(21-08-2016 22:29 )DB83 Wrote: [ -> ]Better to simulate rather than stimulate.
Problem with that is that simulating doesn't stimulate. Don't know about anyone else but I watch these shows to be stimulated.
I've never really understood why people care if Ofcom step in and put a stop to these things? I mean what's the difference? They either behave themselves and keep Ofcom happy, or they give us what we want until Ofcom put a stop to it.
Either way the end result is the same - we have shit shows. And if we're going to get shit shows, I'd rather it was because Ofcom have seen the need to enforce it, not because the channels themselves enforce it to keep Ofcom happy in the first place.
In other words, a shit show is a shit show, however it comes about.
^^ Well you should care since if Ofcom get heavy and they have in the past and fine beyond what a channel will pay then that channel closes down.
Happy then ?
(21-08-2016 23:33 )DB83 Wrote: [ -> ]^^ Well you should care since if Ofcom get heavy and they have in the past and fine beyond what a channel will pay then that channel closes down.
Happy then ?
I wouldn't care one way or another. Why would I care? This is what I don't understand.
I watch these channels for one reason, and one reason only, and if they can't provide that (whether that's because they impose their own restrictions to keep Ofcom happy, or Ofcom do it for them) then I couldn't care less if they get closed down.
This is just my view, but take Storm, for instance. They're the only channel not bothering to push the boat out at the moment (maybe them and Xxpanded) so if these channels disappeared from the airwaves, why would I care?
^ Because it is only really the continued existance of a wide range of operators that can bring about the stiff competition that would necessitate the provision of the sort stimulation you require?
(Phew! Long sentence!
)
(22-08-2016 11:10 )ShandyHand Wrote: [ -> ]^ Because it is only really the continued existance of a wide range of operators that can bring about the stiff competition that would necessitate the provision of the sort stimulation you require?
(Phew! Long sentence! )
I understand that, ShandyHand, but my point isn't getting through.
People are saying the channels need to behave themselves, otherwise Ofcom will step in. But I say why don't we enjoy the ride while it lasts??
Look at it this way:
Channels impose their own restrictions to keep Ofcom happy = Shit, boring shows.
Or, Ofcom step in and impose fines and a reminder of the rules = Shit, boring shows.
And then there's what we have now:
Channels exploit possible loophole and give us great raunchy dayshows until Ofcom step in and do whatever needs to be done = Lots of wanks until that day comes.
And if this last option comes at the expense of one or two of the operators, so what?? What I'm trying to say is that I don't
care about these channels. I have no vested interest. They're wank fodder, nothing more.
^ Your main point has been well made and understood; no-one has really disagreed with you on it, just your conclusion drawn from it... Again, it is only the continued multi-channel landscape that provides the competition that sparks any of these so-called challenges to Ofcom. Very little would ensure less chance of your stimulation than less channels. If I may, even if we limit things to self-interest, that is why you should care.
Your expected scenario is also a heavily pessimistic one. This is not the Richards era Ofcom any more; it is difficult to tell if the current regime will react in the same way as the old one did. But in any case, since 2011, this has been Ofcom's stance: Keep the body parts off TV, don't directly advertise the filth and you can do what you like. Well it's still off TV.
People's access to the media has changed immensely over the past couple of years and continues to do so at an accelerated rate. It should be Ofcom's duty to reflect that and accommodate its expectations. The regulator has a long list of priorities atm and may well conceive that the current fudge is an adequate and convenient compromise. They have form on such decisions... We can only hope. Presumably BS do too.
I be honest this only thread I look at on forum and u moan because of inappropriate nipslip ........... Go read book whatever floats ur boat......... Some people.........
The fewer channels the less choice we have .
If one of your favourites gets laid off in a offcom blitz ,she'll have to be a good earner to get a opening at any remaining channel .
Less choice equals less fun .
Maybe we should have a slip of the day chat thread
(23-08-2016 20:31 )LuvsLucyAnne Wrote: [ -> ]Maybe we should have a slip of the day chat thread
There is a slip of the day chat thread created by Slash.