(28-11-2010 17:41 )hagman1989 Wrote: [ -> ]they should just fold and try to save face
as for the girls they can decide were to go from here i just hop tori and dionne keep in the game , or maybe slide over to some girl on girl porn (im allowed to dream)
Girls move about all the time, so for them it shouldn't be to hard for another channel to find them.
(28-11-2010 15:33 )bigguy01 Wrote: [ -> ] (28-11-2010 10:57 )gazfc Wrote: [ -> ]I agree with you there, Do you reckon the con-dom gov would have the balls to piss off the daily mail readers and axe ofcom though?
someone mentioned that the coalition gov is looking at taking the rule making part of ofcom moving it to the mp for the media, culture and sport department. dailly mail is only good for wiping your bum on.
That's a stupid idea, as the mp would just do what the mojority of his party followers want.
If ofcom was axed you'd think its responsibility would be passed on to the BBFC.
(26-11-2010 21:52 )aaron Wrote: [ -> ] (26-11-2010 21:27 )StanTheMan Wrote: [ -> ]This didn't make any sense anyway. I tuned these in using the 'other channels' feature and they were both broadcasting the same feed as 902 - so what was the point in tuning them in?
The point is that they weren't always broadcasting the same feed as channel 902.
This is annoying. It must have been before I discovered they were still available through 'other channels'. So during this period was the content on the hidden channels any stronger than it was on 902?
(28-11-2010 19:10 )StanTheMan Wrote: [ -> ] (26-11-2010 21:52 )aaron Wrote: [ -> ] (26-11-2010 21:27 )StanTheMan Wrote: [ -> ]This didn't make any sense anyway. I tuned these in using the 'other channels' feature and they were both broadcasting the same feed as 902 - so what was the point in tuning them in?
The point is that they weren't always broadcasting the same feed as channel 902.
This is annoying. It must have been before I discovered they were still available through 'other channels'. So during this period was the content on the hidden channels any stronger than it was on 902?
Pure unadulterated filth - pussy galore, fingers in every hole, stiff cocks, water sports, bukkake, the lot!
Just kidding, it was actually pretty tame - I think at that stage even Bang had realise the game was up.
sammie pennington has posted on her facebook that her night show next saturday 4th december is still on and said its no biggie the channels have gone and they will have new ones up and running soon
have a look at thewatchers links.
it appears ofcom are using evidence against bang from the webstreams not sky/freeview which is not their mandate.
the fernanda caps were shown on the webstream not on sky or freeview therefore they do not have the authority to warn bangmedia about content shown on net. if they are using the forum then it sets a very dangerous president for the future of ofcom and babechannels. the evidence is clear thats it from the webstream is that fernanda's head was looking at the camera which was used for freeview and sky, the camera showing her ass was for the webstream not sky/freeview. therefore ofcom are going beyond their mandate therefore bangmedia should be able go to court get this revoked licences overturn. ofcoms mandate is for tv not internet broadcasting. if they had th mandate for internet broadcasting than sexstation would be banned or forced to go pay per view.
the only authority that prosecute people for internet content are law enforcement agencies (fbi, police, interpol etc).
(28-11-2010 20:08 )bigguy01 Wrote: [ -> ]have a look at thewatchers links.
it appears ofcom are using evidence against bang from the webstreams not sky/freeview which is not their mandate.
the fernanda caps were shown on the webstream not on sky or freeview therefore they do not have the authority to warn bangmedia about content shown on net. if they are using the forum then it sets a very dangerous president for the future of ofcom and babechannels. the evidence is clear thats it from the webstream is that fernanda's head was looking at the camera which was used for freeview and sky, the camera showing her ass was for the webstream not sky/freeview. therefore ofcom are going beyond their mandate therefore bangmedia should be able go to court get this revoked licences overturn. ofcoms mandate is for tv not internet broadcasting. if they had th mandate for internet broadcasting than sexstation would be banned or forced to go pay per view.
the only authority that prosecute people for internet content are law enforcement agencies (fbi, police, interpol etc).
As I rarely ever watched Bang Babes, I never knew that the webstreams had different angles, but either way, that can not be used against them in any way, as those weren't the angles that were shown on TV. Ofcom can't do anything about the content on the internet, so they will have to use footage that was broadcasted on SKY and Freeview only.
Taking aside the whole who's in the right, who fucked up, and whatever...The biggest problem I have is the fact that Ofcom was set up without any oversight from the gen public.
They set their own rules, regulations and procedures and as a quango means we don't have any say in what they do or how they do it, as have been said in another post they were not set up as censors but that is exactly what they are doing.
I think Ofcom shouldn't be scrapped but should have a total overhaul of what they do, how they operate and what rules and reg's apply.
The first thing to stop is one channel complaining about another, and the type of complaint that goes along the lines of "I don't watch these channels myself but want to complain on behalf of those who might."
There has been a lot of Ofcom bashing on here - and I am one of them - but they do some good along the way. In one of the reports about Bang there was also a section that found against a foreign language station that was asking for donations for a charity but wasn't making it clear that the charity in question was the TV station itself!!!
I just think it's time to sort out some form of consistancy and also stop treating us as idoits that have to be protected from ourselves. Clearly demarcate between night and day shows (as another poster said night time and night time-lite).
It also wouldn't kill the stations to do a 'harder' show on the webstream with the girls that would want to do it, as most of us know a lot of the girls who do the night shows have done adult DVD's. If they made clear from the start what they are willing to do and what they are not then I believe that alot of the people who would ring up will respect that. After that it is up to the viewer what they watch, and if they get offended then use the bloody remote control and watch something else!
Sorry that turned into a rant - I'm going for a lie down in a darkend room...
(26-11-2010 12:36 )mikeboob Wrote: [ -> ]Prior to 1 September 2010, the material broadcast by the Licensees was subject to the Broadcasting Code, which includes the following specific provisions: . Licensees must therefore comply with the relevant Standards Code which applies to the material broadcast.
• Rule 1.17: “Material equivalent to the British Board of Film Classification ("BBFC") R18 rating must not be broadcast at any time.”
Of the 48 breaches of the Broadcasting Code:
• 1 related to material found to be in breach of Rule 1.17/7
What in the world was that?
Lets not start on the why or what and what if,for flips sake,it is we the public whom are being spanked,it is we the public whom are being treated the likes of children,and it is we the public who are letting these people put [there rules,not rules passed through parliament]but there self imposed rules made by themselves,passed by themselves and upheld by themselves and guess what.There is nobody in this nanny state of ours that you can turn to to contest there rules,weird or what,as I always thought that we were living in a free country not, as it is becoming,a dictatorship!
I far as I am aware, Ofcom can not prosecute any channel, using a webstream only broadcast as evidence.
They can prosecute them for advertising the website address, but only if that website is streaming 18R material. Which in this case, it wasn't or hasn't.
If Ofcom are really going ahead with these prosecutions, then Bang Media has good grounds to fight it. As it would seem Ofcom has over stepped it's mandate.