+- 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: Tackling Ofcom - defending our channels - StanTheMan - 01-08-2011 20:17
It's not a bad idea, schmoo, not a bad idea at all. The trouble with this is going to be the same as all the other 'march on Ofcom' ideas, namely getting people to participate.
RE: Tackling Ofcom - defending our channels - Big Stu - 01-08-2011 20:54
I've never understood who ofcom are supposed to be protecting, every kid in the country has the wit to find porn from the first moment they switch on a computer. Ofcom is just a 'right on' indulgence to protect the handfull of sad bastards who can't respect that the vast majority of the adult population has no objection to seeing a few naked women on their telly.
Anyway, i'm sure amongst the vast cross section of society who peruse the forum there must be the odd high court judge or barrister who could advise.
RE: Tackling Ofcom - defending our channels - eccles - 01-08-2011 21:21
Sadly consistency is not Ofcoms strong point. They tolerate adult channels but only because they have to. The slightest transgression is stomped on.
Then there are the serious channels that can get away with anything provided it is "justified" by context (plot). 50 nudes can be shown writhing around if it opera, but not for pleasure.
Finally there are the dodgy channels, Bravo, Living etc that show sexunentaries, sex themed documentaries. Most of the time Ofcom tolerates them because they have a verneer of plot. Occasionally Ofcom decides they have gone too far and warns them off - sexual content justified by context but too lingering or too explicit.
So complaining about a show on "other" channels wont achieve anything. If it is on the BBC, ITV or Sky Ofcom will reject the complaint. If it is on Bravo, Living, etc there is a 50% chance they will find against the channel, but what would that achieve? The broadcasters would drop content that could land them in trouble, "tighten compliance procedures" and Ofcom would have one more example to use against adult channels: "Its not allowed even in context, so its definitely not allowed on a sex channel without context".
The alternative, that Ofcom rules that lingering fanny shots are not offensive, wont happen. If it does they would still claim context.
RE: Tackling Ofcom - defending our channels - dirtbag - 01-08-2011 21:58
I agree something needs sorting with regards to the Ofcom/Babe Channel situation, however lodging numerous complaints about sexual content on regular channels would only further justify Ofcoms existence.
RE: Tackling Ofcom - defending our channels - schmoo - 01-08-2011 22:13
Well i thank you for the (very few) replies.
As i said, it's a suggestion, but eccles has possibly, even probably, put a dampener on the whole thing anyway with the "context" issue. Which, through no fault of his own, would be Ofcom's loophole, if you like, to continue as they are doing. However, i’m not sure that any complaints they receive against “other” channels would be anymore detrimental to the babe channels.
However, this context issue, the whole bloody reason the channels are “adult” (don’t laugh!) and therefore in the adult EPG is in itself the context. So this is actually the reason behind complaining against other channels that show adult material out of the adult channel EPG slots that get away with it using the context rule. So by their very nature, the babe channels should not even be guided by/forced to follow this (ridiculous) rule because they are in the adult channel EPG slots because that is their content, ie, context.
My point therefore is that if there is concerted and continual effort to submit complaints against other channels highlighting this fact, will Ofcom just ignore them? Probably i hear you all say..
Stan, about people participating.. people come on here and mention they have seen this, seen that on other channels (i do believe you have been one yourself) and this is what i’m talking about – don’t (just) post it on this forum, submit a complaint to Ofcom. If you can’t be bothered, let me (and/or maybe others?) know and i will do it. However, if you really can’t be bothered, stop f*cking moaning! And this is coming from someone who doesn’t care a jot about night shows, where alot of these moaning posts are all coming from.
Dirtbag, that's a fair comment. However, if they are to stay, which it seems likely, is not a good idea to try to divert them away from the babe channels? In any way possible, however unlikely etc? Because at the moment, these channels are a direct target and they're sitting ducks.
On a final point, if this thread continues, can we keep the replies along in line with my initial post. General discussion re Ofcom have other threads. However, if the general concensus is that the idea here is worthless, fine, close the thread to one of these other Ofcum threads and i'll stop trying to help!!
RE: Ofcom Discussion - eccles - 02-08-2011 01:01
Mumsnet founder: Our members are 'very keen' on PORN ...
The Register
Slightly off topic, but relevant to debate about wider social attitudes to adult entertainment.
Mumsnet founder Justine Roberts Wrote:When it came to the issue of porn, Roberts said Mumsnet, and presumably its legion of members, was not suggesting legal porn be removed from the internet.
"Lots of people on Mumsnet are very keen on pornography," she said. Apparently late on Friday night is the best time to verify this, Roberts said.
"We're not saying we need regulation," said Roberts. Rather, she continued, parents needed to be given tools to control what's coming into their homes.
But she recognised that often parents often don't take advantage of the tools already available, such as Google Safesearch.
RE: How many people have erased those useless ofcom mandated bookends - shankey! - 02-08-2011 22:00
(22-07-2011 00:21 )eccles Wrote: You posted after I started writing and before I hit submit.
Agree with the sentiment though, its almost as if they want the channels to cause offence.
Ofcom might not give a flying jizz, but Id like to be a fly on the wall when they have to explain to The Daily Mail and Keith Vaz that low cost easy solutions were suggested and they turned them down flat.
how can the current state of the babe channels be deemed of an adult nature,when the only thing on show are breasts,channel 4"s sex education was on at 8.30 tonight showing full female nudity if a 15 year old boy was watching it in his bedroom u can bet he was firing his rifle in all directions ,it makes not the slightest bit of difference where kids get access to adult orientated stuff ,they will get it one way or another anyway,they always have, be it from an old rolled up razzle found on a rubbish tip to the internet, ofcom surely must realise this!
RE: Tackling Ofcom - defending our channels - StanTheMan - 02-08-2011 22:08
(01-08-2011 22:13 )schmoo Wrote: Stan, about people participating.. people come on here and mention they have seen this, seen that on other channels (i do believe you have been one yourself) and this is what i’m talking about – don’t (just) post it on this forum, submit a complaint to Ofcom. If you can’t be bothered, let me (and/or maybe others?) know and i will do it. However, if you really can’t be bothered, stop f*cking moaning! And this is coming from someone who doesn’t care a jot about night shows, where alot of these moaning posts are all coming from.
Whoooaa!! Steady on, schmoo. I wasn't saying I couldn't be bothered, but that from past experience you might struggle to get others motivated. Jeez!
RE: Tackling Ofcom - defending our channels - schmoo - 03-08-2011 07:14
Apologies there.. that was a bit strong.
It just annoys me that lots of people on here moan, but then when constructive ways are offered (in threads/posts such as my own here) they get no replies/support?? So whilst i am suggesting another way to possibly do this, it appears it is fruitless, so i will step aside and say no more.
The funny thing is though, not only am i not interested in night shows, i seem to actually prefer the day shows as they are - clothed girls do it for me far more than when they're not, providing the element of sexy teasing is still present of course.
RE: Tackling Ofcom - defending our channels - StanTheMan - 03-08-2011 11:13
(03-08-2011 07:14 )schmoo Wrote: [snip] - clothed girls do it for me far more than when they're not, providing the element of sexy teasing is still present of course.
But it's not.