+- 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 - More Babes in Breach (/showthread.php?tid=15950)
RE: Ofcom - More Babes in Breach - vostok 1 - 16-01-2010 23:42
(16-01-2010 20:24 )StanTheMan Wrote: Ian, as schmoo has already said, a fantastic post. One of the best expose on Ofcom's nonsense we've had so far on this board.
Indeed. If only one of the channels would cut and paste that post and put those points to Ofcom on the next occasion they find themselves under investigation for a breach of the broadcast code.
RE: Ofcom - More Babes in Breach - bjd - 17-01-2010 00:28
Is there any reason that the channels cannot hide behind a pin no?, still free but pin protected then it would be the parents responsibility who accessed the programmes
RE: Ofcom - More Babes in Breach - Digital Dave - 17-01-2010 00:39
(17-01-2010 00:28 )bjd Wrote: Is there any reason that the channels cannot hide behind a pin no?, still free but pin protected then it would be the parents responsibility who accessed the programmes
In theory yes but commercially it would never work.
The channels get calls by people flicking around the channels to see if they spot a babe they like. If they had to insert a 4 digit pin each time they changed channel it would be a non starter.
The only option is to pin protect the whole of the 900 channels with a single pin. There again, the way the Sky box works that's what they have already, to all intents and purposes.
RE: Ofcom - More Babes in Breach - vostok 1 - 05-02-2010 02:28
The latest batch of complaints that are being investigated by Ofcom:
http://www.ofcom.org.uk/advice/audience_complaints/
Club Paradiso Evening Chat, Channel Club Paradiso, Transmission date: Saturday, 19 December 2009
The evening show that day featured this performance:
http://www.babeshows.co.uk/showthread.php?tid=12206&pid=307659#pid307659
Multiple complaints against Bang Babes.
Having just checked against the complaints and the air date, it appears as though "Lollipop gate" has slipped under the complainers/Ofcom's radar. Looks as though they luckily got away with that one, as no complaints were made for that date.
Bang Babes Tease Me, 31 October 2009
Bang Babes Tease Me Saturday, 31 October 2009
Bang Babes Tease Me Friday, 30/31 October 2009
Bang Babes Tease Me Thursday 5 November 2009
Bang Babes Tease Me Sunday, 15 November 2009
Friday 30th Oct?:
http://www.babeshows.co.uk/showthread.php?tid=12934&pid=265193#pid265193
Saturday 31st Oct?:
http://www.babeshows.co.uk/showthread.php?tid=12934&pid=266123#pid266123
Not sure who was on air for 05/11 and 15/11.
RE: Ofcom - More Babes in Breach - sweetsugar007 - 05-02-2010 09:16
The bit I don't get are who are the pricks who are complaining!!!They can always switch to BBC2 if they are offended or are these appointed moderators from Ofcom?
RE: Ofcom - More Babes in Breach - SirAssAlot - 05-02-2010 10:56
If i was going to report any of the channel it would be 949 the asian channel, Cause Shamales have no place on a babe channel.
RE: Ofcom - More Babes in Breach - pakeha - 05-02-2010 11:17
Of the ones that I saw, I would say that the Bangbabes pics were the more explicit. I couldn't see anything bad in the Paradiso clips, but some people might see something in the Bangbabes ones. Bangbabes tend imo to push the boundaries more.
I think some people are out to have a go at these channels, on a witch hunt, if you like. Who knows which one next they will complain about. There is the off button, or the opportunity to watch another type of programme. The nightime shows are more explicit by their nature.
RE: Ofcom - More Babes in Breach - TheWatcher - 05-02-2010 12:11
Just checked out the 2 links for Oct30 and 31.
I imagine a big fine for Bangbabes is on the way.
It would be even bigger if "lollypopgate" was included.
RE: Ofcom - More Babes in Breach - vostok 1 - 05-02-2010 19:23
(05-02-2010 09:16 )sweetsugar007 Wrote: The bit I don't get are who are the pricks who are complaining!!!
This should give you an idea (for some complaints):
(13-01-2010 21:49 )Bob Paradiso Wrote: .....Someone from a rival channel (I know who) got someone to make a malicious complaint about our text number being shown at that time, apparently they had an issue with us saying 'text the studio' when there were no girls on. Pretty darned obvious I'd say!!
http://www.babeshows.co.uk/showthread.php?tid=15950&pid=325989#pid325989
RE: Ofcom - More Babes in Breach - DanVox - 06-02-2010 01:07
Don't get me wrong, I think Ofcom rules are too restrictive, and they don't make it clear what the rules are, but time and again they have said the watershed for sexual antics is 10:30 and the Particpation Broadcaster Association seems to accept this.
Live 960 had nipple sucking, toplessness, fake masturbation and even a flash well before this. They only have themselves to blame. Buy a watch.
Playboy TV tried to claim they weren't responsible for daytime content on Top Shelf TV because they bought it in from another provider. Rubbish, they know perfectly well it is their channel and that makes them responsible. This isn't some tiny pisspot operation run by one failed childrn's show producer, it's part of a giant media organisation with years of experience and plenty of lawyers. Stop making excuses.