Is it time for a mass attack on OFCOM?

I am not a media lawyer unfortunately.I leave that to my sister! I am a humble commercial contracts lawyer. The long and the short of this in response to Ian is that Ofcom are not acting illegally from what I can ascertain their legislative mandate is the comms act and broadcasting act and any supporting or associated acts that may follow or support their code.They are the recognized authority in this case.

Now you can challenge judgements they make in the high court yes of course,but it does not make what they do illegal just that channels have Been able to defend their position in the particular case in question.

The comms act was not penned after the WTC attack but was an evolution of the original act in 1984

Finally my belief is that telecommunications and electronic communications and broadcast media should fall under separate regulatory commissions.it's just too big.I used to work in the sector 12 years ago and they could not handle just the telecoms part of it let alone the massive broadcast media sector we have today.


There is a lack of desire and probably financial capability to fight Ofcom so for these channels to remain competitive and effective they have to consider how to play ball while giving the customers what they want.

Are they bigoted,prejudiced,biased,I don't really know to be fair,but one thing is for sure they not going to change until they are changed.

I seriously hope that Ofcom are disbanded at some point in the not to near distant future, it would be great to see Cellcast being pissed over by the other channels with regards to their XTreme show. Charging £5 to see a live sex show when the rest of Europe would show that free to air.

(30-04-2011 02:32 )sweetsugar007 Wrote:  Finally my belief is that telecommunications and electronic communications and broadcast media should fall under separate regulatory commissions.it's just too big.I used to work in the sector 12 years ago and they could not handle just the telecoms part of it let alone the massive broadcast media sector we have today.

Interesting points and it would be rehashing old ground to respond to then all, but the industry size one is particularly interesting. Telecoms and TV have very little in common apart from being electronic. Part of telecom regulation is ensuring that people who dig up the street have insurance to pay the council if they mess it up. (It took Ofcom 6 years to fail to regulate Infolines on that point, by which time they had gone into voluntary liquidation). Also a lot of phone regulation is vast numbers of complaints about billing disputes - the sector is very different from TV, so why have the same regulator? And hey, lets chuck Postal Serves in, thats a form of communication?

On that logic radio, theatre, newspapers, the internet, pub gossip, porn mags and DVDs should also be regulated by Ofcom.

Only joking, they already regulate radio and the internet.

If the sectors are too big to regulate how the f can they justify wasting 1/3 of their time on just 1% of complaints?

And what about all that other regulation stuff, like quality, equal ops in training and quotas?

"OFCOM MISSION STATEMENT
We are too busy to do anything about the collapse and americanisation of childrens tv or enforcing EU quotas, we will just waste masses of resources on stuff no-one claims to watch."

Incase anybody's in any doubt it's Ofcom's job to lightly moderate the channels (only) not to be hammering out warnings and massive fines and regulating TV is only one job amoungst many, for example they are also responsible for ensuring that we all get fast broadband and on this they have failed miserably, if they put as much effort into their other duties as they do out of hounding the babe channels they'd be doing not a bad job on the bigger scale of things, what I want to know is what are they doing with the money they are taking from the Adult Channels, in my opinion they are probably pocketing it the swindling bunch of robbing bastards, let's make 2012 the year these cunts are forced out of office.

agree with this completely for once

How soon will it be before we are too cast onto this list, at present the internet is still operating on an uncensored level, but for how long remains the question, if Ofcom are not tackled as far as TV censorship goes they will inevitably find themselves being given more power's and the internet as we know it will cease to exist including this website, food for thought as I found this interesting link and if anybody thinks this is pure fiction that it'll ever happen in the UK, think again, we are on the brink of censorship apocalypse
http://listverse.com/2010/10/02/top-10-c...-internet/

You're right Scottishbloke, as I've mentioned before the fact that in 2012, 21st century Britain, in a western democratic country, that the fact that any of us our having a discussion about the ridicules state of affairs to do with our babe channels i.e ofcom totally and utterly disgusts me. And like you've said SB, if ofcom start to meddle themselves in the internet, in otherwords dictating to us we can and cannot view on our own pc's, then it shouts a clear signal to me that this country is slowly but surely turning into a socialist, communist state.

can some one explain to me what god given right ofcom have to deal out these fines to the babe channels if they are not tried in a british court of law? only the police and council officials have the right to issue fixed notice penalties and even then joe public can appeal so why do they get around it so easily?

This may sound a bit silly, but I feel bad for some of the veterans and disabled people in the UK, who might never have the chance to have sex again, or even see a nude beautiful woman. Sure, the internet has some options, but it's just another obstacle for these people, whereas they should be able to chat to a woman on our TV's, and see them fully nude without this sexist censorship. Imagine how they must feel, to know that they have only one option to interact with a beautiful naked woman, and that it's the internet. It's not like anyone can just call an escort, as that is expensive, and many disabled veterans and non veterans might not have money handy for this, or the physical ability even. The internet has options, but many are rather expensive as well, and though the babe channels can be a scam, the basic price for a call isn't exactly as expensive as a private chat online which can cost a lot. It would be depressing for someone like this to to not be able to see a normal body part on the TV, while chatting to them, and I couldn't imagine if I was in some of their shoes! Am I talking crazy? A lot of us have it so lucky, that we at least have the opportunity to go out and about and talk to women, or even go to a strip club when we are single or in the mood, yet not everyone can do this. Some people are bedridden, without use of their legs, sick, or disfigured from an injury or defect, yet we tend to not think about how it would feel to be in that position. The web shows are only so interactive, whereas chatting on the phone to someone on the babe channels is much more connective, and it's sad to know that the women have to tell the callers they can't show a normal body part to them, not even after the watershed. Ridiculous!

(05-01-2012 21:45 )shankey! Wrote:  can some one explain to me what god given right ofcom have to deal out these fines to the babe channels if they are not tried in a british court of law? only the police and council officials have the right to issue fixed notice penalties and even then joe public can appeal so why do they get around it so easily?

For starters when channels are granted a licence they have to sign an agreement with Ofcom, including acceptance of the Broadcasting Code, so arguably the channels have agreed to the procedure. Parties to civil matters can agree to have cases heard outside the County Court system (eg the Press Complaints Commission).

However there is no statutory requirement for channels to actually sign the Broadcasting Code. What the Communications Act 2003 says is that Ofcom must draw up a Code. It would be sufficient for them to tell channels that the Code exists and will be enforced.

As for fines not being decided in a Court of Law, the Ofcom Sanctions Committee is a kind of Court. Or to be technical, a Tribunal, part of the legal system. Sadly they conduct themselves like a kangeroo court and fail basic standards of independence, and while Appeals are allowed, they are to Ofcom.