'Tamestation'

(13-10-2009 18:54 )elgar1uk Wrote:  Do people on 'Have I Got News For You' really say things like 'spunk on my tits you f****** c***'? If so, that programme must have been spiced up a lot since I last watched it.

Vila did include feature films, tv drama, documentaries, sitcoms and stand-up comedy in that list.

Mind you, I have never heard the words "Clock" and "Minky" substitute their intended meaning in any other medium other than "Babe Shows".

But Vila's example is a clear example of Ofcom's hypocrisy and bias.

Would the Babe Shows dare to say "Tw.at" and "Pissed"?

"David Cameron did not breach regulations by saying tw.at and pissed off on Christian O'Connell's Absolute Radio show, Ofcom has ruled.

The incident prompted 20 complaints about offensive language to Ofcom, but the broadcasting watchdog said the show was not in breach of its rules.

An Ofcom spokesman said: In the context of the interview and the programme overall, the remarks did not breach the broadcasting code."

Double standards there perhaps?

But do you agree with Ofcom's stance on the Babe Shows Elgar?

Take a look at this video and see how stupid it is in the context:

Does anybody know why a lot of those words are only offensive to British Asians?

(13-10-2009 18:54 )elgar1uk Wrote:  Do people on 'Have I Got News For You' really say things like 'spunk on my tits you f****** c***'? If so, that programme must have been spiced up a lot since I last watched it.

Read my post again. I said 'words' not 'phrases'.

(13-10-2009 19:18 )Deb x Wrote:  I don't think viewers get off to those shows

How is this relevant? Ofcom's wording contains no qualification of anyone 'getting off' on explicit sexual language. It states quite categorically that such language requires encryption. End of.

(13-10-2009 20:23 )vila Wrote:  

(13-10-2009 19:18 )Deb x Wrote:  I don't think viewers get off to those shows

How is this relevant? Ofcom's wording contains no qualification of anyone 'getting off' on explicit sexual language. It states quite categorically that such language requires encryption. End of.

It's relevant in the context of a discussion which has several times mentioned channels having an intention to 'sexually arouse' viewers.

It was also intended as a humorous response to elgar's comment.

*deadpan*

(13-10-2009 20:38 )Deb x Wrote:  It's relevant in the context of a discussion which has several times mentioned channels having an intention to 'sexually arouse' viewers.

I agree that aspect has been mentioned here but it's a bit of a red herring because it isn't mentioned in Ofcom's statement.

Quote:It was also intended as a humorous response to elgar's comment.

*deadpan*

Sorry. The smiley hadn't registered on my peanut of a brain.

(13-10-2009 19:58 )vostok 1 Wrote:  But do you agree with Ofcom's stance on the Babe Shows Elgar?

I can't see an alternative to their requirement for encryption. Someone mentioned parental controls, but I thought that only worked on satellite. How would using parental controls help with terrestrial transmissions?

(13-10-2009 21:59 )elgar1uk Wrote:  How would using parental controls help with terrestrial transmissions?

In the same way it does with satellite transmissions.

(13-10-2009 23:23 )vila Wrote:   In the same way it does with satellite transmissions.

Does freeview come with parental controls then?

(14-10-2009 09:49 )aldershot1993 Wrote:  

(13-10-2009 23:23 )vila Wrote:   In the same way it does with satellite transmissions.

Does freeview come with parental controls then?

Yes, all freeview boxes, TVs and PVRs can make use of a PIN to block certain channels if required.

I had no idea. You learn something every day.