07-08-2010, 16:51
07-08-2010, 18:45
I am probably not the best person to give impartial views of the continuing OFCOM and Bangmedia saga , i detest OFCOM and every thing they stand for (censorship) so i cannot find it within my self to ever agree with breaches of the adult entertainment code that they bring against Bangmedia or any of the shows , live and let live i say and let people enjoy themselves , if that means watching adult tv then so be it , there are far more worse thing in this wold than stumbling onto a channel showing gorgeous naked girls .
07-08-2010, 22:07
BangBabes don't help themselves with borderline content close to 9pm, flashes, and some of the daytime stuff sounds interesting too. BUT a lot of the other upheld complaints are stretching credibility. Either frequent "visible outer labia and anal detail" means what I think, and all the channels show it from time to time, or it is a level of explicitness that I just haven't seen.
11-08-2010, 07:55
anyone know how long bang have to pay the fine ?
11-08-2010, 17:37
(07-08-2010 22:07 )eccles Wrote: [ -> ]BangBabes don't help themselves with borderline content close to 9pm, flashes, and some of the daytime stuff sounds interesting too. BUT a lot of the other upheld complaints are stretching credibility. Either frequent "visible outer labia and anal detail" means what I think, and all the channels show it from time to time, or it is a level of explicitness that I just haven't seen.
Why should anyone find any parts of the human body offensive on TV after 9.00pm? Very narrow minded as you see a lot more of it on TV in other countries. Why punish night show producers and let daytime TV get away with worse things such as swearing while children are listening? Its not fair to fine people because of adult content at night. I hope theOfcom authorities will see sense soon.
11-08-2010, 17:51
(11-08-2010 17:37 )Angie51 Wrote: [ -> ]I hope theOfcom authorities will see sense soon.
I wouldn't hold your breath Angie.
14-08-2010, 01:23
Interesting point from the Communications Act 2003 - that's the law behind what Ofcom does. Section 316 Conditions relating to competition matters says licence "conditions must include the conditions (if any) that OFCOM consider appropriate for securing that the provider of the service does not— .
(a) enter into or maintain any arrangements, or .
(b) engage in any practice, .
which OFCOM consider, or would consider, to be prejudicial to fair and effective competition"
Thats a pretty broad mandate, and empowers Ofcom to take action against, say, a broadcaster that, say:
a) aims to drive a competitor out of business by repeatedly complaining about material similar to what they broadcast, or
b) sets its call rates below an economic value, or
c) corners the market in qualified staff, or
d) gets economic advantage by not paying staff.
We have seen examples of the last category in the past when small channels set up, employed top models, then went bust owing thousands in modelling fees and to set designers etc. Using that kind of economic flexibility an operator could force competitors out by simply bidding up the price of a very limited number of slots in the adult sector.
The power could also be used to separate ownership on encrypted and free channels, and to clip the wings of sexshop owners who don't want strong stuff on TV.
Ofcom have shown no hesitation in using their competition powers to give Sky a kicking over sports channels and arrangements with Virgin and BT, it's a pity they allow themselves to be used as tools by other channels to squash BangBabes who don't seem to feel they can compete on equal terms.
(a) enter into or maintain any arrangements, or .
(b) engage in any practice, .
which OFCOM consider, or would consider, to be prejudicial to fair and effective competition"
Thats a pretty broad mandate, and empowers Ofcom to take action against, say, a broadcaster that, say:
a) aims to drive a competitor out of business by repeatedly complaining about material similar to what they broadcast, or
b) sets its call rates below an economic value, or
c) corners the market in qualified staff, or
d) gets economic advantage by not paying staff.
We have seen examples of the last category in the past when small channels set up, employed top models, then went bust owing thousands in modelling fees and to set designers etc. Using that kind of economic flexibility an operator could force competitors out by simply bidding up the price of a very limited number of slots in the adult sector.
The power could also be used to separate ownership on encrypted and free channels, and to clip the wings of sexshop owners who don't want strong stuff on TV.
Ofcom have shown no hesitation in using their competition powers to give Sky a kicking over sports channels and arrangements with Virgin and BT, it's a pity they allow themselves to be used as tools by other channels to squash BangBabes who don't seem to feel they can compete on equal terms.
13-09-2010, 12:03
ofcom have found bang in breach again
http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/enforce...ns/obb165/
when are they going to stop victimising them.....
http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/enforce...ns/obb165/
when are they going to stop victimising them.....
13-09-2010, 13:13
The 3 Bangbabes shows complained about were
Bang Babes, Tease Me, 23 July 2010, 22:03 to 22:30
Bang Babes, Tease Me, 31 July 2010, 01:40 to 02:15
Bang Babes, Tease Me, 6 August 2010, 22:00 to 22:25 and 00:00 to 00:45
All of the above broadcasts featured the same female presenter.
From the spitting that was described, I assume Jet was the presenter.
The EarlyBird show complained about was
Early Bird Tease Me TV (Freeview) 25 July 2010, 07:25 to 07:45
Ofcom noted that the female presenter was wearing a revealing pink and black lace bra top, a pink thong, fishnet stockings and stilettos. During the broadcast the presenter adopted certain positions including lying on her side with her legs wide open and on all fours with her hips raised. While in these positions the presenter repeatedly: stroked and touched her body including her crotch area, legs, buttocks and breasts; moved and gyrated her hips in a sexually provocative way; licked her lips; and stuck her tongue out to reveal her tongue stud. The presenter was also shown lightly spanking her buttocks and jiggling her breasts.
It looks like it was Kate Darcy, from these pics posted on that day. #297
http://www.babeshows.co.uk/showthread.ph...#pid579179
Bang Babes, Tease Me, 23 July 2010, 22:03 to 22:30
Bang Babes, Tease Me, 31 July 2010, 01:40 to 02:15
Bang Babes, Tease Me, 6 August 2010, 22:00 to 22:25 and 00:00 to 00:45
All of the above broadcasts featured the same female presenter.
From the spitting that was described, I assume Jet was the presenter.
The EarlyBird show complained about was
Early Bird Tease Me TV (Freeview) 25 July 2010, 07:25 to 07:45
Ofcom noted that the female presenter was wearing a revealing pink and black lace bra top, a pink thong, fishnet stockings and stilettos. During the broadcast the presenter adopted certain positions including lying on her side with her legs wide open and on all fours with her hips raised. While in these positions the presenter repeatedly: stroked and touched her body including her crotch area, legs, buttocks and breasts; moved and gyrated her hips in a sexually provocative way; licked her lips; and stuck her tongue out to reveal her tongue stud. The presenter was also shown lightly spanking her buttocks and jiggling her breasts.
It looks like it was Kate Darcy, from these pics posted on that day. #297
http://www.babeshows.co.uk/showthread.ph...#pid579179
13-09-2010, 15:37
(11-08-2010 17:37 )Angie51 Wrote: [ -> ]What exactly happens these days when something like the movie 'Showgirls' is shown on mainstream/freeview channels? I've seen C4 show the full-frontal nude scenes from it post 9pm, or is it now the case that the Ofcommies would insist on such scenes being heavily edited and that past 'historical' screenings of such are considered to have been regrettable? Certainly, during the Noughties, I noticed a much more puritanical attitude being taken in terms of TV content - all this succeeded in doing for me was to drive me to alternative sources for my adult entertainment. The whole attitude is crazy and seems to be out of line with the general ground-mass of contemporary social morals. How can a society become more and more open and liberal yet also be subject to increasingly draconian censorship? I am confused (as normal).(07-08-2010 22:07 )eccles Wrote: [ -> ]BangBabes don't help themselves with borderline content close to 9pm, flashes, and some of the daytime stuff sounds interesting too. BUT a lot of the other upheld complaints are stretching credibility. Either frequent "visible outer labia and anal detail" means what I think, and all the channels show it from time to time, or it is a level of explicitness that I just haven't seen.
Why should anyone find any parts of the human body offensive on TV after 9.00pm? Very narrow minded as you see a lot more of it on TV in other countries. Why punish night show producers and let daytime TV get away with worse things such as swearing while children are listening? Its not fair to fine people because of adult content at night. I hope theOfcom authorities will see sense soon.