(22-12-2011 23:26 )winsaw Wrote: [ -> ]Friday 23 December-
0530-1330 TeeJay(5), Mikaela Witt, The Dash, Lolly Lopez
1330-2200 Rosie Beever, Bailey Cream, Sarah Daniels, Ani James
Finally Bailey's name on the schedule, looking forward to her second daytime appearance
Can i ask for clarification, is she on P/B Chat sky 902 , if so glad it days as the stream is still poor and capping is still problematic to say the least
(18-12-2011 23:06 )winsaw Wrote: [ -> ] (18-12-2011 19:57 )mr mystery Wrote: [ -> ]Firstly what the fuck are RLC playing at asking their girls to work 9 hours with just two 15min breaks
sounds ok to me i do 9:15 and only get 45 mins break
(18-12-2011 20:58 )gator8 Wrote: [ -> ]I don't understand why Playboy/RLC feel the need to impose stricter rules on the girls.Ofcom's are strict enough as it is.
simple playboy have just been fined £50000 and if they had not kissed ofcoms ass and said they would do the following it could have been a lot more
Those compliance measures comprised: ensuring the female presenters wear adequate underwear that covers their genital areas sufficiently leading to a reduction in the “intrusive feel” to the shots; stopping presenters cupping their genitals until they have further clarity on the issue; restricting more sexual behaviour to later in the evening; instructing camera operators to restrict the shots to mid-range shots only (as opposed to close-up or extreme close up shots); and "ensuring the presenters do not spit or let saliva drip onto their bodies as if to emulate ejaculate".
i think it is most important to think of the following when having a go at the cameraman or girl-
nine camera operators/producers have been dismissed, five presenters have been dismissed and three presenters suspended.
so i think you can see why they don't want to go to close to the line
Ah so thats why Jet Black left
why don't Redlight or any other babeshows (i know babestation has babestation extreme) just do a Pay per night service or monthly subscription?
I know you still can't see penetration and full on close-ups on Adult Channels but you still get 1000's of people buying them, and if the girls wanted to do Pay 2 Watch shows without worrying about Ofcom too much surely it would make sence.
Or I know "another babeshow" that has on their website their normal channels and a couple of other streams that's more XXX - If the girls wanted too why don't Redlight just do this? they already charge 9.99 a month to watch the streams.
It's just a thought..
Also why i'm here how come none of the babeshows read out txts anymore (well you know what i mean, they rarely do these days) I remember sending txts to one of the babestation channels frequently and they just had 2 girls all night reading out txts dealing with requests everynight - it was great connecting to the girls and suddenly they stopped doing it.
like the set that the worlds sexist babe Dannii Harwood is on wish i was that peino not sure how spel that. Makes the change from the other sets the background is good too
(18-12-2011 23:06 )winsaw Wrote: [ -> ]simple playboy have just been fined £50000 and if they had not kissed ofcoms ass and said they would do the following it could have been a lot more
The more they keep kissing Ofcom's ass, the more they'll fart in their face. They'll just fine them again for a new set of made up as they go along rules.
I'm not one of this boards 'Down With Ofcom' placard waving protesters, but even I know the only way to stop Ofcom taking liberties is to fight them legally. Possibly the European courts. There's too many inconsistencies in that way nudity & sex is allowed on some channels but not another. When even certain channels can swear & show sex simulation in adverts but some can't in show. Surely the 'offended' doesn't care if it's editorial or not.
The channels look unlikely to get together, but surely Playboy are big enough to fight.
If sex is allowed on regular tv as part of a story line then why can they say that adult themed shows are bad? Seems like one law for one and another law for everyone else. Its a pity because i know for example Dionne always tells people under 18 not to watch or call.
What i can't understand is why Playboy hasn't done what Babestation has done and got a Dutch/European non Ofcom regulated licence , Playboy already have branches in Europe so like BS they should have no problems using a European licence to broadcast on UK TV with , even if channels without a Ofcom licence have to more or less show what channel do with a Ofcom licence they don't get Ofcom fines . If Playboy had got a overseas licence like BS they wouldn't have got the bloody great big fine , plus the 5 girls that got dismissed and other suspended as well as the 9 camera men/producers that also got dismissed that winsaw mentions would all probably still be in a job .
With all the recent RLC staff dismissals that winsaw mentions that was a direct result of the Ofcom stuff it does answer the question as to why RLC/Playboy are always advertising for new staff , obviously with a combined total of 14 staff members being dismissed and others suspended it's bound to leave them short staffed at times especially camera men /producer wise , it does also answer the question as to why some camera men seem to be so nervous at times , obviously they are scared of showing to much and loosing their jobs because of bloody Ofcom . So surly if Playboy want to avoid all the fines , staff dismissals , Ofcom ass kissing , nervous staff etc they could look at doing things the BS way and start using the overseas licence method to avoid all this and render themselves largely immune from Ofcom .
(20-12-2011 12:39 )derek purcell28 Wrote: [ -> ]i just look at the schedule and there is no Dannii Harwood but on schedule before it she is working can clear lt up for me please thank you
(23-12-2011 13:32 )mr mystery Wrote: [ -> ]What i can't understand is why Playboy hasn't done what Babestation has done and got a Dutch/European non Ofcom regulated licence , Playboy already have branches in Europe so like BS they should have no problems using a European licence to broadcast on UK TV with , even if channels without a Ofcom licence have to more or less show what channel do with a Ofcom licence they don't get Ofcom fines . If Playboy had got a overseas licence like BS they wouldn't have got the bloody great big fine , plus the 5 girls that got dismissed and other suspended as well as the 9 camera men/producers that also got dismissed that winsaw mentions would all probably still be in a job .
With all the recent RLC staff dismissals that winsaw mentions that was a direct result of the Ofcom stuff it does answer the question as to why RLC/Playboy are always advertising for new staff , obviously with a combined total of 14 staff members being dismissed and others suspended it's bound to leave them short staffed at times especially camera men /producer wise , it does also answer the question as to why some camera men seem to be so nervous at times , obviously they are scared of showing to much and loosing their jobs because of bloody Ofcom . So surly if Playboy want to avoid all the fines , staff dismissals , Ofcom ass kissing , nervous staff etc they could look at doing things the BS way and start using the overseas licence method to avoid all this and render themselves largely immune from Ofcom .
BS and RLC operate similar babe channels and as such are still both operating under OfCom as the show is still broadcast in the UK, if BS break the same rules as RLC they will also be warned then fined.
The only thing BS get away with is not having their website directly linked to their channel which allows them to have explicit images on their website rather than behind a members area and also promote the more adult channels.
I'm pretty sure that even BS aren't stupid enough to try and push OfCom too far which is why they have both types of channel, granted RLC may have been playing it too safe lately but i would rather they did that than lose yet another channel this year.
Hopefully things will have died down in the new year and RLC can start relaxing a bit and let the girls do what they do best without too many strings attached.
As for operating in Europe for more flexibility it may actually be a case that they don't want to. Playboy (not their sister companies) do not do hardcore porn, so why would they want their channels to?
And even though they have some porn stars like Michelle Thorne, Linsey etc I'm guessing that not many others would want to do full solo etc so they would then have to find even more girls!
Just a bit of info for twistedmango after reading his previous post on the matter on the previous page (post 2370)
(11-06-2011 21:17 )Chilly Wrote: [ -> ]Thought I'd ask the enemy to clarify the situation regarding Babestation; this was their reply:
Quote:Because the company which provides Babestation is based in the Netherlands, it is licensed and regulated by the relevant authorities in the Netherlands, and not by Ofcom. The relevant authorities in the Netherlands are the Nederlands Instituut voor de Classificatie van Audiovisual Media (NICAM), which regulates the content of television channels, and the Commissariat Voor De Media (CVDM), which has issued the licence.
Television broadcast licences which are granted in one European country are recognised in other European countries, and TV channels licensed in one EC country are often available to viewers in other countries. Babestation is an example of this. Although the channel is licensed in the Netherlands, it is carried on the Freeview platform here in the UK.
(10-11-2011 21:34 )Sootbag1 Wrote: [ -> ]The jurisdiction issue seems to be complicated (unsurprisingly!), but I've found two documents that may help shed some light.
The first one is Article 2 of the EU's Audiovisual and Media Policies Directive. This focuses on the subject of 'jurisdiction'. There's a bit to read there, but I think the key point is:
"To avoid cases of double jurisdiction or absence of jurisdiction, each provider of media services comes under the jurisdiction of one and only one EU country for the purposes of the directive. This will depend chiefly on where their central administration is located and where management decisions are taken on programming or selection of content. Further (subsidiary) criteria include the location of the workforce and any satellite uplink, and the use of a country’s satellite capacity."
On Ofcom's website, they provide a PDF document setting out their guidelines for dealing with regulators in other EU member states in relation to UK-licensed TV channels.
Just thought i'd quote these to posts as they relate to my post on this thread concerning Playboy getting a overseas licence .
Like i have said Ofcom do not regulate give out fines or sit in judgement on channels not using a Ofcom licence , the EU country/state that granted the licence is the one responsible for dealing with complaints not Ofcom and for making decisions about if a channel has breached it's licence conditions or not , ie the Netherlands licencing body "NICAM" , If Playboy had got a Dutch licence they wouldn't have had to pay a fine to Ofcom or dismiss 14 staff members and suspend others .
Also my comments were not about Playboy showing harder content if they had a Dutch license , i was just mealy stating that a Dutch licence would render them largely immune from Ofcom fines just like BS because just like BS they wouldn't be regulated by Ofcom .
(edit} just thought i'd mention when chilly says "thought i'd ask the enemy to clarify the situation" he was talking about Ofcom .