+- The UK Babe Channels Forum (https://www.babeshows.co.uk)
+-- Forum: Channels (/forumdisplay.php?fid=8)
+--- Forum: UK Babe Channels (/forumdisplay.php?fid=9)
+--- Thread: Babeshows - General Chat & Discussion (/showthread.php?tid=18626)
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 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360 361 362 363 364 365 366 367 368 369 370 371 372 373 374 375 376 377 378 379 380 381 382 383 384 385 386 387 388 389 390 391 392 393 394 395 396 397 398 399 400 401 402 403 404 405 406 407 408 409 410 411 412 413 414 415 416 417 418 419 420 421 422 423 424 425 426 427 428 429 430 431 432 433 434 435 436 437 438 439 440 441 442 443 444 445 446 447 448 449 450 451 452 453 454 455 456 457 458 459 460 461 462 463 464 465 466 467 468 469 470 471 472 473 474 475 476 477 478 479 480 481 482 483 484 485 486 487 488 489 490 491 492 493 494 495 496 497 498 499 500 501 502 503 504 505 506 507 508 509 510 511 512 513 514 515 516 517 518 519 520 521 522 523 524 525 526 527 528 529 530 531 532 533 534 535 536 537 538 539 540 541 542 543 544 545 546 547 548 549 550 551 552 553 554 555 556 557 558 559 560 561 562 563 564 565 566 567 568 569 570 571 572 573 574 575 576 577 578 579 580 581 582 583 584 585 586 587 588 589 590
RE: Babeshows - General Chat & Discussion - Rammyrascal - 28-11-2012 16:30
(28-11-2012 14:25 )Chilly Wrote: Whilst we all know if Clare had been censored in the same way, but the channel in question had been a Cellcast one, then Rammy would happily being slating them, too. Again, those who watched viewed a babe who was more than happy to pull her thong down to her knees, and one that clearly wanted to continue teasing by covering herself with the towel. Her thumbs down reaction to the pointless censorship was obvious to all those who don't wear rose tinted spectacles whilst watching this channel. End of.
Not necessarily the case chilly just cause I have been critical of cellcast in the past doesn't mean I would in this case. also bronco I accept your point but as I've said before its not just studio66tv/elitetv that have been apparently grassing on other channels, all the other channels have probably done it as well so your point can apply to all the channels. None of them are squeaky clean
Whilst studio66 TV is my main channel I watch each night, don't think I've got rose tinted spectacles. I have been critical of it in the past when I feel it deserves criticism. At times I do think it gets more flack than it deserves to get and will defend it when I think that's the case. Also I have been positive about bs saying its got the best roster it's had in ages and lily pink is one of my newcomer night babes of 2012
RE: Babeshows - General Chat & Discussion - mr mystery - 28-11-2012 16:57
Rammy people have assumed that rival babe channels contribute to complaints made to Ofcom, but it wasn't until this info below was posted and provided by Ofcom themselves do we know for certain that i rival channel was going to such lengths as to record for hours weeks and months Bangbabe programs and then make complaints and offer to send their Recorded DVD's of Bangbabes to Ofcom , this is unforgivable as far as i'm concerned, we do not officially know what channel went to such lengths to shit on a fellow babe channel , but other things have also come out that points to it being a certain channel and Boss , Matt Mason a employee of this channel even admitted to reporting other channels by text . This same channel in known to watch rival channels in the studio they work in , caps have even been posted on this forum of of this channel watching their rivals
Check out the post i have quoted it what a babe channel said to Ofcom concerning Bangbabes ,(originally posted by MONEY BANG in the Ofcom thread) , it is accurate and provided by Ofcom themselves .
(31-10-2012 12:13 )MONEY BANG Wrote:Quote:As I explained on the phone over the last 6 weeks we have noticed
the level of content on the channels above coming more and more
sexually explicit with it now reaching a point where its is clearly
pornographic.
The recordings listed are just a few that we thinking clearly
demonstrates that this is something that is happening on a regular
basis and is clearly intended.
We are concerned that the level of content is not only having a
hugely negative affect on our business but also reflects badly on the
industry as a whole.
This is also now affecting the moral of our staff and is generally
quite concerning as its happening on such a regular basis.
We have invested heavily in our business and feel content and
behaviour as such as this affects the whole stability of our industry.
Its important that as an industry we all act responsibly in our duties
as broadcasters and it seems that the channels above are
continually going way beyond the mark in terms of the level of
content available.
Please accept this letter and its contents as a formal complaint of
the listed broadcasts.
We would not like our details disclosed to the broadcaster and
request privacy in dealing with this matter
We would appreciate your assistance in looking into this matter and
acting to prevent it continuing.
Look forward to hearing back from you.
Quote:We have continued to monitor certain channels in the Adult area of
Business, the EPG, and in particular the “Tease Me” channels. We feel
compelled to report that, despite several recent Ofcom published
decisions with regard to this genre, as well as Chris Banatvala’s
letter to all such free to air channels dated 3 August 2009, many
channels are continuing unabashed and on a daily/nightly basis,
and that this broadcaster has deliberately continued to broadcast
material that goes far beyond established limits.
By way of example, the “Tease Me 2” channel, on its “Bang Babes”
programme on Tuesday 24th November 2009, from 23:26pm
showed clear footage of 2 female presenters simulating sex acts
including oral sex, fisting, rimming and masturbation with each
other. At times, the models spat on each other and showed genital
detail. Obviously this is unacceptable, and only encourages other
licensees to broadcast similar. We will courier to you this afternoon
a DVD recording of this broadcast for your ease of reference,
(though we appreciate that you will seek a copy directly from the
relevant licence holder). We would be grateful if you would please
confirm receipt of the same. We would be grateful if you could
please treat this email as a formal complaint on a confidential basis,
and would invite Ofcom to follow up this complaint with the
appropriate broadcaster in its usual way. Thanks and kind regards.
(31-10-2012 13:37 )Chilly Wrote: The rival channel/owner that put the likes of Bailey's shows under the Ofcom spotlight?
http://www.babeshows.co.uk/showthread.php?tid=30822&pid=785522#pid785522
RE: Babeshows - General Chat & Discussion - KerrAvon - 28-11-2012 17:03
Apart from a few extreme opinions, I usually find any flack a channel gets can, in some way, be justified. And they ALL get flack for various reasons. The notion of Studio66 unfairly getting it more than others is over defensive to say the least.
RE: Babeshows - General Chat & Discussion - Rammyrascal - 28-11-2012 17:30
again fair point kerravon, any flack a channel gets can be justified for various reasons, but i stand by what i say that studio 66 at times does get it more than others and at times feel its a no-no to say i enjoy studio66 cause ill get jumped on
my mystery, what youve posted in your recent post does seem to prove that elitetv/studio 66 did grass up bangbabes which i agree is unnaceptable but as ive said its not just studio66/elite that has probably been grassing up other channels, the other babechannels do it as well. red light central got agressively targeted by another channel in the fairly recent past.
RE: Babeshows - General Chat & Discussion - broncobilly10 - 28-11-2012 17:46
Did studio 66 apologise to Bangbabes Rammy?
RE: Babeshows - General Chat & Discussion - Scottishbloke - 28-11-2012 17:47
Only in the UK would a late night babe channel be such grounds to make it a criminal offence to air something that is remotely titillating. Was Clare censored last night. Do bears shit in the woods ? Is the Pope a Catholic. Ofcourse she was and don't let anybody else tell you otherwise. It's a closed case as far as I'm concerned.
Star of the shows last night for me was Lori Buckby and was it because she got naked that made it a good show. Bloody right it was
and I'll make no secret of it 
RLC was piss poor. It was practically like a dayshow with the exception of Rachel Taylor who was the only one in my books who got pass marks. Shame she never removed the panties because that might just have held some interest. Topless although interesting to a point soon get's boring.
Studio66 had a late rally with Paige and Sophia both putting on a sort of nude stint but it was little to late after the blatant censorship they'd displayed earlier on that evening.
For all those who favour the more clothed look then there is a show that caters for such and it's called the dayshow. Tit's and ass all the way for me and channels that don't show this fall well short of the mark as far as I'm concerned. Nightshows are called nightshows for a reason and I certainly didn't tune in to see fully dressed models. Some weren't even prepared to get topless.
Also don't give me this "It's ofcom's rules, it's ofcom's fault" bullshit or this "If you don't like it then don't watch it" bullshit either. I find the shows patronising enought without having to hear it from certain forum members into the bargain too. I rest my case.
RE: Babeshows - General Chat & Discussion - StanTheMan - 28-11-2012 18:23
(28-11-2012 03:27 )snookered147 Wrote: The whole thing is daft - honestly I despair at the inconsistency of it all sometimes. One rule for one and another rule for another and with no obvious logical reasoning. Just bonkers really
. I have to laugh otherwise I would have steam coming out my eyeballs instead. Doh
This is precisely what baffles me. The babeshow producers and presenters constantly give Ofcom as the reason they can't do the things they're asked. And then what happens a few days later, those same girls are doing all the things they were saying Ofcom prevented them from doing three days earlier.
Apart from the theory of different producers / cameramen being more relaxed than others, what other explanation is there for this inconsistency?
Many many years ago, back when Babestation and its sister channel Babestar were the only two around, I remember one of the presenters coming on the mic to explain why some nights are ruder than others. She said that each day they received an 'acceptable content' memo from Ofcom which would give a breakdown of what was allowed and what wasn't. One night it would say brief genital exposure was OK, but then the next night not. One night masturbation under the knickers was fine, the next night only over the knickers, and then the night after that no masturbation at all.
I have no idea if this was really the case, but I'm almost certain this isn't the reason behind today's inconsistency.
RE: Babeshows - General Chat & Discussion - mrmann - 28-11-2012 19:18
I agree, it's very inconsistent.
One night we get close angles, and then the next night one of the best women is told she can't go nude, not even with a towel covering her
Regardless, Clare was very good last night, so it's not always about constant nudity for me, despite me prefering it over them being clothed. However, it's kind of a depressing sight to see when Clare of all people is told she can't go nude, when they let Sophia C and Paige go nude later on, with decent angles.
RE: Babeshows - General Chat & Discussion - dan g 27 - 28-11-2012 19:24
(28-11-2012 10:19 )Rammyrascal Wrote: this is probably my main annoyance on the forum, forum members posting that it was a poor night unless there is nudity. what complete and total rubbish.
But Rammy that is how they value how good show is.
Everyone has different opinions on how good or bad a show is.
Everybody's standards are different.
RE: Babeshows - General Chat & Discussion - dan g 27 - 28-11-2012 19:42
(28-11-2012 17:30 )Rammyrascal Wrote: again fair point kerravon, any flack a channel gets can be justified for various reasons, but i stand by what i say that studio 66 at times does get it more than others and at times feel its a no-no to say i enjoy studio66 cause ill get jumped on
I disagree I think all the big channels get the same amount of criticism.
In my early months of the forum, it was Babestation that was getting it left, right and centre.
Later RLC was getting it mainly for how they treat their callers.
Then Studio66 was getting it for putting in poor performances.