which resulted in previous adverse judgements.
Unless Bang confirm in writing by 3.30pm today that
they will stop being naughty, Ofcom will impose statutory sanctions, including possible revocation of their licences.
Bang certainly haven't tamed their output much since recent Ofcom bollockings so I wonder if something else is going on? Are Bang pushing things to the brink deliberately?
Ofcom Formal Direction
As commented elsewhere:
ReplyDeleteI have heard that big changes are on the horizon. Paul Chaplin, the owner of Bluebird studios may have purchased the 4 EPG slots.
As Bang Media have just under 2 hours to respond in writing to agree to Ofcom's formal directions, it could be possible that the sale/transfer of the EPG slots to Bluebird may go through this afternoon. A "phoenix" company from Bang Media would then occupy the EPG slots on 902/915/916.
This is just speculation at the moment though.
So Ofcom are 'concerned' are they? I can't bring myself to accept that 'concerned' is the right term to use. Concerned they're being ignored, probably, but that's where thier concern ends if you ask me.
ReplyDeleteEven if the company goes into liquidation, Ofcom can still ban anyone involved from owning, operating, producing or directing. That just leaves appearing in front of the camera, and my mental image of the owners is not one I want to see in swimsuits. H-H
ReplyDeleteHave none of you even stopped to comprehend the fact that many of the girls themselves do not want to go any further than they currently are?
ReplyDeleteWhile it is easy to dismiss every issue people have with the channels and their content on the big boogeyman type organisation of Ofcom, along with the continual assumption that similar issues are as a direct involvement from channel bosses - often it is a simple case of the girl does not want to do more than she is willing to.
No amount of 'campaigning' etc is going to make a girl go outwith her comfort zone - nor should it
@Anonymous. There may be a handful of babeshow watchers who think like that, but the majority do not. It is evident, however, because of their careers in hardcore, that many of the girls would go futher if it was permitted. This does not mean it is expected from all the girls.
ReplyDeleteThe main point is that you guys are just looking in guessing how things work. You are trying to force our channels to loose our licenses and you are forcing our girls to go hardcore. If you want porn go on the internet. Simples.
ReplyDeleteWhen we cant pay our rent bills car loans blah blah are you gonna campaign to pay for our stuff? Because that is how things are going now. Sites like this and babeshows nagged and moaned and pushed the producers and girls to go further and when ofcom starts pushing it doesnt affect you it affects us.
Do you wonder why the bosses dont come and supprt your campaign? Because ofcom is a goverment office and you cant do anything to them.
so 2 points. stop pushing us to do what we dont want to do and then ofcom wont be on our backs.
and if u want porn go on the web.
Anonymous, I respect your opposing points of view, but those are a ridiculous set of statements. 'Forcing' your girls to go hardcore? No one if forcing anything apart from Ofcom to stick by their own guidlines instead of making them up so that they can impose fines whenever they feel like it. How many times do we hear the girls come on the mic and apologise to viewers and callers for 'not being allowed to go further'? I'm sure they don't share your point of view. Furthermore, we are not campaigning for the channels to break any rules, but for Ofcom to stop handing out their unjustified fines and warnings.
ReplyDeleteWhat planet is Anonymous on? Supportive campaigns like this do not try "to force our channels to loose our licenses" or force "our girls to go hardcore". No, campaigns are just about being allowed to show slightly stronger material - "being allowed" to do something does not mean you have to. I am allowed to drink 6 pints a night, but don't.
ReplyDeleteIs Anonymous saying that every channel will push to the max? Even if that happened, there are less than a dozen girls working each night. The glamour sector employs hundreds every day, and that's not counting presenting roulette TV shows, shopping channels, Bravo.
Perhaps Anonymous wants every top shelf mag and lap dancing club closed, because the women who work in those sectors go beyond the limits he sets.
"Do you wonder why the bosses dont come and supprt your campaign? Because ofcom is a goverment office and you cant do anything to them."
Just plain silly. In West European constitutional democracies Governments have been answerable to the law for hundreds of years. Henry the 7th paid his debts. Henry the 8th was a monster but could not do what he wanted without changing the law. And don't get me started in the 1688 Bill of Rights.
And what does he mean, "our channels" and "our girls". Either he runs a channel (get one with it instead of blogging) or has been taken in by sob-stories and big brown eyes at £1.50 a minute. They tell you want you want to hear. H-H
Anon, what do you mean "Ofcom are a Government office"? They are an independant public body, funded out of the public purse.
ReplyDeleteLet me add that if Ofcom are a charade for a Governmnet body, then they're most certainly up shit creek for imposing ANY form of cesorship. If Parliament had wanted to ban R18 or any other 'adult sex' material from our TV screens they would have stated it categorically in the Coms Act 2003. Our Parliament DIDN'T. Our Parliament DIDN'T intend, believe, want, or sanction any interference with adult material whatsoever. ALL they said was that Ofcom should TRY and protect the under 18s from "harmful and offensive" material. Offensive material is defined in the TVWF/AVMS as "sexist or racist material". Moreover, "gratuitous violence" ranks alongside "pornography" as POSSIBLE CONCERNS for the "serious impairment of minors" in the TVWF/AVMS. Has Ofcom gone on a crusade against "gratuitous violence" in the same way as finding any possible reason whatsoever to ban R18 (and far TAMER) material from our TV screens? They haven't have they, despite the FACT that their own PIN research reveals 46% of 11-17 y/o ARE watching "premium movie channels" when they're ALLOWED by Ofcom to broadcast 18-rated horror/slasher/action movies where people are seen being hacked, shot and blown to bits - nice stuff for impressionable kids isn't it? If Ofcom think this material is safe (despite the TVWF/AVMS concerns) its makes you wonder why the BBFC bother giving it the old 18 cert. doesn't it?
As a point of FACT, you can take Ofcom to court and SUE them over every item we've already highlighted on this blog and, indeed, many more yet to be revealed.
Is Anonymous saying that every channel will push to the max? Even if that happened, there are less than a dozen girls working each night. The glamour sector employs hundreds every day, and that's not counting presenting roulette TV shows, shopping channels, Bravo.
ReplyDeletePerhaps Anonymous wants every top shelf mag and lap dancing club closed, because the women who work in those sectors go beyond the limits he sets.my blog usagamezone.blogspot.com
"Do you wonder why the bosses dont come and supprt your campaign? Because ofcom is a goverment office and you cant do anything to them."