hugh_g_rection Wrote:with the certain segments of that report that i could be bothered to read, i couldn't help wondering to myself, that with these double standards in place, what would happen if you swapped the two occurences over, so that the Bang Babes presenters told a gay joke, and Jonathan Ross showed a bit of 'bammhole'? ;-)
get the tories in ,they will get rid of ofcom aswell as many other quangos costing 65 billion a year !
I hope to god, ofcom weren't watchin the pad today lol
deano Wrote:hugh_g_rection Wrote:
get the tories in ,they will get rid of ofcom aswell as many other quangos costing 65 billion a year !
The tories have not said they will get rid of OFCOM but they intend to take away its policy setting functions, thereby leaving it to concentrate on enforcing the regulations. This could be a disaster for the babe channels as this bunch of nazis will have more time to review and enforce plus it will set the review of codes back further.
Sorry but any post that says get the tories in deserves putting right
perana68 Wrote:deano Wrote:hugh_g_rection Wrote:
get the tories in ,they will get rid of ofcom aswell as many other quangos costing 65 billion a year !
The tories have not said they will get rid of OFCOM but they intend to take away its policy setting functions, thereby leaving it to concentrate on enforcing the regulations. This could be a disaster for the babe channels as this bunch of nazis will have more time to review and enforce plus plus it will set the review of codes back further.
Sorry buy any post that says get the tories in deserves putting right
Sorry but labour have been a disaster ,
Gordon brown and blair simply can not tell the truth !
politics and religion are banned from this pub
I read the bulletin. And do you know what concerns me? The language used. It sounds remarkably like any number of advisories the the Catholic League of Decency, in conjuction with the Hays Office, would have release back in the early 30's in the run up to the forcing of the Studios to adopt the Hays Code. And promptly gagged any creativity in Hollywood at the time.
To be honest, its very disturbing.
OfCom would like to see the babe channels close. By law they have to encourage material that caters for all tastes - that includes yours and mine - so they just try and harass the channels to death. Thanks to them there isn't a single encrypted nude show any more, and in the last year when they did broadcast they were tame as hell in case of another fine.
The rules clearly state that anything that looks as if it could be genuine masturbation is banned, as is slutty talk, but OfCom don't bother applying this to other channels. How on earth did Crod Mandoon get away with deep throating a banana at 9:30 in a popular children's comedy ?
Major league broadcasters are allowed to produce audience figures that show very few children (but more than 0) watching violent police dramas repeated during the day, but if a babe channel shows too much on an obscure specialist late night channel OfCom throws the book.
And why do they mention irrelevant issues time and time again, unless it is to instill fear and push the boundaries even further back ? Anything that looks as if it could be genuine masturbation is banned. Simulating oral sex is NOT - there is no way that a woman waggling a coulple of fingers near her mouth looks genuine. And spanking is not cert 18, and probably not even cert 15.
What next ? Will they criticise channels because the babes wore high heels ? Or were showing their underwear ? Or had lipstick on ?
OfCom hide behind Generally Accepted Standards, but fact is the number of complaints against all babe channels over a year is exceeded by just one episode of Big Brother (23 June: 12 complaints, 27 June: 42), Wife Swop (21 June: 21 complaints) or EastEnders (19 June: 13 complaints), which blows that argument that babe programs cause public offence out of the water.
OfCom have spent the past 4 years using their official powers in a biassed way that support their own beliefs. That is abuse of official funds and powers. No MP is going to stand up and complain, unless they think there are votes in it. There will be an election in less than 10 months, and a lot of MPs are running scared. After the election there won't be another chance for 5 years. It's up to you.
perana68 Wrote:deano Wrote:hugh_g_rection Wrote:
get the tories in ,they will get rid of ofcom aswell as many other quangos costing 65 billion a year !
The tories have not said they will get rid of OFCOM but they intend to take away its policy setting functions, thereby leaving it to concentrate on enforcing the regulations. This could be a disaster for the babe channels as this bunch of nazis will have more time to review and enforce plus it will set the review of codes back further.
Sorry but any post that says get the tories in deserves putting right
I think you're mixing your politics.
The conservative party are the party of the "free market" therefore they will be against more regulation.
The labour party will naturally want to meddle.
rjack11 Wrote:perana68 Wrote:deano Wrote:hugh_g_rection Wrote:
get the tories in ,they will get rid of ofcom aswell as many other quangos costing 65 billion a year !
The tories have not said they will get rid of OFCOM but they intend to take away its policy setting functions, thereby leaving it to concentrate on enforcing the regulations. This could be a disaster for the babe channels as this bunch of nazis will have more time to review and enforce plus it will set the review of codes back further.
Sorry but any post that says get the tories in deserves putting right
I think you're mixing your politics.
The conservative party are the party of the "free market" therefore they will be against more regulation.
The labour party will naturally want to meddle.
OIIIIII!!!! I did not write that!!! I wouldn't normally give a shit about being mis-quoted, but as a tory boy?!? I think not gentlemen, my post said fackk-alll about tories it was the fella who posted just after me!
hugh_g_rection Wrote:OIIIIII!!!! I did not write that!!! I wouldn't normally give a shit about being mis-quoted, but as a tory boy?!? I think not gentlemen, my post said fackk-alll about tories it was the fella who posted just after me!
You're not quoted as saying anything - the box in which your name features is empty other than your name. Deano is quoted as saying
"get the tories in ,they will get rid of ofcom aswell as many other quangos costing 65 billion a year !".