Quote:In the eyes of OFCOM, we were a telemarketing channel because we were, effectively, selling something. The word ‘porn’ wasn’t used in the studio as not everyone sees a sexy woman in lingerie gyrating on cheap furniture as porn. You can put as many regulations on as you like, but at the end of the day it was very explicit, sexualised and erotic.
The producers, cameramen & presenter should always be trying to be as "explicit, sexualised & erotic" as possible to increase their ability to sell something.
(21-06-2017 19:35 )babelover48 Wrote: [ -> ]I wonder what it would be like on the phones if the shoe was on the other foot so to speak?..... 
.
This did happen, on sky, some channel in the 940's had guys on it, that you could phone, not sure how long it lasted, only a matter of weeks, maybe months.
(21-06-2017 23:28 )FanofCamilla Wrote: [ -> ] (21-06-2017 19:35 )babelover48 Wrote: [ -> ]I wonder what it would be like on the phones if the shoe was on the other foot so to speak?..... .
This did happen, on sky, some channel in the 940's had guys on it, that you could phone, not sure how long it lasted, only a matter of weeks, maybe months.
Yes, it seemed to be aimed at the gay market more than women callers.
I wonder how OFCOM dealt with the complaints if there were any...
There have been at least two gay channels on Sky, that I can remember. They weren't around for very long though.
Best night across all the channels in ages in my opinion. With so many fave babes on, it was difficult to know where to look.
WOW the shows don't seem to have a youth policy.. Tonight I make the average age is around 35+
(30-06-2017 22:20 )Charlemagne Wrote: [ -> ]WOW the shows don't seem to have a youth policy.. Tonight I make the average age is around 35+
In some cases age is just a number, Dannii and Dionne look good for their respective ages imo
plus the older women and the boring girls have the best call stats and there's a mix of those on tonight
(30-06-2017 22:20 )Charlemagne Wrote: [ -> ]WOW the shows don't seem to have a youth policy.. Tonight I make the average age is around 35+
age is only a number
doesn't bother me there are a few older babes on tonight
Apologies for pulling the following to the main thread but I didn't want my general comments to seem like they were targeting any individual babe or poster...
(03-07-2017 06:34 )southlondonphil Wrote: [ -> ]... I'm sure Tori's plenty attractive enough. In terms of looks she's as good as anyone on Studio 66. I don't think she's the most natural girl on the phones though. Some girls are probably better at cultivating regular callers, which can really bump their call figures up.
^ This. Exactly... The part I've bolded is the sort of observation that deserves to be stickied here (if we did that kind of thing
) IMO.
Mainstream attractiveness and energetic skin-filled performances don't ALWAYS equal loads of calls quite evidently. There is a whole other side to a successful babes standing that barely gets a mention on here in relative terms compared to reams and reams of guys assessing the visuals (Ive been as guilty as any of this in the past btw).
Quite obviously, a hot night girl MUST carry her apparent visual horniness over into her conversation. She has to hold and seduce her callers and listeners alike. She has to cultivate her crowd with an engaging and enticing expression of aspects of her personality. She has to be able to heighten the sexual side of herself in the right way, on demand, and put that over effectively enough to build calls night after night, when, by rights, the repetition should be having a deadening effect. She'll hopefully be able to use language (dirty and clean) in an evocative and varied way. The best babes will then tailor the caller experience to feedback (if any) from the particular guy - working to his desires and individualising the call to garner even greater customer satisfaction. Like any good conversationalist that part is about good listening skills - an essential component of a charismatic personality. Guys can then be charmed back as well as drained sexually.
Without these things in her locker even the most stunning and commited performer may well struggle on the shows.
But we consistently miss speaking of this here. And ignoring these aspects of a babe's job completely will leave the casual observer struggling to understand the apparent success and ubiquitous scheduling of certain proponents...
This is actually part of the disconnect between the babes and their general viewing audience that is often bemoaned round these parts. Yes, it is quite obvious that large sections of the industry hold this forum and its 'fans' in contempt. But just one small reason for that is the lack of perception exhibited for how the babes work on shows; primarly in a lack of acknowledgement of
who they are actually working to satisfy. In this and in how the forum under-expresses its appreciation for their communication skills, I think the insiders have a valid point.
The forum simply does not discuss these aspects enough. A visable awareness of them is sorely lacking in many, many, comments on here. The explanation for the former may well be immediately obvious. The latter is less excusable. An expanded perspective is everything in any criticism. Even that of a wank channel.