(17-10-2011 23:50 )Scottishbloke Wrote: [ -> ] (17-10-2011 23:22 )simplymarko Wrote: [ -> ]...have you considered taking this on local radio?
What about the Chris Moyles show on Radio 1, they pretty much don't give a fuck about what they talk about on there if you recall the very drunk Noel Gallagher interview only a few years ago. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xiXv8YiIl24
Yea it's worth a shot mate.
You're right there Continental, I'd happily take a shot at that fat talentless C*nt Moyles
(17-10-2011 23:50 )Scottishbloke Wrote: [ -> ]What about the Chris Moyles show on Radio 1, they pretty much don't give a fuck about what they talk about on there if you recall the very drunk Noel Gallagher interview only a few years ago. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xiXv8YiIl24
You should go on loose women.
Hi Winston, long time no hear. Always good to get an alternative take.
100,000 signatures would be nice, but difficult to achieve. But thats not the end of the story. For starters its important to show that there is more support for liberalisation than restriction. Failure to do that would give a green light to censorship.
Second, MPs are very sensitive to voter pressure. Every MP will tell you that one letter gets their attention but not for long. Two makes them take a bit more interest. But if they get just 3-5 letters on the same subject they realise something is going on. They know that only a tiny minority of people actually interested in an issue will put pen to paper, so a handful of letters often represents much larger local interest, and that can affect their chance of reelection.
Dont kid yourself, some MPs will browse the petition website to spot the latest bandwaggon or just see which way the wind is blowing. And even if they dont, the relevant Ministries should.
Poor promotion? Yes, Ill put my hand up to that. Theres only so many hours in the day and some ideas have not taken off the way I thought they would. But there are huge areas I havent even started yet. Other members are promoting it elsewhere, and a slow burn campaign will gradually gain momentum and may suddenly capture the imagination. In the meanwhile it is going forward.
The numbers so far are respectable compared to Ofcom consultations over the years:
> Broadcasting Code initial consultation (14/7/2004) - lots of media attention, organised campaigns, total of 576 responses for & against regulation/deregulation.
> Participation TV (15/12/2006) - proposal to basically close babe channels, just 18 responses
> Particpation TV 2 (9/4/2008) - revised response after Ofcom backed down a bit - 42 responses
> Broadcasting Code Review (15/6/2009) - another opportunity to permit R18 or tighten up, organised campaign by a Church group - 220 responses
> Regulation of Video on Demand (14/9/2009) - licencing & controlling VOD - just 35 responses
> Participation TV 3 (3/11/2009) - 28 responses
300 may not be masses, but even 300 proves a higher level of interest than most of the above.
As for Hillsborough and other blockbuster petitions, these tend to be backed by a newspaper campaign (Hillsborough, cuts) or are linked to high profile events (Hillsborough, riots, cuts). Of course this campaign doesnt attract the same level of interest, but the powers that be know that the rate at which interest translates into action varies.
Please share if you have ideas for making the petition take off, otherwise all mentions on other sites and social media gratefully recieved.
Winston did ask some good questions that I overlooked
Which channel owners and industry investors have you pitched this petition to?
I have contacted some privately, but private communications are exactly that, private. Obviously not much take up yet. This evening I started new threads, but need to rethink that.
Have you contacted any high-profile names in the adult industry?
I dont have contacts. Volunteers?
Who have you contacted in the media?
A few names you would recognise, but private comms are private. Will start working the press when I get round to it. Again, all help appreciated specially from people with experience in this area.
i only have freeview so wont understand some of your channels you put..As to channels being scared of ofcom channel5 UK is defo one of them.I have tweeted out the petition but yes we need a lot more interest and signatures.I also hope this comment has the said e-petion at the bottom..I have been swatting up on all these ofcom findings and its hard to describe nudity..I am complaing about genatalia fairness but someone can be nude with hands covering sensitive areas..It seems folk are more concerned with soap content than nudity..Anyhow i still scour the airwaves to see how much male genatalia is shown and pixellated female genatalia is shown then email the the channel and ofcom..Ofcom do not seem to be in charge of the BBC it says on their site you have to complain to the BBc direct,,stuff that i still complain to ofcom...If Riverside house accidently blew up tommorow and killed them all id be bloody just that bit happier.
Bit harsh HateSexist, Id just like them to go away. In my book they are right up there with traffic wardens as pointless tossers who make life unpleasant, are a waste of money and would hardly be missed.
Sorry to hear you only have Freeview, but just a couple of years ago Freeview was locked down with no adult channels. Plenty of repeat channels and teleshopping shit. And Ofcom wanted to keep it that way, so there has been some progress, just not much.
As for Ofcom rules and nudity, its not nudity that is banned late at night but genitals and sex. Through gritted teeth Ofcom said it is OK to hide the lady bits behind a hand, but only if the hand is not touching because that would be masturbation. Or it might be. Or a sensitive soul might imagine it.
Ofcom DOES have a say over the BBC. There is an exception, but for taste and decency Ofcom rules. However Ofcom asks that people contact a channel before them. Its not compulsory, and many people are happy to approach big reputable broadcasters like the BBC direct. Many people who complain about babe channels like to hide behind anonymity and it is possible that they are troublemakers who have no interest in an amicable resolution.
313 signatures at time of writing. We are over the 300 mark
Worth noting the signatures regularly so we can see the progress if any. I will have to re-send the email again to try drum up and bit more support.
(19-10-2011 23:49 )Money_Shot Wrote: [ -> ]313 signatures at time of writing. We are over the 300 mark
Worth noting the signatures regularly so we can see the progress if any. I will have to re-send the email again to try drum up and bit more support.
Whoooo over 300 signatures well it's getting there
Oh quality Money shot fat talentless twat I love the way you put it mate