occcurances like that can be used in emails to ofcom , and asked why such things are allowed on mainstream tv but not on an adult channel , their answers will be intersting to say the least !!!
(30-11-2012 03:24 )eccles Wrote: [ -> ]Channels vary and there have been complaints about some in the past, but I dont think thats it. Financial issues could also be cause for complaint about psychic, shopping and gambling channels. There are people who get a brief kick from buying tat and have homes full of the stuff. A few fraud cases have even featured sad middle aged women who have stolen thousands of pounds and spent a sizeable portion on hideous garbage with limited resale value. One recent Ofcom sanctions case was about a channel with a health show where people rang up on a premium rate number. Among other things they were fined for giving medical advice without seeing the caller. In its defence the channel said if they did not give advice callers would keep ringing back (at premium rates) until they got it. These days there are a lot of roulette and poker channels. Many religious channels solicit donations.
All of these have potential for viewers to run up large bills, possibly unaffordable bills, and have little or no entertainment value in the traditional sense that would keep Drama teachers and Arts luvvies happy.
Despite this it is rare for Ofcom to even investigate psychic, gambling, teleshopping or religious channels. When they do the focus is hardly ever on financial aspects, despite potential for harm.
No, Ofcom gives babe channels a hard time because it dislikes sexual content, and no other reason.
I appreciate your views on this subject of censorship, But as far as sexual content goes, according to all the other recent posts it seems that ofcom are quite generous in letting things of a sexual nature pass by. And all the other genres of tv you mention, does anyone know what they can and can't do? 'I don't'. For me it's the "so-called" seedy nature of adult TV that keep the censors shackles firmly tied. Plus the unwillingness to stand and fight their corner by the makers.
(05-12-2012 07:50 )shankey! Wrote: [ -> ]occcurances like that can be used in emails to ofcom , and asked why such things are allowed on mainstream tv but not on an adult channel , their answers will be intersting to say the least !!!
(30-11-2012 03:24 )eccles Wrote: [ -> ]Channels vary and there have been complaints about some in the past, but I dont think thats it. Financial issues could also be cause for complaint about psychic, shopping and gambling channels. There are people who get a brief kick from buying tat and have homes full of the stuff. A few fraud cases have even featured sad middle aged women who have stolen thousands of pounds and spent a sizeable portion on hideous garbage with limited resale value. One recent Ofcom sanctions case was about a channel with a health show where people rang up on a premium rate number. Among other things they were fined for giving medical advice without seeing the caller. In its defence the channel said if they did not give advice callers would keep ringing back (at premium rates) until they got it. These days there are a lot of roulette and poker channels. Many religious channels solicit donations.
All of these have potential for viewers to run up large bills, possibly unaffordable bills, and have little or no entertainment value in the traditional sense that would keep Drama teachers and Arts luvvies happy.
Despite this it is rare for Ofcom to even investigate psychic, gambling, teleshopping or religious channels. When they do the focus is hardly ever on financial aspects, despite potential for harm.
No, Ofcom gives babe channels a hard time because it dislikes sexual content, and no other reason.
I appreciate your views on this subject of censorship, But as far as sexual content goes, according to all the other recent posts it seems that ofcom are quite generous in letting things of a sexual nature pass by. And all the other genres of tv you mention, does anyone know what they can and can't do? 'I don't'. For me it's the "so-called" seedy nature of adult TV that keep the censors shackles firmly tied. Plus the unwillingness to stand and fight their corner by the makers.
Think I see what you mean about sexual content, Ofcom allow nudity in some situations, medical education and possibly sex documentaries. And film if it is short and unarousing. (Resists urge to make cheap joke about short TV personalities).
Even so hell will freeze over before Shortbus, In The Realm of the Senses, Caligula, Guardami, Ken Park, 9 Song, Anatomy of Hell, or anything by Tinto Brass are shown uncut on Channel 4. Or HBO TV series Tell Me You Love Me.
Regarding rules for other stuff, psychic channels are not allowed to give life changing advice and must be for fun - one advised a woman not to marry her intended. Religious channels must not say donations are for charity if the recipent is not a properly registered charity. They can cover their costs but must make it clear that is where money is going and must keep proper books. No advertiser is permitted to run down a competitors products. Under no circumstances is it permitted to promote one side of a civil war or one election candidate without genuine balance. Medical advice cannot be given excep by a qualified medical professional who has actually seen the patient. It is illegal to sell unapproved cancer treatments.
Not a mainstream TV channel but does illustrate dual standards.
Just clicked through GirlGirl (subscription) when the freeview was on and a babe was lying on the ground while gloopy stuff rained down on her tits. If it wasnt a lesbian channel Id be wondering if it was spunk, and anything even remotely similar is banned totally for "advertising" babe channels.
![[Image: article-2247219-167C2575000005DC-889_634x485.jpg]](http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2012/12/12/article-2247219-167C2575000005DC-889_634x485.jpg)