+- 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 - TheWatcher - 19-07-2011 19:39
(19-07-2011 19:34 )blackjaques Wrote:(19-07-2011 17:05 )schmoo Wrote: But is it? Ofcom/govenment, i believe, have already intimated they wish to "get involved" in the internet scene too..
"First we take Manhattan.................................."
RE: Ofcom Discussion - StanTheMan - 19-07-2011 23:48
(19-07-2011 18:58 )Roquentin Wrote: I dont think they should all move to internet. But pretty much stay as they are now (within guidelines) then additional parallel content on a stream online. They would need the shop window on TV as the source of punters. That might work. Worth trying anyways.
I don't want that either because I'd still be losing out; nothing worth watching on Sky (if they stay as they are) and no interest in the webstreams... so where would I get my hit??
RE: Ofcom Discussion - Digital Dave - 20-07-2011 13:25
With respect Stan (and we've known each other a long time) I do think you have a bit of a psychological condition, whereby you only find images displayed on a TV screen erotic!
I suggest that you invest in an internet TV as they're coming down in price all the time - that way you could sit happily watching a webstream on your TV.
At the end of the day, how the signal gets to your TV (either via an aerial, satellite dish or the internet) should be of no consequence to your enjoyment. For you however, it does seem to be.
RE: Ofcom Discussion - StanTheMan - 20-07-2011 13:54
A psychological condition, eh?It's nothing so complicated, Dave. In fact, it's all to do with 'forbidden fruit' syndrome. As much as I whine on about Ofcom, I'm not necessarily looking for a complete removal of censorship. I have no interest in the webstreams because there's no censorship there - everything we see is permitted. It's only when liberties are taken with the rules governing the shows on Sky that I am truly aroused. As an example I'd say that Babestar had the mix absolutely perfect; never going so far OTT that they'd end up in court, but going much further than the rules permitted.
That's what I miss. It is also the reason I have no interest in the webstreams.
RE: Ofcom Discussion - Addison - 20-07-2011 21:21
(20-07-2011 13:54 )StanTheMan Wrote: As much as I whine on about Ofcom, I'm not necessarily looking for a complete removal of censorship. I have no interest in the webstreams because there's no censorship there - everything we see is permitted. It's only when liberties are taken with the rules governing the shows on Sky that I am truly aroused.
That's one weird fetish, Stan! I think someone should draw Scottishbloke's attention to this, because I think he thinks you're both singing from the same hymn sheet with regard to the eradication of babe show censorship, and I don't think you are!
RE: Ofcom Discussion - StanTheMan - 20-07-2011 22:30
(20-07-2011 21:21 )Addison Wrote: That's one weird fetish, Stan! I think someone should draw Scottishbloke's attention to this, because I think he thinks you're both singing from the same hymn sheet with regard to the eradication of babe show censorship, and I don't think you are!
Not ever so weird, Addison. The Forbidden Fruit mentality has been around since... well, since Adam and Eve. Unless, of course, you're an evolutionist, but even then it's still been around for ever.
The censorship things is a funny one. I hate and resent these self-appointed moral guardians telling me what degree of porn is safe for me, but at the same time a total scrapping of it (censorship) would mean I'd grow bored of the babeshows fairly quickly.
But, if I had a choice between how they are now and a no holds barred approach, I'd choose the latter every time.
RE: Ofcom Discussion - Renfrew169 - 20-07-2011 22:38
(20-07-2011 13:25 )Digital Dave Wrote: With respect Stan (and we've known each other a long time) I do think you have a bit of a psychological condition, whereby you only find images displayed on a TV screen erotic!
I suggest that you invest in an internet TV as they're coming down in price all the time - that way you could sit happily watching a webstream on your TV.
At the end of the day, how the signal gets to your TV (either via an aerial, satellite dish or the internet) should be of no consequence to your enjoyment. For you however, it does seem to be.
Unfortunately this doesn't work in practice because unless the feed comes directly from a studio the quality of the picture is governed by the bandwidth of the broadcasting model; there are some stunning shows which are "spoiled" by the poor quality of the picture. I can see where Stan is coming from and have some sympathy with the principle. Ultimately a bit of pussy when it's not really allowed and in the detail only TV can provide, hits the mark for me.
RE: Ofcom Discussion - mrmann - 20-07-2011 23:41
For those of you who might get tired of uncensored shows
, there's a way around this. Allow the women to show what they want, but have them keep it to a minimum for much of the time, to build suspense and keep us thrilled. I'd still be thrilled if they went all out though, and showed everything up front.
RE: Ofcom Discussion - Digital Dave - 21-07-2011 00:06
(20-07-2011 22:38 )Renfrew169 Wrote:(20-07-2011 13:25 )Digital Dave Wrote: With respect Stan (and we've known each other a long time) I do think you have a bit of a psychological condition, whereby you only find images displayed on a TV screen erotic!
I suggest that you invest in an internet TV as they're coming down in price all the time - that way you could sit happily watching a webstream on your TV.
At the end of the day, how the signal gets to your TV (either via an aerial, satellite dish or the internet) should be of no consequence to your enjoyment. For you however, it does seem to be.
Unfortunately this doesn't work in practice because unless the feed comes directly from a studio the quality of the picture is governed by the bandwidth of the broadcasting model; there are some stunning shows which are "spoiled" by the poor quality of the picture. I can see where Stan is coming from and have some sympathy with the principle. Ultimately a bit of pussy when it's not really allowed and in the detail only TV can provide, hits the mark for me.
That doesn't really work either because as we all know, 'TV' is not automatically good quality. In the 900s it's normally very poor quality, with the honorable exception of Storm and Elite (but even they're not proper mainstream broadcast quality).
Conversely you can have very high quality webstreams.
RE: Ofcom Discussion - eccles - 21-07-2011 02:34
For me a webstream is simply not the same as a TV channel. Connecting it to the TV would help, but I like the thought that its live and on TV. And financially it would fail, at least any time in the next 3 years. The big strength of being onSky is that channels are in the EPG and anyone with a Sky box can access them without tech skills or rewiring. The web has literally hundreds of sites, another porn site would get lost in the crowd.
Id also like to see some sex in normal TV. It used to happen. Comedy, satire, cabaret shows used to feature the odd risque sketch. These days you have to have a certificate stating that any sex/nudity is dramatically justified and we have segregation. Mainstream TV = pretent adults have no interest in sex.