Banned Babe Links…Ofcom whinges at babe channels for promotion of related porn websites

Read more Ofcom Watch at MelonFarmers.co.uk

See Broadcast Bulletin [pdf] from stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk

Northern Birds, Essex Babes, Sportxxx Girls, and Livexxx Babes 24 September to 8 February 2013, various times throughout the day The services all transmit interactive daytime chat and adult chat advertising content. These services are freely available without mandatory restricted access and are situated in the adult section of the electronic programme guide of the Sky digital satellite platform ( Sky EPG ). Viewers are invited to contact on-screen presenters via premium-rate telephony services ( PRS ). The female presenters dress and behave in a sexually provocative way while encouraging viewers to contact the PRS numbers. The licencesare all held by Satellite Entertainment Limited ( SEL ). Ofcom received a complaint that, throughout the day and across all these channels, on-screen references were made to the website bluebird.tv by means of a graphic giving the URL of the website positioned in the bottom left-hand corner of the screen. The complainant said that on accessing the website there were no access restrictions, and that users were directed to freely accessible R18 equivalent content by clicking on any number of links . From Ofcom’s examination of the broadcast material, it appeared that no verbal references to the website URL were made by the presenters. The bluebird.tv website consisted of a homepage containing a number of tab-style links to Bluebird branded content. There were no access restrictions other than responding OK to a pop-up box on first visiting the site to confirm that the user was over 18 years of age. Ofcom observed that this website contained explicit pornographic material (equivalent to the British Board of Film Classification ( BBFC ) R18-rated content 1 ). Registration and age verification by means of using a credit card (holders must be over 18 years of age) was only required if the user wished to become a member of the premium Bluebird service. Two types of explicit pornographic material could be accessed and viewed from the Bluebird Films homepage. The first type, on initially accessing the Bluebird Films website, consisted of an embedded video player positioned in the centre of the screen, which automatically played a video clip. The player showed a 50-second video clip, the first 30 seconds of which featured edited glamour shots of scantily clad or naked women, kissing, touching and posing in an erotic way. The final 20 seconds of the clip, however, featured explicit sexual material involving shots of oral sex, vaginal penetration, and the use of sex toys for sexual stimulation or penetration some of which were in close-up. The second type of pornographic material was accessible at the bottom of the page and consisted of 17 photographic hyperlinks under the heading Bluebird Films Hot Movies . These links promoted pornographic films that could be viewed in full by purchasing premium Bluebird membership or by purchasing the associated DVD product (from the Buy DVD’s [sic] tab positioned at the top of the page). Clicking on these photographic hyperlinks led the user through to teaser videos, each between about one and two minutes in length, promoting the full film to which the photographic hyperlink corresponded. These teaser videos featured explicit sexual material including vaginal penetration, oral sex, and masturbation some of which was again in close-up. Ofcom considered BCAP Code Rule 30.3, which states: Advertisements for products coming within the recognised character of pornography are permitted behind mandatory restricted access on adult entertainment channels only. [After an initial approach from Ofcom the company reorganised the website so that the first website which would be accessed by viewers does not contain adult material itself but links though to another related website that does. Ofcom judged that this technique does not circumvent the ban on links to porn sites]. Ofcom Conclusion: Brach of Rule 30.3 The broadcast of an advertisement, on channels without mandatory restricted access, for a website containing pornographic material, is a serious breach of the BCAP Code. Ofcom is particularly concerned that the Licensee in these instances broadcast, for extended periods both during daytime and immediately after the watershed when children were available to view (some unaccompanied), on-screen references to a website which led to R18 equivalent material without any access restrictions. Ofcom therefore puts the Licensee on notice that it will consider these breaches for the imposition of a statutory sanction. Breaches of BCAP Code Rule 30.3

Elitist Censorship…Ofcom claim sexy material causes widespread offence amongst viewers watching babe channels at 3 in the morning

Read more Ofcom Watch at MelonFarmers.co.uk

See Broadcast Beulletin [pdf] from stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk

Elite Nights Studio 66 TV 2 (938), 15 July 2012, 03:00 to 03:55 Elite Nights is a segment on the babe channel Studio 66 TV 2 (Sky Channel 938). The female presenters dress and behave in a sexually provocative way while encouraging viewers to contact the premium rate telephony services ( PRS ) numbers. The licence for Studio 66 TV 2 is owned and operated by 965 TV Ltd. Ofcom received a complaint that content on this service, broadcast from 03:00, contained images that were inappropriate on a free-to-air service. Ofcom noted there were two female presenters on screen at this time. The first female presenter was wearing black shoes, a pair of yellow knickers with party all night printed on the back and a black top pulled down to expose her breasts. The second presenter was wearing a pink thong under a pink one-piece outfit, which was pulled down to reveal her breasts. During the broadcast the presenters stroked each other’s thighs, buttocks, stomachs and breasts. They also adopted sexual positions, such as on all fours with their buttocks to camera and also lying side by side with their legs intertwined, and while in these positions mimed sexual intercourse, sometimes for quite prolonged periods. Ofcom also noted that while the female presenters filled most of the screen there were graphics on the right of the screen showing still images of women, all of whom were topless and in some cases naked, although their genitals were obscured. These images were accompanied by short code numbers which viewers could text to receive pictures and video content of the women, for example TXT XXX to 899** and TEXT FERNANDA TO 899** . In the bottom left-hand corner of the screen we noted there were graphics that were text only, such as FILTHIEST X RATED VID OF THE MONTH! TEXT JULY TO 899** , and TEXT BABE TO 899** . Ofcom considered BCAP Code rules: Rule 4.2: Advertisements must not cause serious or widespread offence against generally accepted moral, social or cultural standards. Rule 30.3: Advertisements for products coming within the recognised character of pornography are permitted behind mandatory restricted access on adult entertainment channels only. Ofcom Decision Widespread Offence On 27 July 2011, Ofcom published revised rules on the advertising of telecommunications-based sexual entertainment services and PRS daytime chat services. For example the rules explicitly state that adult chat broadcasters should: [T]ake particular care if two or more presenters appear together on screen. If there is any contact between the presenters of an erotic or sexual nature (for example kissing, stroking, or contact between thighs, breasts or genital areas) or any miming or simulation of a sexual act performed by one presenter on another, in Ofcom’s view there is a high risk of causing serious or widespread offence against generally accepted standards. Sidebar Adverts The still graphics included in these advertisements comprised still images of women, all of whom were topless and in some cases naked. In addition, the on-screen graphics were accompanied by text which included: FILTHIEST X RATED VID OF THE MONTH! TEXT JULY TO 899** and TXT XXX to 899** . This in Ofcom’s view clearly indicated to the viewer that if they texted the relevant word or term to the on-screen short code number they would be provided with access to explicit adult material. To assess the product being advertised, Ofcom sent a text message to a short code shown on-screen. As a result Ofcom was sent details of a URL which gave access to explicit video images of a female masturbating. Some of these images were in close- up. Further, although we received a text message requesting age verification, we were able to access the explicit sexual content without being required to provide any proof of age. We noted the Licensee’s argument that viewers would only have been able to obtain the video clips and images if their handset had been age-verified by the relevant mobile network operator. However, we considered this did not remove or weaken the duty on the Licensee to ensure that the products advertised on this channel were acceptable on a free-to-air service. In Ofcom’s opinion this explicit sexual material was clearly equivalent to that which would be given a British Board of Film Classification ( BBFC ) R185 rating. Both R18 equivalent content and adult sex material 6 are clearly within the recognised character of pornography . Therefore any advertisement for this type of content was prohibited on a free-to-air service without mandatory restricted access, regardless of whether the images featured in the on-screen advertisement were edited or masked in an effort to make them non-explicit and suitable for broadcast on a freely available service or whether handsets to which the clips were downloadable had been age-verified by the relevant mobile network operator. Rule 1.18 of the Broadcasting Code makes clear in giving the meaning of mandatory restricted access that this must consist of a PIN protected system (or other equivalent protection) which cannot be removed by the user, that restricts access solely to those authorised to view [i.e. adults] . As Ofcom’s assessment of the on-screen promotions demonstrated (see above), we were able to freely access the explicit sexual content which was being advertised without being required to provide any proof of age. These advertisements for products within the recognised character of pornography were therefore shown on these channels without mandatory restricted access as required by Rule 30.3 of the BCAP Code. Advertising for pornographic content is not suitable for broadcast at any time on any interactive adult chat service available free-to-air, regardless of the type of images broadcast as part of the advertising content. Breaches of BCAP Code Rules 4.2 and 30.3

Moral Censors…Ofcom has another whinge at late night babe channels Sport XXX Girls and Northern Birds

Read more Ofcom Watch at MelonFarmers.co.uk

Thanks to Nick See article [pdf] from stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk

Bluebird Live Sport XXX Girls (Channel 967), 28/29 August 2011, 23:45 to 00:45 Sport XXX Girls (Channel 967), 29 August 2011, 02:45 to 03:45 Sport XXX Girls (Channel 967), 3/4 September 2011, 23:45 to 00:45 Bluebird 40+ Northern Birds (Channel 954), 29 August 2011, 22:50 to 23:25 Bluebird Live and Bluebird 40+ are segments of interactive adult chat broadcast on free to air babe channels Sport XXX Girls and Northern Birds. The licences for Sport XXX Girls and Northern Birds are held by Satellite Entertainment Limited (SEL). A complaint alerted Ofcom to the level of sexual content in the material listed above. Ofcom therefore viewed this content and found: 1. Bluebird Live, Sport XXX Girls, 28/29 August 2011, 23:45 to 00:45 The female presenter was wearing a light blue one piece costume which consisted only of a thin strip of fabric between her legs which covered her vagina but resulted in her outer genital area being exposed. During the broadcast she lay with her legs wide open to camera gently thrusting her hips forward and stroking her upper inner thigh area. Given that this shot of the presenter with her legs wide open remained onscreen for the majority of this broadcast, the material was both invasive and prolonged. SEL denied that the presenter’s outer genital area was exposed, saying that it was covered by her garment. The Licensee also denied that these were prolonged or intrusive images, and asked for further clarification about what Ofcom considered to be invasive about the material. 2. Bluebird Live, Sport XXX Girls, 29 August 2011, 02:45 to 03:45 The presenter wore only a pink lace thong and was filmed with a hand held camera. Throughout the broadcast there were various prolonged and intrusive images filmed, extremely close up and for a duration of time, from directly behind the presenter’s buttocks and also between her wide open legs. While being filmed in these positions she thrust her buttocks and hips towards the camera revealing her outer genital area and anal detail. SEL said there were no prolonged images in the sequence with the potential to cause offence, and asked for Ofcom?s clarification as to how the images were intrusive and prolonged. 3. Bluebird Live, Sport XXX Girls, 3/4 September 2011, 23:45 to 00:45 The female presenter was wearing only a thin white and red thong. For the majority of this broadcast she was positioned on all fours with her buttocks to camera. While in this position her anal and outer genital areas were clearly visible. Given these shots had a duration of several minutes and were in sufficient close up to show anal and outer genital detail they were both prolonged and intrusive. The Licensee said that the presenter?s garment was clearly covering her genitals, and that for most of the sequence the model was on her stomach with the camera focussing on her face; therefore, SEL failed to see how these images could be in breach of the BCAP Code. 4. Bluebird 40+, Northern Birds, 29 August 2011, 22:50 to 23:25 The presenter wore a black leather look thong composed of a thin strip of fabric only covering her vagina and so revealing her outer genital area. During the broadcast she lay on her back with her legs wide open to camera, and while in this position she gently thrust her hips backwards and forwards. Some particularly intrusive images followed, filmed at close range, when her outer genital area was visible for a prolonged period. In this position she massaged and stroked around her outer genital area. Ofcom considered this material raised issues warranting investigation under Rule 4.2 of the BCAP Code, which states that: Advertisements must not cause serious or widespread offence against generally accepted moral, social or cultural standards. Ofcom Decision: Breach of Rule 4.2 of the BCAP Code Ofcom concluded that relevant scheduling restrictions were not applied so as to ensure that the material which was broadcast was not capable of causing serious or widespread offence against generally accepted moral, social or cultural standards. Specifically, this material should not have been broadcast within the context of „adult chat? advertising content that was freely available without mandatory restricted access. Therefore Ofcom found this material in breach of Rule 4.2 of the BCAP Code. Ofcom has recently imposed a sanction on the Licensee for a number of serious and repeated breaches of the BCAP Code3 , which led to the imposition of a financial penalty totalling ฃ130,000. These present contraventions of the BCAP Code by SEL are another example of very poor compliance by the Licensee. In the circumstances, Ofcom is considering what further regulatory action is appropriate.

Bad Babes…TV Censor fines babe channels, Sport XXX Girls, Essex Babes and Northern Girls

Read more Ofcom Watch at MelonFarmers.co.uk

See Sanction report [pdf] from stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk

Ofcom has fined Satellite Entertainment Ltd ฃ130,000 for being a little bit too sexy for what Ofcom prudes consider acceptable on babe channels. The fine is in respect of its services Sport XXX Girls, Essex Babes and Northern Birds. Ofcom considers babe channels to be advertising and censors such channels using advert censorship rules: Rule 4.2: Adverts must not cause serious or widespread offence against generally accepted moral, social or cultural standards. Rule 32.3: Relevant timing restrictions must be applied to advertisements that, through their content, might harm or distress children of particular ages or that are otherwise unsuitable for them In addition Ofcom whinged at a lack of recordings from the channels and cited their licensing rule: Rule 11: The Licensee shall adopt procedures acceptable to Ofcom for the retention and production of recordings in sound and vision of any programme which is the subject matter of a Standards Complaint The overly sexy programmes were broadcast in the period 5th – 14th April 2011. Ofcom highlighted a number of examples of broadcast material that were claimed to be clearly inconsistent with the Chat Service Guidance, such as: extremely prolonged and close up images of the genital area; bunching of underwear to simulate masturbation; pouring oil and white cream onto, and massaging it into, the buttocks, anal area and genital area; and presenters wearing clothing that did not adequately cover their genital and anal area. Ofcom noted that in conjunction with those images the presenters performed various other actions including: opening their legs wide to camera; stroking their bodies; thrusting their buttocks; massaging oil into their breasts; and miming sexual intercourse. The combination of these images and action resulted in prolonged and frequent scenes of a strong sexual nature. Ofcom said it was also concerned at the degree of offence likely to be caused to viewers who might come across this material unawares. Ofcom decided that the Code breaches were serious and repeated, and that the breach of Licence Condition 11 was serious, and therefore a financial penalty should be imposed in accordance with Ofcom’s Procedures for the consideration of statutory sanctions. Ofcom then also considered the level of the fine to be imposed. Having regard to the serious and repeated nature of the breaches of the BCAP Code, the serious nature of the breach of Licence Condition 11 and having regard to the Licensee’s representations and Ofcom’s Penalty Guidelines, Ofcom decided it was appropriate in the circumstances to impose a financial penalty of ฃ130,000 on SEL.

Warning Light…Ofcom starts the ball rolling for another attack on Playboy and its Red Light channels

Read more Ofcom Watch at MelonFarmers.co.uk

See Complaints Bulletin [pdf] from stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk

****Babes Red Light 1 (Channel 911), 1 September 2011, 00:00 to 01:00 Red Light Central Red Light 2 (Channel 902), 26 August 2011, 22:32 to 23:00 Red Light 2 (Channel 902), 2 September 2011, 22:55 to 23:05 Red Light 2 (Channel 902), 5 September 2011, 21:03 to 21:35 ****Babes and Red Light Central are segments of programming on babe channels Red Light 1 & 2. Playboy TV is the licensee of both channels (albeit via a Just4Us subsidiary for Red Light 1). Ofcom received two complaints about the content listed above. In summary the complainants were concerned about the level of sexual content which they considered was capable of causing offence and the level of sexual imagery immediately after the watershed. Ofcom cited several examples of material they considered too sexy, but their main whinge was about: 1. Red Light 1, 1 September 2011, 00:00 to 01:00 The presenter was wearing a black latex thong and red shoes. The broadcast included prolonged images of the presenter adopting sexual positions, such as with her legs wide open to camera, often mimicking sexual intercourse. At various points during the broadcast intrusive images of the presenter’s genital area were shown. Approximately 18 minutes into the broadcast, the presenter was shown pouring oil onto her buttocks and anal area and three minutes later spitting onto her fingers and letting the saliva drip down onto her genital area, as if to emulate ejaculate. Throughout the broadcast the presenter was shown touching her outer genital area and massaging oil into her legs and breasts. Approximately 50 minutes into the broadcast the presenter spoke directly to viewers to encourage further calls: Come on, bend me over, give me a spank, stretch me open. Do whatever you want. I’m up for it. I want every hole filled up with your dirty, hot, sticky muck. Come on you naughty boys, call me right now. Predictably Ofcom found the channels to be in breach of the UK Code of Broadcast Advertising (BCAP) rules: Rule 4.2 Advertisements must not cause serious or widespread offence against generally accepted moral, social or cultural standards. Rule 32.3 Relevant timing restrictions must be applied to advertisements that, through their content, might harm or distress children of particular ages or that are otherwise unsuitable for them. And of course given that Playboy TV have just been fined ฃ110,000, Ofcom have started the ball rolling again with the warning: Ofcom has recently recorded a number of serious and repeated breaches of the BCAP Code6 against Playboy TV and Just4Us which led to the imposition of a financial penalty totalling ฃ110,000 . These present contraventions of the BCAP Code are another example of poor compliance by the Licensee, particularly with regards to the material broadcast on 1 September 2011 that was of a strong sexual nature. Playboy TV is put on notice that any further similar contraventions of the BCAP Code will be considered for further regulatory action by Ofcom.

Happy Bedfellows?…Adult Channels and TV debated at the Royal Television Society

Read more Satellite X News at MelonFarmers.co.uk

See details from rts.org.uk

Happy Bedfellows? — Adult Channels And TV 25 October 2011, 1845 for 1900 Northern Film & Media Studio 3, The Kiln Hoults Yard, Walker Road, Newcastle A Royal Television Society Debate featuring KATH WORRALL (OFCOM former member) Dr CLARISSA SMITH (Reader in Sexual Cultures, Sunderland University) LISELLE BAILEY (Head of Scheduling, Television X) Chairman: CHRIS JACKSON (BBC Inside Out’) The discussion will focus on regulation, and where the line is drawn between protecting the vulnerable and over-regulating a major entertainment industry. There will be some adult content shown — so over 18s only — in order to illustrate the debate about regulation. The three female panelists will also explore the role of women in pornography — as contributors, producers and consumers. Join our panel for the debate followed by Q&A session to discover the reality of producing and regulating adult content in the digital television age. Free but registration required

Storm in a Tea Cup…Oops, afternoon babe channel viewers treated to an open-mike customer phone-in

Read more Ofcom Watch at MelonFarmers.co.uk

See article from stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk

Storm Afternoons Storm TV,  3rd July2011, 16:00 Storm Afternoons is an interactive daytime babe channel broadcast on the service Storm (Sky channel number 966). The licence for the service is held by Chat Central Ltd. A complainant alerted Ofcom to the broadcast of offensive and racist language during Storm Afternoons on the afternoon of 3 July 2011. After inviting viewers to contact the studio, the female presenter placed the microphone beside her but neglected to switch it to mute. As a result, her conversation with callers and a man off-screen was audible for approximately 14 minutes. During this time, the following clearly audible phrases were broadcast: I feel fucked Oh fucking hell I fucking hate this song. How the fuck can you dance to this in a club. Fuck off I feel too fucked I wish black guys called me. I get all the Paki Ofcom considered: Rule 4.2 Advertisements must not cause serious or widespread offence against generally accepted moral, social or cultural standards. Rule 32.3 Relevant timing restrictions must be applied to advertisements that, through their content, might harm or distress children of particular ages or that are otherwise unsuitable for them. The Licensee acknowledged that not only had our compliance procedures not been followed but that the error had not been duly reported to the company management team. It added that the language used by the presenter was wholly unacceptable, whether broadcast or used in the workplace and as a result of this the presenter was dismissed as soon as this incident came to light. Ofcom Decision: Breach of BCAP Code Rules 4.2 and 32.3 Ofcom noted that the content was highly offensive and clearly exceeded the expectations of the audience. Ofcom concluded that relevant timing and scheduling restrictions were not applied to the broadcasts so as to offer adequate protection to children and therefore the material was in breach of Rule 32.3. Ofcom concluded that relevant scheduling restrictions were not applied so as to ensure that the material which was broadcast was not capable of causing serious or widespread offence against generally accepted moral, social or cultural standards. The material was therefore in breach of BCAP Code Rule 4.2. Ofcom was particularly concerned that the repeated broadcast of the most offensive language appeared to go undetected by the broadcaster for approximately 14 minutes. Ofcom considered this raised serious questions about the robustness of its  compliance procedures. In view of the measures taken by the broadcaster in response to this incident, Ofcom does not expect further breaches of the BCAP Code.