(30-04-2012 23:15 )oldboy1047 Wrote: [ -> ]lets face it providing they stay within ofcom rules the channels are probably quite happy as things are.if the girls could show more they would probably want more money and would they get more calls?.as it is the channels are obviously making money and have always got an excuse for not putting on better shows so i dont think theres much chance of them challenging ofcom as much as we would like to see them do it.so while ofcom are still here i think we just have to put up with it or switch off
Yes I think they would make more money and have more calls, as this seemed evident to me on the babe channels before Ofcom came knocking. Elite is the biggest example of this. Caty Cole was always on the phone in the past, but now not so much, and the nude 2-4-1s were so popular they'd sometimes last three hours!!!
I think they are making enough now, which is why they don't care to challenge anything, as it would cost more money and probably not work in their favor, but I think they were more successful before all of the silly censorship.
Court action would e hugely expensive and fought every step of the way. Its one thing for a large scale publisher, quite another for a customer or a little channel operating out of a shed in someones back garden. A major difference with the R18 ruling was that was fought by someone owning a large number of sex shops who wanted to get into a new market - DVDs were replacing magazine sales. Today the babe channels are in the middle, between sex shops and high street magazines on one side, and the world interweb on the other. An operator with a chain of sex shops might be reluctant to see babe channels proposer. Someone with a growing web presence could feel the same way too.
Its daft because internet censorship will grow unless challenged while sex shops, DVDs and magazine sales will decline. In 5-10 years they will be quaint reminders of days gone by and difficult to find.
ISPs used to block a wide range of adult and other material until there was an industry change of heart. It wasnt even an opt in system, if a domain was block it was blocked, end of. If the Daily Mail and some MPs get their way a whole range of sites will be blocked unless the bill payer writes to the ISP specifically asking to be put on the perv list. Are you the bill payer in your home?
Stan says he doesnt see why babe channels could not broadcast strong material if they dropped the premium rate calls. Ofcoms track record is that they display originality when it comes to finding reasons for banning stuff. They already ban 'Sex Works At 18' except on encrypted channels from 10-5:30am under rule 1.18 even if there is no sales element. They also have considerable leeway. Mostly they use their discretion to let drama off but it could work the other way.
ScottishBloke says 3 channels have been killed. Its even worse than that, the entire live sex genre has been killed. There used to be multiple encrypted channels putting out several hours live penetrative and oral BG and GG sex every night of the week. Mostly the detail was out of sight but it was real and we also got to see held open pussies and external rubbing. For a while there was even a little FTA side on sex.
Then the live shows died. After a while one came back but it was a pale shadow of its former self with no interaction. Even that died.
Today there is only one live encrypted show on Sky, 30 minutes 2 or 3 times a week, and with all due respect, it is not a live sex show. Nude yes, sex no. There is also a live show of Freeview but many people would say that is in a different league to the old shows too.
(30-04-2012 23:20 )mrmann Wrote: [ -> ] (30-04-2012 23:15 )oldboy1047 Wrote: [ -> ]lets face it providing they stay within ofcom rules the channels are probably quite happy as things are.if the girls could show more they would probably want more money and would they get more calls?.as it is the channels are obviously making money and have always got an excuse for not putting on better shows so i dont think theres much chance of them challenging ofcom as much as we would like to see them do it.so while ofcom are still here i think we just have to put up with it or switch off
Yes I think they would make more money and have more calls, as this seemed evident to me on the babe channels before Ofcom cam knocking. Elite is the biggest example of this. Caty Cole was always on the phone in the past, but now not so much, and the nude 2-4-1s were so popular they'd sometimes last three hours!!!
I think they are making enough now, which is why they don't care to challenge anything, as it would cost more money and probably not work in their favor, but I think they were more successful before all of the silly censorship.
You no I've been reading all these posts about the possibility of taking Ofcom to the europeon courts of justice and even applying for a foreign license, which I personally think is the way to go, if the babe channels really wanted to seek for a foreign license. However the question in my mind, is do the babe channels really want to take on Ofcom, or even seek for a foreign license, surly they would have done something by now!!
I agree with the previous comments, that there must be enough callers calling them each week, so the channel owners think to themselves why should I bother to risk It, when things appear to be running relatively smooth? I guess if the public weren't calling then It would probably spur the channels into desperate action. Look I'm sick to death with Ofcom, I hate them with a passion, it just seems to me that the babe channels are happy enough with the way things are, and they don't want to rock the boat. I reckon if you ask any producer, they would love to show stronger content, that's why the foreign licence route seems to be the more promising way to go.
Maybe they're might be a rules change, I have a gut feeling that there will be, and soon!! I can't help but think that even the idiots who work at Ofcom must realise that these rules they impose on the channels are so out of date, and with the current defeat which ofcom suffered to the hands of there European neighbours, they became the laughing stock of regulators.
i hope your right about the rules change continental but i wouldnt hold my breath on that one
(30-04-2012 19:49 )fedup Wrote: [ -> ]Ofcom bang on about protecting kids yet show male kiddie penises on channel 4(daddy daycare plus some jungle tribe docu) and just at about 9.05pm a vagina is onscreen showing vaginal hole urethra(embarassing bodies)..
What the kids are doing is sexting each others genitals ,looking up porn on their laptops and allowing contraception at 13 promoting sex at 13 and again underage...So the government is protecting kids by allowing the above and ofcom are hell bent on fining anyone who shows a fanny lip..
I have asked so many people on the labia minora debate and most females shout girl power..Other people could not give a shiny shite so again ofcom is on its own with its FANNY LIP PHOBIA.
Why not everyone chip in and help fund a legal case against ofcom lol? It's clear from what's said above that people can dig up evidence which can help challenge ofcom
(30-04-2012 23:50 )oldboy1047 Wrote: [ -> ]i hope your right about the rules change continental but i wouldnt hold my breath on that one
Well Ofcom as we all no tend to change there tune when it suits them, however with the defeat in Europe, as I have previously mentioned in my post, and maybe possible other factors, I think there must be some discontent within the ranks.
Some might call Ofcom the laughing stock of Europe, me personally I'd call them the cunts of Europe, I just find the whole situation at present extremely depressing
Going back to the point made about the babe channels all going down the route of a web based show, if that is the solution then why is it that we allready have one called Sexstation TV yet we are still far from happy. There is a sort of magic that is brought to the big screen that is irreplaceable irrespective of how good the feed is and I guess that's why we continue to punish ourselves with the daily torture of being let down, night after night, I'm sure the rules will change and things will be more relaxed in the future but when, rules only change if the ones making them are being challenged.
If I was the one running Ofcom I'd say to the channels do what you want within reason, mind you I certainly wouldn't want to tune in to see anything like 2 girls, 1 cup material, even I have my limits
(01-05-2012 00:09 )Scottishbloke Wrote: [ -> ]If I was the one running Ofcom I'd say to the channels do what you want within reason, mind you I certainly wouldn't want to tune in to see anything like 2 girls, 1 cup material, even I have my limits
you'll see that on Rude Tube before you see two girls kissing, sucking and spanking eachother on the babeshows. and i'm only
barely joking
Now this official Ofcom video showing how parents/guardians can use the parental control features really flys in the face of Ofcom saying that insufficient measures are currently in place, talk about contradicting yourself
(01-05-2012 00:19 )cmiller Wrote: [ -> ] (01-05-2012 00:09 )Scottishbloke Wrote: [ -> ]If I was the one running Ofcom I'd say to the channels do what you want within reason, mind you I certainly wouldn't want to tune in to see anything like 2 girls, 1 cup material, even I have my limits
you'll see that on Rude Tube before you see two girls kissing, sucking and spanking eachother on the babeshows. and i'm only barely joking
Sadly that could be true. Some arsehole could work it into a documentary about the evils of the internet.
As for TV access controls being inadequate, how come a 4 digit PIN in good enough to keep Nigerian scammers out of idiots bank accounts but not good enough to stop self same idiots kids working the TV?