Serious Ofcom warning for Bang Media

Maybe I've missed a possibility? What if Ofcom deem the 'in breach' material to be R18-equivalent and by virtue of the webstream TV feed Ofcom can then propose this to be the source of potential child exposure on the website? Sneaky. Anyway, whatever, I'm not sure anything except lolligate would qualify as R18. I mean, if BM put that material out on DVD at R18 I think they'd get slated because its not actually up to the "generally accepted standard" that we expect at R18, is it?

It's more tease than please. A glimpse. A flash. A bit of sauciness. A playful poke with a bit of confectionary and...its all over. Not worthy of R18 in my book.

'Too hot for TV', maybe. No, let me put that right : "Too hot for UK TV" - that's more like it (Oh no it isn't!).

I heard the BBFC have passed the fully restored classic softy Emmanuelle at 18 - i.e. with smoking pussy scene. So, here we have a fairly explicit vaginal penetration with a foriegn object in an erotic movie with a general release 18 cert. Now I doubt the BBFC would like to claim Emmanuelle's sex scenes are justified by context - esp. not the on-stage sex act, its completely superfluous to the story and I doubt anyone but real film buffs were aware this scene had been snipped by the BBFC (no doubt to 'protect health and morals') some 30 odd years ago (around the time Punk Rock appeared - oh the irony).

Why is it Britain's censors seem to be 30 years behind the times? Of course, its the 'standards' they're trying to maintain that are 30 years out of date. I think Ofcom's 'standards' are at least 15 years out of touch.

Oh, and of course there's one other possibility. Ofcom's research says children claim to know their parents' creditcard numbers. So, even with creditcard subscription to the members site, its no guarantee this stops kids - so long as mom and dad never check their creditcard bills - "Err, what's this?"

(11-03-2010 05:05 )Hexit Wrote:  

(08-03-2010 14:43 )IanG Wrote:  Cobblers, I think Bang Media should get the BBFC to rate their recording of the nights in question and find out if they're 18 or R18 sex works (or maybe even less...). Ofcom need to explain why anything which is available to any adult in any video stockist should be placed behind encryption - i.e. 18-rated 'sex works' need no additional restrictions on supply by law so Ofcom have no legal right or necessity/precedent to demand it.

actually ian that is a stunning idea. get the bbfc and ofcom to slug it out. if a channel gets held up for adjudication then they should submit the evidence to the bbfc to be rated and then ofcom cant say shit especially if it doesn't come back as r18

Sorry to disappoint but Ofcom isn't big on integrity or adherence to its own guidelines. BBFC rating doesn't count in cases relating to sex as has been demonstrated on a number of occassions when broadcasters have tried to show 18-rated content outside of PPV or pin protected service. For example, The Idiots on Film4, which initially went out censored, and Baise Moi, which was shown PPV on Sky but subsequently heavily lobbied against by Ofcom and not broadcast via its subscription movie channels - even though as a condition of its licence the broadcaster must offer films previously broadcast PPV to subscribers no more than six months after PPV broadcast.

When are ofcom going to fuck off they are serously spoiling what we like to watch ie adult entertainment which by the way are all pin protected so it's up to the guardians to control what there kids watch not you so please do us all a favour and kindly fuck off or throw yourself off the nearest bridge.

(12-03-2010 11:35 )HenryF Wrote:  

(11-03-2010 05:05 )Hexit Wrote:  

(08-03-2010 14:43 )IanG Wrote:  Cobblers, I think Bang Media should get the BBFC to rate their recording of the nights in question and find out if they're 18 or R18 sex works (or maybe even less...). Ofcom need to explain why anything which is available to any adult in any video stockist should be placed behind encryption - i.e. 18-rated 'sex works' need no additional restrictions on supply by law so Ofcom have no legal right or necessity/precedent to demand it.

actually ian that is a stunning idea. get the bbfc and ofcom to slug it out. if a channel gets held up for adjudication then they should submit the evidence to the bbfc to be rated and then ofcom cant say shit especially if it doesn't come back as r18

Sorry to disappoint but Ofcom isn't big on integrity or adherence to its own guidelines. BBFC rating doesn't count in cases relating to sex as has been demonstrated on a number of occassions when broadcasters have tried to show 18-rated content outside of PPV or pin protected service. For example, The Idiots on Film4, which initially went out censored, and Baise Moi, which was shown PPV on Sky but subsequently heavily lobbied against by Ofcom and not broadcast via its subscription movie channels - even though as a condition of its licence the broadcaster must offer films previously broadcast PPV to subscribers no more than six months after PPV broadcast.

actualy m8 i need to correct you on 1 thing. film 4 showed the idiots (dogma 95) uncut they have since shown other films uncut also which were previously censored/ channel 4 have always pushed the boundrys and are willing to take on ofcom because they know they can win. they have b4.

Correct Hexit, they did show it uncut, I can remember watching that one, as well as "the principles of lust" and "life song" both of which had full penetration shots shown, and "life song" had ejaculation shots left in as well.

And these films were shown as free to view.

(08-03-2010 17:38 )TheWatcher Wrote:  Quote from PDF file
................................................................​............
Bang Babes, Tease Me, 25 November 2009, 00:00 - 05.30

With regard to Rule 1.25, Bang Channels did not accept that the broadcast contained
R18-rated equivalent material. However, it accepted that the material which included
the insertion of a lollypop into the presenter’s vagina may have exceeded viewer
expectations for a channel of this nature. The Licensee continued that the channel’s
internal compliance guidelines were ignored and this resulted in the transmission of
content that was not suitable for broadcast. It said that the broadcast was a live
transmission and that appropriate action was not taken to suspend the transmission.
It stated that it has now terminated the contract of the producer who was in charge of the transmission.
Bang Channels also stated that the presenters in this broadcast
were suspended and returned to work a month later having undergone further
compliance training. The broadcaster highlighted that these steps were taken before
any complaint was made about the broadcast.
................................................................​....

It looks like they did not get away with the lollypop incident after all.
So they are now guilty. Wonder what the sentence will be?

(08-03-2010 14:52 )SOCATOA Wrote:  Who woke the bastards up? Thats what i want to know!!

Either someone from a "rival channel" has once again "snitched" to OFCOM, or a "mole" has tipped them off. Whichever it is, that kind of situation is unacceptable...

The pressure on Bang Babes is mounting. Today Ofcom issued a formal direction notice - they're concerned that the Bang channels are continuing to transmit material to the same level of raunchiness as that which resulted in previous adverse judgements.

Unless Bang confirm in writing by 3.30pm today that they will stop being naughty, Ofcom will impose statutory sanctions, including possible revocation of their licences.

Bang certainly haven't tamed their output much since recent Ofcom bollockings so I wonder if something else is going on? Are Bang pushing things to the brink deliberately?

Ofcom directive against Bang Babes

It must be time for all the babe channels to get together and take Ofcom on. Pisses me off that a few no brainer, couldnt hold down a real job, idiots at Ofcom can say what i am allowed to watch Act before its too late Babe Channels!!!! ( Feel better now)

(15-03-2010 11:15 )Digital Dave Wrote:  The pressure on Bang Babes is mounting. Today Ofcom issued a formal direction notice - they're concerned that the Bang channels are continuing to transmit material to the same level of raunchiness as that which resulted in previous adverse judgements.

Unless Bang confirm in writing by 3.30pm today that they will stop being naughty, Ofcom will impose statutory sanctions, including possible revocation of their licences.

Bang certainly haven't tamed their output much since recent Ofcom bollockings so I wonder if something else is going on? Are Bang pushing things to the brink deliberately?

Ofcom directive against Bang Babes

could be but bangbabes musnt be too worried if they are launching new channels 912, 915 and 916. so maybe bang are deliberately overstepping the line so the channels 912, 948 and 959 will be shut down and then relaunch as a new company but still be onscreen as bangbabes with 912, 915 and 916 instead of 912,948 and 959. either way ofcom have to give 28 days notice of their punisment so if worse case scenario happens bangbabes wont be shut till after easter

The last 2 Bangbabes freeview shows that I've seen in the past week have been much tamer than any of the Babestation freeview shows during that time.
The last "good" Bangbabes show I saw was on 7 March with Amanda and Toni together on Bang Airways. I imagine ofcom did not like this one.