+- 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 - Kenilo - 16-07-2011 12:12
These fuckers in OFCOM had better stay from the beaches in Europe then because the rubbing of baby oils and suncreams goes on all the time over there. And shock /Horror they rub it on each other, men and women, Young and old. And they are all semi-naked for most of the day.Then when they go home they have showers and then start the process all over again with the aftersun.Can you imagine how much damage has been caused to minors over there having to watch this going on around them all the time. I mean this is what the bible bashers in OFCOM preach is'nt it?
RE: Ofcom Discussion - Roquentin - 16-07-2011 13:34
Again, this might seem basic to those who have read up on this. I think it worth posting the Ofcom guidance advice points for night shows. I've put numbers in for future reference, in case anyone wants to comment on each. Unfortunately, whereas some are vague, the application in the bulletins are usually explained clearly enough, so the problem might not be Ofcom's application, but the basic restrictions themselves. I'm intrigued to see what are we left with.
Set out below are some of the key points to assist licensees when broadcasting these services. Please note that the following points are not exhaustive. Adult chat broadcasters should:
(1) • not broadcast shots of bare breasts before 22:00;
(2) • at no time broadcast invasive shots of presenters’ bodies. Ofcom cautions against physically intrusive, intimate shots of any duration; and against less intrusive shots that may become unacceptable by virtue of their being prolonged;
(3) • at no time broadcast anal, labial or genital areas or broadcast images of presenters touching their genital or anal areas either with their hand or an object;
(4) • ensure that presenters’ clothing adequately covers their anal, labial or genital areas. They should also avoid adjusting their clothing (including clutching or bunching) which results in anal, labial or genital areas being exposed;
(5) • at no time broadcast images of any real or simulated sex acts (these include vaginal or anal intercourse, masturbation, fellatio or cunnilingus);
(6) • at no time include shots of presenters spitting onto their or others’ bodies, or include shots of presenters using other liquids, such as oil and lotions, on their genital or anal areas.
(7) • at no time broadcast shots of presenters using liquids of a sort or in a way which suggests the liquid is ejaculate;
(8) • at no time broadcast sexually explicit language;
(9) • ensure any sexual language broadcast is restrained, and avoid its use altogether before midnight; and
(10) • ensure that where more than one presenter is in shot greater care is taken to avoid broadcasting the above images or language.
RE: Ofcom Discussion - iamthatjack - 16-07-2011 13:39
I'm not sure if this is the right place to post this, but I was watching BS last night and there was a moment when Tiffany was on the mic, and Ree was with her, and Ree bent down and Tiffany spanked her...and then quickly apologised quite seriously about doing that! Is that because of a crazy Ofcom thing?
RE: Ofcom Discussion - Roquentin - 16-07-2011 13:40
May as well give the daytime restrictions, numbering following on.
Set out below are some of the key points that licensees should apply when broadcasting these services. Please note that the following points are not exhaustive.
Daytime chat broadcasters should:
(11) • ensure that presenters are wearing appropriate clothing, that adequately covers their bodies, in particular their breasts, genital areas and buttocks. Presenters should not wear revealing underwear, swimwear, gym wear or fetish clothing;
(12) • not broadcast images of presenters touching or stroking their bodies in a suggestive manner, in particular avoiding breasts, thighs, crotches and buttocks;
(13) • not broadcast images of presenters mimicking sexual intercourse by rocking and thrusting their bodies, or otherwise adopting sexual poses;
(14) • not broadcast images of any mimed sex acts; and
(15) • not broadcast close up and intrusive images of presenters breasts.
RE: Ofcom Discussion - Roquentin - 16-07-2011 13:43
(16-07-2011 13:39 )iamthatjack Wrote: I'm not sure if this is the right place to post this, but I was watching BS last night and there was a moment when Tiffany was on the mic, and Ree was with her, and Ree bent down and Tiffany spanked her...and then quickly apologised quite seriously about doing that! Is that because of a crazy Ofcom thing?
Well according to the advice it doesnt seem so. Number 10 refers to more than one person, but only says be more careful about 1-9, but 1-9 dont forbid spanking. Seems that way to me. (as long as she didnt spank right on the arsehole due to number 3 hehe, gosh this is picky stuff) Also, from what others have said, I dont think BS are as restrained by Ofcom as other channels, not sure.
RE: Ofcom Discussion - Roquentin - 16-07-2011 13:55
Ah the nature of language is a funny old thing.
Take number 11 as an example. Particularly "[daytime] Presenters should not wear revealing underwear, swimwear, gym wear or fetish clothing;"
Now does that mean that underwear/swimwear/gymwear/fetishclothing is ok as long as it is not revealing? Or do Ofcom take the view that all such clothing is by nature revealing, so all of it is out. Might be clarified in the bulletins.
RE: Ofcom Discussion - Roquentin - 16-07-2011 14:00
meh, just realised there is another thread similar to these last posts. Feel free to sort out Mods, ignore, cut, or keep here if you think its useful. Soz, still reading this stuff.
RE: Ofcom Discussion - Roquentin - 16-07-2011 17:44
1 We are used to.
2 Stops the close up ass2cam shots and close2pussy between the legs
Certainly for any length of time but seems ok in panning over a girls body. Also, no lengthy close ups of breasts/nipples (less invasive shots?). Biggest problem guideline I think. Sympathies for cameramen. 3 I'd say we are used to for the last years.
4 We are used to since one or two bang babes used to ride their thongs ages ago. Although maybe not to put thongs too much to the test in trying to cover everything (a cameltoe on a thong may be a close thing!). Number 2 seems to limit this anyways.
5 is annoying. So thats what happened to simulated jerking of my dick!!
Second biggest problem in my view. 6 Spitting Ewwwww yuk! Think I remember a few bang babes going to town on the oil drenching of a few thongs. Otherwise not much to worry about. Oil/cream applied (by hand, see 7) on boobs s'fine, on ass if careful? (think the channels may be too cautious now about this).
7 Ahh, so thats what happened to the moisturiser drizzle! I can live without. I did wonder why they never splashed water on boobs n ass though.
8 & 9 we are used to.
10 is a pain if you're into the 2-4-1s which I admit I'm not. (I always think they are flirty not sexual. Maybe I cant remember how hot they used to be. )
This is just my interpretation of how the guidelines are applied. I understand better now the changes in content I've been seeing.
RE: Ofcom Discussion - eagle_si - 16-07-2011 19:30
On a different subject, I was surprised when I read the latest Ofcom bulletin (published 4 July) and looked through the "Not In Breach" section at the end. What interested me was that they listed the number of complaints for each programme, and in most cases that number was 1. Being something of a stats anorak, I did some calculations, the results of which are below:
There were 171 different TV or radio programmes which had received one or more complaints.
139 of these had one complaint (81.3% of the total)
20 had 2-5 complaints
5 had 6-10 complaints
7 had more than 10 complaints (the highest number was 88)
There were five babe channel programmes on the list (two Elite and three Red Light) all of which had ONE complaint. It's also noticeable that they don't appear to give the number of complaints for the programmes found in breach, but we can all guess that they're single figures.
I don't know exactly what their procedures are, but if only one person out of thousands, hundreds of thousands, or millions of viewers/listeners can be bothered to write and complain about a programme, surely that complaint should be just thrown in the bin, with a response to the complainant telling them to get a life and stop wasting time and money. That would mean Ofcom would not need as many people working for them, saving a good chunk of money in the process. It would also make it more difficult for malicious channel owners to snitch on their rivals.
This is all common sense of course, but we know that Ofcom and common sense are never used in the same sentence unless separated by the words "have got fuck all".
Here's the link to the bulletin, originally posted by Gold Plated Pension. The list I'm referring to starts on page 104.
http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/binaries/enforcement/broadcast-bulletins/obb185/obb185.pdf
RE: Ofcom Discussion - schmoo - 16-07-2011 19:49
That's certainly a pertinent point about the number of complaints eagle si. And you're right, if the number is low (and i'd bet they are suspiciously low), then the complaint should indeed be thrown out - what a waste of our bloody money following it through.
Now re these Ofcom breaches and the like, i admit i haven't read through all the bulletins (who could!?), it seems to me that the babe channels, more often than not, fall foul of beareaucratic red tape draconian rules re advertising and the failure to submit recordings etc rather than actual visual and audio output. But please, correct me if i am mistaken.
So if Ofcom are hell bent on protecting "our" kids (and i say "our" as they're not bloody Ofcom's kids to protect) then they are plainly not even doing this.
Unless of course, it's their very indirect way of removing the channels, in which case, no channels, no corruption of "our" kids.