+- 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 - eccles - 30-01-2011 01:17
(29-01-2011 23:37 )Gold Plated Pension Wrote: Article 10: Right to freedom of expression
Article 10 protects your right to freedom of expression. This includes the right to hold and express opinions yourself as well as to receive and impart information and ideas to others.
As long as what is being expressed does not harm others. Ofcom will decide for you what is permitted.
RE: Ofcom Discussion - StanTheMan - 30-01-2011 13:55
(29-01-2011 12:36 )Tonywauk Wrote: Let's face it Ofcom are not going to ease up on the Babe shows at all while they are FTA - and I can't in all honesty say that I disagree with their stance.
Could you elaborate on that, Tony, and explain exactly why you think Ofcom have got it right?
RE: Ofcom Discussion - Tonywauk - 30-01-2011 14:39
(30-01-2011 13:55 )StanTheMan Wrote:(29-01-2011 12:36 )Tonywauk Wrote: Let's face it Ofcom are not going to ease up on the Babe shows at all while they are FTA - and I can't in all honesty say that I disagree with their stance.
Could you elaborate on that, Tony, and explain exactly why you think Ofcom have got it right?
I just think it better that any overtly sexual material should, within sensible limits, have the restrictions lifted from it and put on encrypted channels where those who want them can watch them and without the possibility of them causing offence to anyone chancing on them or young children accessing them. Those who want them would then be given a better show rather than the restricted material currently available and those who do not want to view such material would have no chance of seeing it by accident.
Of course within a short while, with television soon to offer internet access the whole debate will become irrelevant. Just my thoughts.
TW
RE: Ofcom Discussion - RESPONSIBLE ADULT - 30-01-2011 23:01
I am at a loss as to why so many people on this forum should choose to agree with the punishment meted out in recent weeks to channels that break laws set down by the watchdog. I am also at a loss when the very same people say that as far as they are concerned they are not in the least bit bothered by being deprived of seeing what to others is what these shows are all about, that being "tits and pussy". They say looking at pretty girls is all they want. These people surely don't then need to watch adult T V. Maybe they would be better tuning into Songs of Praise, where many an attractive girl can be seen singing in the choir. But if it's conversation they want, why not just phone a regular sex line instead. And if they do it while watching Songs of Praise just look at the money they would save.
I would also like to comment on how staid the channels have become since the crackdown started. With the exception of maybe one or two girls, the rest are being prevented from showing any sort of expression that you would expect from a programme of the nature of these, taking direction by someone in the studio seems now to be the way. That, or being obscured by some enormous on screen graphics.
And finally. Why is it now deemed a must that during the day the girls must be ultra cautious and dress in a way that is totally illogical for the job they do. And please don't insult my intelligence by telling me that's it's protecting the children. Should these children not be at school during the day? Given some reason they are not at school, should they not be accompanied by an adult? For me leaving a child home alone is a much graver crime than an attractive young lady showing her lady bits. And for the young teenage child, I wouldn't be bothering to much about them. Because they'll be having an Hilary Swank courtesy of the porn tubes.
RE: Ofcom Discussion - StanTheMan - 30-01-2011 23:46
(30-01-2011 14:39 )Tonywauk Wrote: I just think it better that any overtly sexual material should, within sensible limits, have the restrictions lifted from it and put on encrypted channels where those who want them can watch them and without the possibility of them causing offence to anyone chancing on them or young children accessing them.
So, like Ofcom, you think that those same children accessing gratuitous violence and torture on the other free-to-air channels is fine?
RE: Ofcom Discussion - mrmann - 30-01-2011 23:57
(30-01-2011 23:46 )StanTheMan Wrote: So, like Ofcom, you think that those same children accessing gratuitous violence and torture on the other free-to-air channels is fine?
I know, ridiculous
You know what I think? I think that if any of the channels ever get close to being shut down by ofcon, that they should go all out and give us the most explicit shows yet! Most of the women will still be able to make money from websites, photo and video shoots and magazines as well, so it's not like all will be lost for them if they are no longer on TV. I hope the channels take this into consideration.
RE: Ofcom Discussion - Tonywauk - 31-01-2011 10:30
(30-01-2011 23:46 )StanTheMan Wrote: So, like Ofcom, you think that those same children accessing gratuitous violence and torture on the other free-to-air channels is fine?
Do I? Thank you so much for telling me what I think. Very good of you!
RE: Ofcom Discussion - StanTheMan - 31-01-2011 13:51
(31-01-2011 10:30 )Tonywauk Wrote: Do I? Thank you so much for telling me what I think. Very good of you!
It was a question, Tony, indicated by the question mark on the end, which I see you managed to avoid answering.
RE: Ofcom Discussion - eccles - 31-01-2011 23:36
(30-01-2011 14:39 )Tonywauk Wrote:(30-01-2011 13:55 )StanTheMan Wrote:(29-01-2011 12:36 )Tonywauk Wrote: Let's face it Ofcom are not going to ease up on the Babe shows at all while they are FTA - and I can't in all honesty say that I disagree with their stance.
Could you elaborate on that, Tony, and explain exactly why you think Ofcom have got it right?
I just think it better that any overtly sexual material should, within sensible limits, have the restrictions lifted from it and put on encrypted channels where those who want them can watch them and without the possibility of them causing offence to anyone chancing on them or young children accessing them. Those who want them would then be given a better show rather than the restricted material currently available and those who do not want to view such material would have no chance of seeing it by accident.
Understand where you are coming from Tony even if I dont agree with you 100%. There are only arguments against sex on TV, embarrasment etc to people who tune in by mistake and kids.
Personally I dont think that kids should be watching at 3am, and if they are they have bigger problems than a bit of flange, but I accept that some may still be up a 9 or even 10pm.
And I dont accept that an adult who flicks through channels at 3am has much to complain about either.
(The reason I say 3am is because there have been Ofcom cases about unsuitable material at 3am).
But there are much easier ways of preventing accidental viewing and kids access.
1) Ship Sky boxes with the Adult sector locked out.
2) Dont make the out-of-the-box-PIN the same as something else.
3) Even better, have a separate PIN for Adult channels and other stuff, so 16 year old kids can access cert 15 films (PIN protected to keep their 10 year old sister out) or Vincent Price movies, but not the strong stuff.
4) Make the whole Adult section an optional package at £1.12 a month like Arts and Documentaries. (There are a few problems with this).
Full blown encryption costs a packet with a hefty annual set up cost and a slice off each activation. Also it destroys channel hopping. Dont know about you, but I like hopping between 16 channels a night to see who is one, and there are another 5 channels I dont usually bother with. Imagine parting with your hard earned £5.99 only to find out you dont fancy the model, her costume does nothing for you, she looks like the boss and her accent really gets on your tits.
Quote:Of course within a short while, with television soon to offer internet access the whole debate will become irrelevant. Just my thoughts.
Unless things change Ofcom will control all TV on demand too.
RE: Ofcom Discussion - eccles - 06-02-2011 00:03
(17-12-2010 11:32 )on 17 Dec beller Wrote: Just to let you know that, for what it's worth, I have now made an official Freedom of Information Act 2000 request to see what Ofcom's "generally accepted standards" are and who decides on them. They are legally bound to reply by 17th January 2011.
I encourage everyone else here to do the same. It's easy to do via the http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/ website.
I have also written to my MP this morning to ask her to follow up the sudden change in "generally accepted standards" which has been imposed upon the Babe Channels as from today. A sudden change in generally accepted standards sounds like a contradiction in terms to me.
Notice too that this publicly accountable, publicly funded organisation has imposed these changes without any public announcement.
Maybe the Daily Mail apoplectics are the public announcement. They seem to follow each other remarkably closely.
Did Ofcom ever come up with the goods? By my reckoning its been 50 days since this request was lodged.