(26-02-2010 03:34 )DanVox Wrote: [ -> ] (22-02-2010 15:22 )IanG Wrote: [ -> ]And if Ofcom said to you, as they did to BB in Bulletin 120 that, 'close-up breast fondling, over-knicker pussy rubbing and inside-knicker 'simulated masturbation' should not be broadcast before 22:00', wouldn't you take it as read this would be fine after 22:00?
Ofcom got quite shirty about their previous ruling being turned around and used against them. "Just because we said it THIS is not allowed under THESE conditions, it does not mean the opposite, that THIS is allowed when the opposite conditions apply (ie after 10pm)". Ironically Ofcom themselves legitimised this argument.
According to them if the situation is the opposite then that means allowed/not allowed is reversed, even if the rule does not spell it out.
Here is what Rule 1.24 used to say until it was changed in December:
Premium subscription services and pay per view/night services may broadcast 'adult-sex' material between 2200 and 0530 provided that in addition to other protections named above ... manadatory PIN ... adult verification"
Several channels have argued that Rule 1.24 did not ban 'adult-sex' material on free-to-air channels as the Rule was specifically about pay channels. After all, it does not say that. Ofcom said Oh Yes It Did and fined them anyway.
So if they say its banned, its banned, and if they say its permitted sometimes its still banned. Interesting use of English.
DanVox, I think its becoming increasingly obvious that Ofcom are not fit to write pseudo 'laws' or rules. They're simply not qualified. Their Code is nought but a set of guidelines. How they can enforce it as 'law' when they're not lawyers, not legislators, not even elected representatives of the public and, moreover, their Code hasn't passed legal (e.g. Human Rights) scrutiny, simply beggars belief. Of course this is the Government's fault for bestowing such powers upon pissants but, then again, its what the Government wanted so they can impose censorship via the back door.
I do get really pissed off about this sort thing.
Lets make it plain and simply. If you don't want to view ladies fondling their private areas, then don't tune in after 10pm on channels over 900 and complain.
Just go to bed.
I don't really like the war games that people play over the internet, but I don't protest, I just don't join them on line because some people love to do this sort of thing.
I maybe not the only one thinking this, but at some point as adults in this society, as long as it is legal and no one is being hurt / abused why can we not just watch want we want to.(rant over)
^^^^ True. However, the channels don't exactly help the current situation either, as they seem quite happy grassing each other up!
(22-02-2010 15:22 )IanG Wrote: [ -> ]...And if Ofcom said to you, as they did to BB in Bulletin 120 that, 'close-up breast fondling, over-knicker pussy rubbing and inside-knicker 'simulated masturbation' should not be broadcast before 22:00', wouldn't you take it as read this would be fine after 22:00? Indeed, taken 'as a whole', you might even interpret it to mean no 'sexualised action' before 22:00?
Ofcom got the hump when the implication of their own rulings was thrown back at them and basically denied ever saying stronger material was permitted after 10pm.
But here's what the
Sanctions Committee said "Ofcom wishes to make clear that such content is unacceptable, especially so soon after the watershed between 21.00 and 22.00" (
Babeworld Sanction 12 Feb 2007 para 1.9. Yes, they say "Adult-Sex" is not allowed free-to-air, but they do clearly draw a line at 10pm. (The ruling was about explicit laguage and [genuine] mastrubation, not a quick flash and simulated masturbation). It's
their own Sanctions Committee people, they cannot ignore the Ruling.
Hadn't noticed this before today, but the Ofcom Sanctions Committee decision on breaches by a couple of defunct channels were announced last week:
http://www.ofcom.org.uk/tv/obb/ocsc_adjud/springdoo.pdf
It should be noted that some of these fines (totalling £24,000) seem to be for failure to provide recordings of material, as well as other breaches for Babe-style content.
A lot to read, but decidedly easy to pick holes in it.
Thanks for the above link.
It would appear that Chatback did get into trouble after all, a lot of posters wondered how long they would get away with their output.
Having checked the dates, the daytime performance related to April, night time to Juliet.
(Chatback was also operating on channel 907 at that time)
Cobblers, I think Bang Media should get the BBFC to rate their recording of the nights in question and find out if they're 18 or R18 sex works (or maybe even less...). Ofcom need to explain why anything which is avaiable to any adult in any video stockist should be placed behind encryption - i.e. 18-rated 'sex works' need no additional restrictions on supply by law so Ofcom have no legal right or necessity/precedent to demand it.
Who woke the bastards up? Thats what i want to know!!