"Adult" channels propogandists.
Re: "Adult" channels propogandists.
Lol well it's ur duty 2 say how u feel like it?s a free country & there always free speech !happy! !happy! hehehehe.
J
J
-
friendlyguy
- Posts: 26
- Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 2:40 am
Re: "Adult" channels propogandists.
unless and until the industry can reduce the risks to children accessing hardcore on tv, then the nanny state approach is safer, however frustrating it is for the majority.
Re: "Adult" channels propogandists.
Agreed but Sky & other cable systems DO have parental locks!!
J
J
Re: "Adult" channels propogandists.
friendlyguy wrote:
> unless and until the industry can reduce the risks to children
> accessing hardcore on tv, then the nanny state approach is
> safer, however frustrating it is for the majority.
The BBFC is quite happy, apparently, to trust adults to buy R18 DVDs and to take responsibility for keeping their contents away from the eyes of children. This is despite the fact that these are unencrypted and can be inserted into playback machines at any time of the day or night.
On the other hand, broadcasters, who only accept orders from adults possessing those credit cards only issued to the over-18s, who confine their broadcasts to the hours after 22.00, and who encrypt their services only to be unlocked by inserting a special PIN number, are limited to only showing the tamer class of content.
Can I also ask what you are protecting children from? The High Court allowed hardcore at R18 because the BBFC could find no evidence of harm.
> unless and until the industry can reduce the risks to children
> accessing hardcore on tv, then the nanny state approach is
> safer, however frustrating it is for the majority.
The BBFC is quite happy, apparently, to trust adults to buy R18 DVDs and to take responsibility for keeping their contents away from the eyes of children. This is despite the fact that these are unencrypted and can be inserted into playback machines at any time of the day or night.
On the other hand, broadcasters, who only accept orders from adults possessing those credit cards only issued to the over-18s, who confine their broadcasts to the hours after 22.00, and who encrypt their services only to be unlocked by inserting a special PIN number, are limited to only showing the tamer class of content.
Can I also ask what you are protecting children from? The High Court allowed hardcore at R18 because the BBFC could find no evidence of harm.
quis custodiet ipsos custodes
Re: "Adult" channels propogandists.
Depends what adult satellite channels you're talking about. Adult channels based in the UK can't show hardcore - Television X, The Adult Channel and Playboy TV UK - because of regulation, not because they don't want to.
However, there are dozens upon dozens of satellite adult channels that are hardcore that you can legally buy a subscription to in the UK and are easily viewable in the UK. mostly from the hotbird satellite. I've seen almost all of them ... Sexview package now includes 12, MCT package 21 etc etc. And they cater for just about every taste imaginable. The one which shows the most UK stuff, however, is a stand-alone channel ... Private Spice (formerly known as Spice Platinum).
However, there are dozens upon dozens of satellite adult channels that are hardcore that you can legally buy a subscription to in the UK and are easily viewable in the UK. mostly from the hotbird satellite. I've seen almost all of them ... Sexview package now includes 12, MCT package 21 etc etc. And they cater for just about every taste imaginable. The one which shows the most UK stuff, however, is a stand-alone channel ... Private Spice (formerly known as Spice Platinum).
Re: "Adult" channels propogandists.
Do you not think it strange that you can get Euro hardcore quite legally but not UK hardcore (even though it is legal)?
Now as none of the Euro broardcasters have been proscribed since 2000, it follows then that these broadcasters must be complying with the Television Without Frontiers Directive otherwise the Department for Culture Media and Sport would have acted to block them, just as they did with Xtasi.
So the regulator Ofcom cannot have applied the Directive rules correctly and indeed have subsequently created an isolated market actively excluding R18 strength adult channels being carried by domestic cable and satellite services. This goes against the stated objectives of the Directive to create a single market and is thus in conflict with EU Law.
So if the rules of the Directive are applied unilaterally accross the EU, as they should be, then the UK broadcasters should be able to broadcast R18 strength material. Indeed the ban was outlawed by the European Commision for Human Rights in 1990 when they stated that "a licensing system cannot be used to suppress any legally available material". R18 is legally available material.
Ofcom have ignored the requirement in UK law to consult the Case Law of the ECHR, they have ignored the wording of the TVWF Directive and, they have chosen to interpret the Communications Act in a way that is not compatible with the Human Rights Act. They have not provided any evidence contrary to that shown by the BBFC when they lost the R18 appeal and thus they have no right whatsoever to ignore the High Court ruling of 2000.
And you, the consumer, allow Ofcom and the adult broadcasters to get away with it. Shame on you.
Now as none of the Euro broardcasters have been proscribed since 2000, it follows then that these broadcasters must be complying with the Television Without Frontiers Directive otherwise the Department for Culture Media and Sport would have acted to block them, just as they did with Xtasi.
So the regulator Ofcom cannot have applied the Directive rules correctly and indeed have subsequently created an isolated market actively excluding R18 strength adult channels being carried by domestic cable and satellite services. This goes against the stated objectives of the Directive to create a single market and is thus in conflict with EU Law.
So if the rules of the Directive are applied unilaterally accross the EU, as they should be, then the UK broadcasters should be able to broadcast R18 strength material. Indeed the ban was outlawed by the European Commision for Human Rights in 1990 when they stated that "a licensing system cannot be used to suppress any legally available material". R18 is legally available material.
Ofcom have ignored the requirement in UK law to consult the Case Law of the ECHR, they have ignored the wording of the TVWF Directive and, they have chosen to interpret the Communications Act in a way that is not compatible with the Human Rights Act. They have not provided any evidence contrary to that shown by the BBFC when they lost the R18 appeal and thus they have no right whatsoever to ignore the High Court ruling of 2000.
And you, the consumer, allow Ofcom and the adult broadcasters to get away with it. Shame on you.
quis custodiet ipsos custodes
Re: "Adult" channels propogandists.
Jacques wrote:
> Do you not think it strange that you can get Euro hardcore
> quite legally but not UK hardcore (even though it is legal)?
>
> Now as none of the Euro broardcasters have been proscribed
> since 2000, it follows then that these broadcasters must be
> complying with the Television Without Frontiers Directive
> otherwise the Department for Culture Media and Sport would have
> acted to block them, just as they did with Xtasi.
>
> So the regulator Ofcom cannot have applied the Directive rules
> correctly and indeed have subsequently created an isolated
> market actively excluding R18 strength adult channels being
> carried by domestic cable and satellite services. This goes
> against the stated objectives of the Directive to create a
> single market and is thus in conflict with EU Law.
>
> So if the rules of the Directive are applied unilaterally
> accross the EU, as they should be, then the UK broadcasters
> should be able to broadcast R18 strength material. Indeed the
> ban was outlawed by the European Commision for Human Rights in
> 1990 when they stated that "a licensing system cannot be used
> to suppress any legally available material". R18 is legally
> available material.
>
> Ofcom have ignored the requirement in UK law to consult the
> Case Law of the ECHR, they have ignored the wording of the TVWF
> Directive and, they have chosen to interpret the Communications
> Act in a way that is not compatible with the Human Rights Act.
> They have not provided any evidence contrary to that shown by
> the BBFC when they lost the R18 appeal and thus they have no
> right whatsoever to ignore the High Court ruling of 2000.
>
> And you, the consumer, allow Ofcom and the adult broadcasters
> to get away with it. Shame on you.
>
>
Of course, all of that's perfectly true. The UK regulations are completely untenable ... in fact, discriminating against UK-based companies. You can legally buy a subscription that will allow you to watch hardcore television channels as a UK resident, so long as the company supplying it is not a UK-based one. Pretty much a joke.
As for the Xstasi ban on grounds of violent S&M, there are plenty of other channels up there now showing the same crap and worse, so either the UK regulators don't check the output currently in the skies, or they gave up. I suspect the latter.
> Do you not think it strange that you can get Euro hardcore
> quite legally but not UK hardcore (even though it is legal)?
>
> Now as none of the Euro broardcasters have been proscribed
> since 2000, it follows then that these broadcasters must be
> complying with the Television Without Frontiers Directive
> otherwise the Department for Culture Media and Sport would have
> acted to block them, just as they did with Xtasi.
>
> So the regulator Ofcom cannot have applied the Directive rules
> correctly and indeed have subsequently created an isolated
> market actively excluding R18 strength adult channels being
> carried by domestic cable and satellite services. This goes
> against the stated objectives of the Directive to create a
> single market and is thus in conflict with EU Law.
>
> So if the rules of the Directive are applied unilaterally
> accross the EU, as they should be, then the UK broadcasters
> should be able to broadcast R18 strength material. Indeed the
> ban was outlawed by the European Commision for Human Rights in
> 1990 when they stated that "a licensing system cannot be used
> to suppress any legally available material". R18 is legally
> available material.
>
> Ofcom have ignored the requirement in UK law to consult the
> Case Law of the ECHR, they have ignored the wording of the TVWF
> Directive and, they have chosen to interpret the Communications
> Act in a way that is not compatible with the Human Rights Act.
> They have not provided any evidence contrary to that shown by
> the BBFC when they lost the R18 appeal and thus they have no
> right whatsoever to ignore the High Court ruling of 2000.
>
> And you, the consumer, allow Ofcom and the adult broadcasters
> to get away with it. Shame on you.
>
>
Of course, all of that's perfectly true. The UK regulations are completely untenable ... in fact, discriminating against UK-based companies. You can legally buy a subscription that will allow you to watch hardcore television channels as a UK resident, so long as the company supplying it is not a UK-based one. Pretty much a joke.
As for the Xstasi ban on grounds of violent S&M, there are plenty of other channels up there now showing the same crap and worse, so either the UK regulators don't check the output currently in the skies, or they gave up. I suspect the latter.
Re: "Adult" channels propogandists.
Option 3 is the more likely scenario - the EU broadcaster appeals agains proscription based on the fact that the rest of Europe does not have a problem. The EU braodcaster wins, the floodgates open and hardcore is allowed to be broadcast in the UK. Ofcom and the DCMS then have to admit their illegal repression.
Better to just let the recomendations for proscription sit on a desk in Whitehall gathering dust.
Better to just let the recomendations for proscription sit on a desk in Whitehall gathering dust.
quis custodiet ipsos custodes