New Ofcom Rules

(10-01-2011 17:49 )modster Wrote:  Don't like it don't watch it, if you don't want your kids to see it put on the passcode for the adult channels. That's what I say!!!

Don`t like what?
Babechannels,free view for encrypted or just encrypted?

    Does anybody remember the very first babestation/cast broadcasts years ago, when the channels started one by one? The channels were a pure txt service then with a phone capability. The txts were £1.50 per time and great value in comparison to some of the latest £1.53 efforts! The ladies would wear a variety of outfits/ fashion costumes from 9pm and post 11pm some/all clothing was removed. This is going back to 2002/03 and I have many recordings of fancy costumes,some rather impressive shirts, stockings etc on videos.There were 3 to 4 models on a time, all would fashion clothes/outfits to txt requests/call. My memory/videos go back to an Asian lady called Spider and a fancy Polish blonde called Anoushka. I know this concept is a step back in time for most, not as lively as shows in recent years other than some nudity(mainly topless later on) and some oil and spitting. Through some fantastic years of late night viewing we have been left with very poor offerings. For me, Jet Black, Emily Dean-Bowie and the Babecast POV/guy thing cannot be replaced with who and what they are currently offering, even more established models' shows are disappointing now. I can understand that some recently stretched the boundaries at times showing the lower half stuff but since they restricted basic things like spitting, I find more enjoyment watching Claira with the big muscles on the casino Channel! We can all sit and moan about Ofcom but we're stuck with them and I know the shows can improve further without pushing the boundaries to the maximum. Maybe a return to the old style shows would be widely appreciated.

Found some POV recordings on the sister site, and all I can say is Well Dodgy.

(10-03-2011 14:13 )Big Tim Wrote:  There were 3 to 4 models on a time, all would fashion clothes/outfits to txt requests/call. My memory/videos go back to an Asian lady called Spider and a fancy Polish blonde called Anoushka. I know this concept is a step back in time for most, not as lively as shows in recent years other than some nudity(mainly topless later on) and some oil and spitting. Through some fantastic years of late night viewing we have been left with very poor offerings. For me, Jet Black, Emily Dean-Bowie and the Babecast POV/guy thing cannot be replaced with who and what they are currently offering, even more established models' shows are disappointing now. I can understand that some recently stretched the boundaries at times showing the lower half stuff but since they restricted basic things like spitting, I find more enjoyment watching Claira with the big muscles on the casino Channel! We can all sit and moan about Ofcom but we're stuck with them and I know the shows can improve further without pushing the boundaries to the maximum. Maybe a return to the old style shows would be widely appreciated.

Those old shows were fun in their way. Spider was absolutely gorgeous with a fantastic body, while Anoushka was an extremely horny lady as anyone who enjoyed regular lap dances with her on London's private strip scene will testify.

I always thought that SportXXX was one broadcaster who was comfortable with the content broadcast in relation to compliance with the plethora of subjective guidance published by the regulator.

From watching the shows for the past week this is obviously not the case and their output has been severly effected since the intervention on Friday by the regulator.

This has led to a self-enforced ban on naked shows even though they are still permitted under the BCAP code. When such shows return depends on when this broadcaster feels that they are confident that the regulator will not move the goalposts again.

Current guidance states that

No nudity before 11pm. A performer can be fully nude and use a static straight hand with straight fingers to cover themselves. Ofcom accepted that this does not constitute masturbation.

Now one would assume that the term 'to cover themselves' relates to the sheilding of the genitalia and anus. Not of the pubic area.

Another piece of guidance states

Full frontal nudity is never acceptable under any circumstances. This is an immediate breach of the Code.

Now being reasonable and applying common sense priciples one would assume that 'full frontal nudity' means the display of genitalia and/or anus and naked displays of buttocks, pubic area with or without hair, breasts etc would be acceptable, but it would appear not to be.

The broadcasters need to clarify the situation with the regulator on what is acceptable under the current guidance, something that should have been done when these additional guidelines were imposed several months ago.

I believe the following pictural examples are where the regulator are clamping down. No implication's of wrongdoing are made against the presenters or the channels in these examples.

I think from what I interpret then is that full nudity is allowed just not any close up or intimate shots and going by these pictures it's clear for all to see that no rules have indeed been broken. The legs have been firmly closed so that no detail can be seen. Not guilty as far as I'm concerned.

(22-04-2011 22:45 )Gold Plated Pension Wrote:  I always thought that SportXXX was one broadcaster who was comfortable with the content broadcast in relation to compliance with the plethora of subjective guidance published by the regulator.

From watching the shows for the past week this is obviously not the case and their output has been severly effected since the intervention on Friday by the regulator.

I seem to have missed something. What intervention last Friday?

(22-04-2011 22:55 )Scottishbloke Wrote:  I think from what I interpret then is that full nudity is allowed just not any close up or intimate shots and going by these pictures it's clear for all to see that no rules have indeed been broken. The legs have been firmly closed so that no detail can be seen. Not guilty as far as I'm concerned.

Not guilty has my vote too. This is just tease and surely on an adult show after 11 this the whole point of the channels.

I hope Cameron takes away some of their power this year, so that they can focus on things other than the babe channels for once. However, if Ofcom persists, I'm hopeful that the producers of these channels will be able to think outside the box and come up with a counter attack. Something clever perhaps, as in a different way to view the channels, as well as not bowing down to Ofcom for ridiculous reasons.

Ofcom is quite sexist and hypocritical.

(22-04-2011 22:55 )Scottishbloke Wrote:  I think from what I interpret then is that full nudity is allowed just not any close up or intimate shots and going by these pictures it's clear for all to see that no rules have indeed been broken. The legs have been firmly closed so that no detail can be seen. Not guilty as far as I'm concerned.

same here. also remember denni tayla saying that so long as youre not open leg you should be ok. or something like that