more.
RE: Ofcom Discussion - Rob169 - 22-01-2020 19:20
how can a program like naked attraction still be aired on ch4 or 5 (can't remember which 1 it's on) and yet the babeshows get hauled over the coals for the slightest hint of anything sexual
RE: Ofcom Discussion - Chrisst - 22-01-2020 20:05
Naked and afraid goes out on DMAX on Freeview at 16.00 hours.
Just as the kids are getting home from school.
RE: Ofcom Discussion - skully - 22-01-2020 20:10
It's down to how they're categorised as far as I'm aware. I don't know if anything has changed recently, but the babe channels are/were classed as a form of teleshopping due to them selling a service and the premium rate numbers used. As weird as that sounds, you know, 'cos tits and stuff.
RE: Ofcom Discussion - Stemmw - 23-01-2020 00:17
(22-01-2020 20:10 )skully Wrote: It's down to how they're categorised as far as I'm aware. I don't know if anything has changed recently, but the babe channels are/were classed as a form of teleshopping due to them selling a service and the premium rate numbers used. As weird as that sounds, you know, 'cos tits and stuff.
I don't buy that as a reason. Whenever Ofcom put out a notice that there is a complaint against the channels, the reasons they use are always the same, it's how "easy it is to find the channels on sky/freeview" (complete bullshit as it's far easier to find Sky Atlantic/Channel 4 etc) and the "potential harm of adult content on a child" (also complete bullshit, where are these hypothetical children scarred for life because of some tits and ass ?).
I never see the description from Ofcom say "the channels can't do x or y because they have a certain license". Maybe they have put that out there but I can't ever recall seeing it.
It just feels that Ofcom has an agenda and if the channels went and fought their case against them then logic and common sense would prevail and Ofcom would be back in their box, but the channels seem to be devoid of the will to fight their corner, maybe they just don't have the finances to undertake such a fight, I dunno but the stranglehold Ofcom has seems like a massive over reaction on their part when it is completely unwarranted.
RE: Ofcom Discussion - Dave_A - 23-01-2020 12:15
(23-01-2020 00:17 )Stemmw Wrote:(22-01-2020 20:10 )skully Wrote: It's down to how they're categorised as far as I'm aware. I don't know if anything has changed recently, but the babe channels are/were classed as a form of teleshopping due to them selling a service and the premium rate numbers used. As weird as that sounds, you know, 'cos tits and stuff.
I don't buy that as a reason. Whenever Ofcom put out a notice that there is a complaint against the channels, the reasons they use are always the same, it's how "easy it is to find the channels on sky/freeview" (complete bullshit as it's far easier to find Sky Atlantic/Channel 4 etc) and the "potential harm of adult content on a child" (also complete bullshit, where are these hypothetical children scarred for life because of some tits and ass ?).
I never see the description from Ofcom say "the channels can't do x or y because they have a certain license". Maybe they have put that out there but I can't ever recall seeing it.
It just feels that Ofcom has an agenda and if the channels went and fought their case against them then logic and common sense would prevail and Ofcom would be back in their box, but the channels seem to be devoid of the will to fight their corner, maybe they just don't have the finances to undertake such a fight, I dunno but the stranglehold Ofcom has seems like a massive over reaction on their part when it is completely unwarranted.
Ofcom describe the babe channels as a "Teleshopping service"
Here is a link to the Ofcom licence details of Studio 66, it shows that the type of service provided by S66 is Teleshoping http://static.ofcom.org.uk/static/radiolicensing/html/tv/cs/tlcs000515ba3studio66tv.htm
The babe channels are not classed by Ofcom as "editorial" broadcasts.
Ofcom have stated that the Babe channels due to the fact that they are Teleshopping/advertisement broadcasts have less leeway than editorial broadcasts
The Babe channels are governed by the BCAP code, this stands for "Broadcast Committee of Advertising Practice" .
Ofcom mention when dealing with breaches by the Babe channels that they come under the BCAP codes of practice
Check this broadcast bulletin, it concerns when Ofcom found Studio 66 in breach https://www.ofcom.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0026/170882/issue-388-broadcast-and-on-demand-bulletin.pdf
Ofcom used the BCAP code of practice among other things, when determining if S66 were in breach .
RE: Ofcom Discussion - Dave_A - 29-01-2020 12:15
Ofcom have just found Meet the Babes/Babecall in breach, for a Mr P show that was broadcast on the 18/7/2019 at 00:30
Info here with explicit lurid details lol https://www.ofcom.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0012/190200/Babecall,-Meet-the-Babes,-18-July-2019.pdf
RE: Ofcom Discussion - winsaw - 29-01-2020 13:21
^^ it's quite funny when you read what Alice said word for word, and frankly mad that it's the main thing ofcom didn't like about the whole thing, to claim that Mr P lightly touch her ass will cause wide spread harm to the viewer it a lol moment, but that's ofcom still stuck in the last century and not moving with the times,
Looks like it was just a slap in the rist and don't put that on tv again though so so real harm done to bs, and no surprise that all the Mr P shows are web only now,
RE: Ofcom Discussion - PetDetective - 29-01-2020 14:06
I said a while back that this was what that OFCOM complaint was about and nobody agreed with me, turns out I was right. I must say though after reading the doc, they've gotten away with it a bit as there are some things in there which aren't exactly true, as I watched that particular show on cam. But I won't say what exactly as I don't want to cause any further troubles, you know, just in case.
RE: Ofcom Discussion - Chrisst - 29-01-2020 14:59
Interesting.
Three observations:
1. It's Babestation for a change (I don't mean for that to come across as catty).
2. It's about a new gimmick, at night rather than a day show.
3. Am I right in thinking that the licensee's response was more robust than those I've seen from S66?