Ofcom - Current Investigations

Quote:Ofc@m received a number of complaints about the content listed above. The complainants were concerned about the level of sexual content which they considered was capable of causing offence.

So the complainants were not offended but stated what the BCAP code says about capable of causing offence.

And where is OFCOM's proof that these supposed 'slips' can indeed cause "widespread offence"?

If these were general/mainstream entertainment channels then "widespread offence" might be possible. However, these are specialist channels confined to the "adult section of the EPG" where the number of viewers is TINY and the VAST MAJORITY of these viewers are NOT offended by adult content. The possibility of such content causing "widespread offence" when the likely audience is less than 1% of the TV viewing population and consists of viewers that actually LIKE adult entertainment is thus in all probability ZERO! I.E. There was no possible or likely breach of BCAP 4.2.

Moreover, OFCOM's own research shows that general viewers (those expressing the generally accepted social and moral standards that BCAP 4.2 is supposed to apply to) are MORE ACCEPTING of sexual imagery in the context of ADULT PROGRAMMING. OFCOM are out of touch with reality and indeed have IGNORED their own findings. Furthermore, OFCOM have done NO RESEARCH to find out WHAT adult channel viewers feel is ACCEPTABLE.

OFCOM cannot assume to know anything. OFCOM cannot simply rely upon their puritan version of morality - they are required by law to apply the generally accepted standards of the viewers NOT their own twisted 'we know better' version.

Many times, those who are in power like to pretend they know everything

(21-07-2011 12:31 )Deadpool Wrote:  

(21-07-2011 03:38 )eccles Wrote:  

(19-07-2011 17:32 )blackjaques Wrote:  Ofcon are certainly pulling out all the stops to impress their paymasters.

Id be more impressed if the concentrated their efforts on the decline of kids TV, the almost total absence of anything worth watching on ITV, the dull "worthy" drama on the BBC, ITV dropping regional programming, and the dominance of US imports on almost every other channel.

And offence caused by programmes with millions of viewers who complain in their hundreds.

Well said. Seem to be concentrating on the soft targets rather than dealing with the major issues.

the bbc are cutting a gay sex scene from next weeks episode of torchwood. yet they have 5 or 6 gay characters on eastenders. there were no investigation into a scene from eastenders which saw to men naked in bed because the context of eastenders is represent real life. the context of babechannels is talking to sexy ladies about everything and anything and the ladies erotically showing would they do.

(21-07-2011 13:27 )mrmann Wrote:  Many times, those who are in power like to pretend they know everything

No, thats the News of The World

It would be interesting to see what their appointment rules are for impartiality.

So here we are on a Fiday night. I am a male who is nearer 60 than 50. I have had quite a difficult week in work and would like to relax and be entertained by some very attractive females on the tele.

I am unable to do this fully as Ofcon tell me that there are kids and other "vulnerable" people who need protecting against such images.

How many kids are watching? Can Ofcon quantify this?

They (Ofcon) tell me that even if I pay a subscription, that children are watching.
If they know this why haven't they informed the authorities; the social services or the police. Surely if they have evidence that children are routinely watching pornography on UK TV then they have a moral duty to tell the police.

They could give the names and addresses to the authorities and then the parents can be brought to justice fo allowing their childen to watch such filth.


Bet they won't do it, though.

(22-07-2011 21:21 )blackjaques Wrote:  So here we are on a Fiday night. I am a male who is nearer 60 than 50. I have had quite a difficult week in work and would like to relax and be entertained by some very attractive females on the tele.

I am unable to do this fully as Ofcon tell me that there are kids and other "vulnerable" people who need protecting against such images.

Ofcom have a legal duty to take account of different demographics including, er, older people. Also disabled people who don't have easy access to licenced sex shops and tend not to go clubbing.

Yet strangely I don't recall seeing any assessment of this.

Quote:How many kids are watching? Can Ofcon quantify this?

Have you asked?

[quote='Gold Plated Pension' pid='866279' dateline='1311030510']
With a fine of £90,000 issued against Satellite Entertainment Limited on the 24th June 2011 for not providing recordings against nine broadcasts, the regulator has struck again.
Ten more investigations against the licensee for channels 967 Sport XXX Girls, 954 Essex Babes and 955 Northern Birds have been concluded and ALL found 'In Breach'.

Office Girls, SportXXX Girls, 5 April 2011, 22:00: Breach of BCAP Rule 4.2 & Licence Condition 11.
40+ Readers Wives, Essex Babes, 5 April 2011, 22:00 to 23:00: Breach of BCAP Rule 4.2 & Licence Condition 11.
Office Girls, Sport XXX Girls, 6 April 2011, 22:00 to 23:00: Breach of BCAP Rule 4.2 & Licence Condition 11.
40+ Readers Wives, Essex Babes, 7 April 2010, 22:00 to 23:00: Breach of BCAP Rule 4.2 & Licence Condition 11.
Sport XXX1, Northern Birds, 8 April 2011, 22:00 to 00:00: Breach of BCAP Rule 4.2 & Licence Condition 11.
Sport XXX1, Northern Birds, 10 April 2011, 22:00 to 00:00: Breach of BCAP Rule 4.2 & Licence Condition 11.
Office Girls, SportXXX Girls, 10 April 2011, 21:00 to 22:00: Breach of BCAP Rules 4.2 & 32.3 & Licence Condition 11.
40+ Readers Wives, Essex Babes, 10 April 2011, 22:00 to 23:00: Breach of BCAP Rule 4.2 & Licence Condition 11.
Office Girls, SportXXX Girls, 13 April 2011, 21:00 to 22:00: Breach of BCAP Rules 4.2 & 32.3 & Licence Condition 11.
Office Girls, Sport XXX Girls, 14 April 2011, 00:00 to 01:00: Breach of BCAP Rule 4.2 & Licence Condition 11.

It is not known who made the complaints but the way Ofc@m have stated this leads ne to believe it is from a rival broadcaster.

Ofc@m received a number of complaints about the content listed above. The complainants were concerned about the level of sexual content which they considered was capable of causing offence.

So the complainants were not offended but stated what the BCAP code says about capable of causing offence.

................................................................​.................................


Ten more investigations carried out due to Ofc@m receiving a number of complaints from people who were concerned that the content was likely to cause offence.

I have checked every single area of Ofc@m's website to try to locate these complaints and when they were made but to no avail.
Even the archived current investigations list does NOT list a single one of the complaints as being investigated.

If Ofc@m are no longer listing complaints or investigations against the babe channels can i assume that this is yet more evidence that they do have a campaign against the babe channels.

I don't believe that all these investigations were complaint led but that the majority of them were Ofc@m's own pro-active enforcement.

This level of investigation against the babe channels is unheard of and i don't believe that either a single person or other external organisation is behind the complaints but that Ofc@m are being directed to the shows to investigate from another operator.

How many more investigations have Ofc@m still to conclude either due to information received or their own monitoring. If i was an operator/licensee of a babe channel then i would be requesting an immediate meeting with the regulator to find out why they are being so agressive with their enforcement. It is not how enforcement should be carried out and broadcasters should not be operating under this dark cloud of secret enforcement.

With the current level of 'In Breach' findings against the channels then it is likely that SEL will have their licenses revoked, Playboy (RLC) will attract a substantial fine before Ofc@m turn their attention back to Elite TV, and don't forget Ofc@m still have to conclude their enforcement against those that cannot be mentioned, subject, allegedly, to due legal process.

Doesn't Ofcom have to provide proof that the complaints are legit? I've heard otherwise, but want to know if this is true or not, or if they are breaking the law by not providing proof?

(24-07-2011 19:34 )mrmann Wrote:  Doesn't Ofcom have to provide proof that the complaints are legit? I've heard otherwise, but want to know if this is true or not, or if they are breaking the law by not providing proof?

they make their own rules dont they?,bloody bastards now ive said it!