since when was the night just being talked about?
(20-02-2013 01:33 )schmoo Wrote: [ -> ]Indeed mr mystery.
Which highlights the point I raised in my earlier post - relative investigation/action etc against complaints made is just not happening across the board. Clear bias towards the babe channels.
you are failing to look at the seriousness of those, could be something that isn't serious compared to babe channels, and how many of those complaints are for the same thing. I haven't looked at the bulletin that Mr Mystery says however.
^ I think there's only been one or maybe two in breach rulings made against the day shows in the last few years, one or two complaints are usually listed in Ofcom's bulletins but Ofcom usually decide not to investigate further, but saying that the ChatGirl day show has been receiving quite a few complaints compared to all the other day shows, it's assumed they are from someone or a rival channel that is deliberately targeting ChatGirl for some reason, ChatGirl is quite a compliant show and their girls don't do anymore than rival channels, four complaints were listed concerning ChatGirl in Ofcom's last broadcast bulletin, Ofcom decided not to investigate the complaints further, in the same bulletin the Liverpool v Mansfield football match received 8 complaints for exceeding generally expected standards .
Generally the babe channels just don't receive complaints in any vast numbers .
Is the pope a catholic, do bear's shit in the woods. Schmoo is 100% correct and also based on My Mystery's statistics Ofcom are unequivocally biased towards the babe channels aswell as the subsciption based ones.
Also based on what RCTV has told us what goes on behind the scenes at ofcom it's clear for all to see that they do indeed have a negative agenda. For anybody to dispute this fact is talking nonsense.
Ofcom have also stated publicly that they can even launch an investigation into any of the channels having recieved no complaints whatsoever. They are an organisation made up of corrupt bureaucrats who are rotten to the core. You cannot defend Ofcom as they have no defense.
Scottishbloke, I don't believe they have a negative agenda, more they don't necessarily understand why things are liked, if you look at the current contents board, none have babe channels experience, and there are no co-opted's/advisors, i believe could be wrong, involved in the babe channels.
The could launch an investigation in to any channel, not just babe channels.
Remember that seriousness of a complaint will always out way number, as if you look at some complaints they are VERY petty.
Scottishbloke read posts in mainstream nudity thread, not sure if you have, you'll find out why I left ofcom, and will agree with last statement.
The day proper people who know the industry could overhaul ofcom will be a good day.
I do think that complaints have had more of a harsh outcome in terms of fines etc, is because there is no one at ofcom who is willing to help the channels, well help the producers/camera operators, as it's really no good going to head guys of the channels, but going to the coal face of the channels actually gets results.
would like to stress this
I don't like ofcom (due to various arguments with them), but I see why they get to their decisions.
(20-02-2013 12:52 )RCTV Wrote: [ -> ]...
Remember that seriousness of a complaint will always out way number, as if you look at some complaints they are VERY petty.
...
This may be true, but
who decides how serious a complaint is? OFCOM!!!
Ofcom have set
themselves an agenda that says what is and isn't acceptable on the babechannels.
They are the ones declaring, for instance, that 2 girls touching each other, at 2/3am, on a channel in the adult section of the epg, is likely to cause 'widespread offence', and that it is their duty to stop this kind of thing incase some irresponsible parent is allowing their child to watch these channels unsupervised at that time of night!
Given that there are only one or two complaints about these matters, and given that, by their own admission, these complaints are often from within the industry, it does suggest that there is in fact no 'widespread' offence being caused.
Further to that, there is no actual evidence that exposure to such material actually causes 'harm' of any kind even if a minor was exposed to it.
I fully accept that there have to be limits, I for one don't expect hardcore porn on free to air tv, but, the arbitrary rules imposed upon the babeshows, and the lack of empirical evidence to support those rules, and the fact that harder content is allowed uncensored and unpunished on other channels, often at prime time, and the way ofcom jump to investigate the most minor infringements based on solitary complaints from other channels, all this suggests an agenda of some kind, and it is clearly not an agenda in
favour of the babechannels.
Has anyone thought to ask ofcom if they like babe channels and if they actually understand why they exist and what they are there to achieve.
(20-02-2013 14:29 )RCTV Wrote: [ -> ]Has anyone thought to ask ofcom if they like babe channels and if they actually understand why they exist and what they are there to achieve.
I think that even if someone was to enquire as to Ofcom`s understanding of the appeal/purpose of the babechannels we would be unable to understand the answer they gave.
(20-02-2013 15:52 )jimmyt73 Wrote: [ -> ] (20-02-2013 14:29 )RCTV Wrote: [ -> ]Has anyone thought to ask ofcom if they like babe channels and if they actually understand why they exist and what they are there to achieve.
I think that even if someone was to enquire as to Ofcom`s understanding of the appeal/purpose of the babechannels we would be unable to understand the answer they gave.
you would be able to understand it, may be different to how you see it though.
i understand ofcom have these rules but they need to provide evidence when they say children are up at 2am and can watch the shows, just that point needs clarifying because its clear they are using children as a "weapon" to back up what they are saying in relation to the channels having the potential to harm people.
furthermore what they are saying about children is implying that there is a shit load of bad parents out there and basically saying children are corrupted.
To use children as a way of justifying their actions without no evidence is shocking
rctv may i ask what made you decide to become a member on this forum ?