From Time Out

Lap dancers have been ordered to grow their pubic hair in order to comply with a court ruling that patrons must not be able to see their private parts as they perform. The bosses of the Secrets dancing club in Hammersmith have told staff they must act or face the sack after a judge ruled that the girls must not display their "genitalia or excretory organs" during routines.

I agree it sounds bizarre, but it is all about exposure, said Stephen Less, the club's leisure consultant. We are just trying to implement what was a very ambiguous ruling that genitalia and secretary [sic] organs must be hidden. The girls perform in G-strings, but they are not very substantial garments. Most of the girls have some pubic hair already, and they have been asked to grow it. Some of them don't want to have pubic hair, for hygiene reasons, but if they want to work here, this is how it has got to be. We are doing our utmost to comply.

The hair directive was introduced after a series of court hearings over the last nine months. The legal battle began in February, when Hammersmith and Fulham Council ordered that girls must not show their private parts while lap dancing. West London Magistrates Court overruled the condition in June, but last month, the council succeeded in having it reinstated at Knightsbridge Crown Court. We have been in negotiations with the Council since the hearing, and we have modified our practices somewhat, said Less, who estimates Secrets' total legal bill at around £30,000.

A spokesman for Hammersmith and Fulham said the council had not calculated how much the legal fees had cost the taxpayer, but pointed out the club had been ordered to pay its costs at the Crown Court. We have never said that Secrets is not a well run club, but we have got a lot of pressure from residents to act and we are trying to uphold the law, he told Time Out. Undercover officers will now visit Secrets to check the ruling is being adhered to. They will report to council lawyers who will decide if the new arrangements complied 'to the spirit of the law'.

Secrets has attracted controversy since it opened 18 months ago. Local residents led by the BBC's John Humphrys, claim it lowers the tone of Hammersmith. The head teacher of Godolphin and Latymer School complained after a 13-year old pupil walking near the club was accosted by a man who asked her to strip.

Hammersmith certainly qualify for the Hall of Shame both for their elevation of the rights of the whinger over those of the customers and for their assumption that nudity is somehow illegal anyway.

Very dodgy goings-on from the Department of Culture, Media and Sport. They have apparently proscribed the porn satellite channel Eros on December the 9th but somehow failed to inform anyone in the industry. They are supposed to nominally give 21 days notice and hence the ban applies from December 30th. However this notice period is meant so that commercial operations can adjust their policies in a timely manner so as to comply with the (obnoxious and repressive) law. I shall be taking a close look at what other measures the Government try and push through whilst they think we are all on a Christmas break. This entire exercise smacks of a very lowlife attitude from Chris Smith and Co, very shoddy!

Satisfaction Club Television (SCT) has started its regular digital hardcore porn service on Hot Bird 3 (13degs east).  It is encrypted in MPEG2/Viacess and uses the following tuning parameters: 12.303 Ghz vertical (V-PID 205, A-PID 206).  Its transmission time is: 1.00 till 3.00 CET.

The BBFC have opened up their searchable database of cuts. See www.bbfc.co.uk

An excellent move towards greater openness, my thanks to the BBFC

The Sexual Freedom Coalition recently submitted a petition to the Home Office and received the following reply:

The law on sexual offences is a very complex area and the Government recognises that it is important to ensure that the framework of sexual offences is coherent and effective whilst reflecting the society that we live in today. At the same time, it must protect those who are vulnerable from abuse. Any reform will need careful consideration.

We have recently been commissioned to carry out a wide-ranging review of sexual offences and penalties and this work will begin shortly. I have no doubt that you will wish to make a contribution to this work, and I hope that our intention to consult widely on this issue will allow you to do so.

I hope that a few melon farmers can provide them some input, I will. Here is the address to respond to

Home Office
Sentencing and Offences Unit
50 Queen Anne's Gate, London SW1H 9AT
Switchboard: 0171 273 4000 Fax: 2967 Direct Line 0171 273 3123

A short interview with the new censor, Robin Duval, in the Glasgow Herald (Thursday 19th November) had him wheeling out the usual claptrap about the BBFC being classifiers more than censors these days.

There was also mention of an early test of his limits as the distributors of The Texas Chainsaw Massacre were seeking a video release.

Perhaps even more interestingly, I have heard a strong rumour that the distributors of The Exorcist are feeling very confident of a BBFC certificate and have pencilled in a video release for early next year.

Perhaps these releases will sort out whether Duval is a censor or a classifier.

Not strictly UK news but it serves as a useful contrast between attitudes to porn in the US and the UK where all forms of enjoyment are either frowned upon or illegal.

US Penthouse and Hustler magazines broke the penetration barrier in their December issues, showing photos of men and women engaging in the act.

The two magazines decided independently about a year ago to liberalize their editorial policies on penetration. Both say any controversy over the change likely will die down soon.

In Tulsa, Oklahoma, two bookstore clerks were charged with obscenity for selling Penthouse to undercover officers. At the time, the officers seized copies of Penthouse, Hustler and some videos. Larry Flynt, publisher of Hustler, announced he will pay legal costs for the arrested clerks. A Penthouse spokeswoman said the Oklahoma arrests were isolated incidents and that she believed the magazines would be in store sales racks throughout the state soon.

The arrests made Utah retailers skittish. Most either pulled their copies of the magazine or placed opaque, adhesive tape strips over the potentially offending photos. The Utah business owners said they were trying to keep things low-key so as not to attract the attention of state authorities.

A Salt Lake City lawyer who represents Penthouse said the move across the line to show sexual penetration was inspired, in part, by the growing tolerance and new sexual standards created by the widespread availability of sexual materials on the Internet.

Police in Birmingham have seized supposedly obscene material worth an estimated £250,000 claiming it to be a national distribution network for hardcore pornography.

West Midlands Police raided six addresses in the Birmingham area on Thursday and found 4,000 videos, 1,400 magazines and video production equipment. Eight people were arrested, including three women and a 15-year-old boy. One of the four men and the boy were later released on police bail. The other individuals are still being held for questioning.

The officer who led the operation, Inspector Cath Hannon, said: We believe we have disrupted a major network of pornography dealers distributing material all over the UK. The seizure includes copying facilities, master copies of videos, blank tapes, and scanning and computer equipment. "The operation will have a substantial impact on the availability of illegal hardcore pornography in this region and probably in the entire country."

Shop premises and private addresses in Birmingham were raided by a ludicrous 41 officers.

(4000 thousand videos seems a ridiculously small number to warrant an operation by 41 police. How on earth does one hype up a figure of £250,000 from 4000 videos, that's like £60 each and £10 per magazine. The only wrong doing in this case is a criminal waste of tax payers money on funding the police raid, I trust the jury will agree)

Today's newspapers are reviewing the latest cinema release of The Texas Chainsaw Massacre complete with an 18 certificate. In fact the film is showing at the ABC Shaftesbury Avenue with a 18 certificate granted by Camden Council rather than the BBFC.

Congratulations to Camden Council and continued yah-boo to the BBFC who continue to ban a fine film that contains  little even remotely cuttable material.

As reported earlier, the police recently raided Garden of Eden, a nudist club that was playing host to some liberated partying. The owner has now been convicted in court and ended up with a £2000 fine for living off immoral earnings and keeping a brothel. He was also ordered to pay £40 costs.

In court the owner admitted turning his failing garden nursery at Nevern, Pembrokeshire, into the Garden of Eden sex club. It attracted visitors from across Britain, largely by advertisements on the Internet describing it as an attraction for "liberated adults". It boasted a 3,000sq ft semi-tropical glasshouse with bar, plunge pool and ten-seater sauna.

Paradise fell to earth the night that an unnamed woman, having heard tales of orgies, visited the club with her sister on a mixed night. They were picked up at their home 60 miles away by a driver employed by Brett. The woman had been told that 'anything goes' at the centre, with couples, lesbians, homosexuals and transvestites meeting there. The woman was so shocked at finding up to 20 people having group sex in the swimming pool that she reported the matter to police.

Brett was interviewed by police and admitted running his club as a brothel for five years from Januray 1994. He said he had bought the property as a garden centre ten years ago, but business had fallen on hard times and he had decided to venture into the naturist scene. He told police that people wanted more excitement, and he turned a blind eye to what was going on. He said he had acted on the advice of solicitors, did not think he was doing anything wrong, and did not actively encourage people to have sex."

The chairman of the magistrates, said: We regard this as a very serious case, but we are taking into account that you co-operated fully with the police.

After the hearing Brett told reporters that he had pleaded guilty because he had not wanted to embarrass friends by asking them to give evidence. But he remained somewhat unrepentant: I did not have sex parties; I had liberated parties. I feel my punishment is steep and I have been treated unfairly.

(It strikes me that the real snakes in the Garden of Eden was the snitch of a woman who was obviously told what to expect, the police for raiding what was obviously a pretty discrete operation and of course the magistrate for enforcing the notion that sex is somehow illegal in Britain. Similar clubs proliferate in other more civilised countries such as France and Germany and shock-horror! people enjoy themselves there.Outrageous!)

As reported earlier, London's Commercial Tavern Pub was raided by Trading Standards and eventually fined for allowing table dancing to evolve into lap dancing. This seems to have had a knock-on effect at other strip pubs who have been tightening up their acts. Thanks to Bob Singleton for the following information.

Regulars of the Flying Scotsman will no doubt have seen the large notice next to the girls' table forbiding them from licking their own nipples, playing with themselves "down below", using creams, lotions, whips, and other accessories, from walking to and from the stage unless fully covered, or from doing a "floor show" (i.e. The girls have to dance upright rather than roll around on the filthy floor that is so generously provided).

At the Rainbow Sportsbar, the girls have been told that no part of their body should protrude from outside the circumference of the table, and that they must not "play with themselves". So what are we paying £10 for? It was never a private dance, given the traffic between the bar and the gents, and now that the girls can't do anything, it's hardly a dance at all!

Everywhere in London, the story seems to be the same... where there is a stage, the girls have been told not to wander around the rest of the pub during their dances. The use of creams, lotions, etc., is at best frowned upon, and at worst barred.

If this repressive tendancy amongst the powers-that-be carries on any further, I can envisage a return to the original shows staged at The Windmill Theatre, where nudity on stage was tolerated, so long as nobody moved!!

Writing in the today's Guardian, Ros Hodgkiss, who resigned from the board in July, says the BBFC was being run on ridiculously paternalistic lines. She had left in protest at the "pompous" content of a censorship roadshow ordered by Andreas Whittam Smith, the president, to dispel the board's reputation for excessive secrecy,

Ros Hodgkiss, a teacher, who worked as a censor for three years, said protests from morality campaigners, or a hostile article about a film in a tabloid, was enough to send the office into panic. Controversy set the board backtracking on policy, or retreating into silence. A handful of letters constituted a public outcry.

She claimed decisions about cuts to "awkward" films were often put on ice, and the reports by examiners like herself filed away in drawers and ignored. She claimed many of the controversies which have dogged the board - like the row over David Cronenberg's Crash - could have been avoided if Ferman had not been such a "control freak".

The board was run by James Ferman, the chief censor, like a personal fiefdom, she said. After 23 years in the job, Ferman is to step down next month. Despite Ferman's liberal credentials, Hodgkiss writes: "I found him to be a chauvinist, but some others, I know, did not. The general view was that James was James and you had to adapt to his ways."

Since joining the board, Whittam Smith has taken a much more robust line on both pornography and violence, banning some films which Ferman had wanted to pass, including the video of Sam Peckinpah's Straw Dogs. She is also critical of Whittam Smith's, promise for improved BBFC openness. "So far he has not delivered. He does not have Ferman's commitment, nor his film literacy."

(See Confessions of a Censor for the full article.)

I reported earlier that the BBFC had banned Deadbeat At Dawn. The video was submitted by Dave Gregory from the Exploited label and he made it absolutely clear that Whittam Smith was personally responsible for the ban. The story goes like this:

I submitted Deadbeat at Dawn back in July hoping to release it alongside Vigilante. The BBFC sent me a not entirely unexpected cuts list for Deadbeat totaling two minutes of footage. I made around fifty cuts to remove all sight of chain sticks and throwing stars exactly as they requested. Most of the gore in the film passed unnoticed. 

I resubmitted the film and started sending out preview copies, printed the sleeves, and ran a couple of ads, under the foolish assumption that because I had cut what they asked the film would be approved. Not so. Ferman watched it and through his secretary informed me that there was a problem with the violence in the film. A discussion was to be staged on the matter two days after the original release date: Oct. 26th. According to Ferman, opinions were split among the examiners.

Then Whittam Smith entered the room, overruled all discussion and declared that the film was to be rejected. Democratic discussion! Anyway, Ferman said they didn't want to issue another cuts list and that I could submit a toned down version if I wanted to. He had this impression of the film reaching a massive audience of impressionable. I told him that he ought to consider, in future, the actual market for a film of this type. 1500 units max! Not a huge blockbuster by any account, but a healthy specialist market.

Sounds likely Whittam Smith was being particularly dictatorial that day, perhaps he was behind with his annual quota of bans as demanded by Jack Straw.

For those that would like to see the film in its full glory it will soon be released on US DVD. The distributors of the US version are glorying in the British embarrassment. They will certainly be looking to add the advertising "banned in the UK" to help them sell the disc.

The UK regulation of pornography import is a disgrace. It is implemented in a manner more akin to Soviet style policing rather than that expected of a liberal democracy.  Customs have a secret list of things that they find supposedly obscene. The public are deliberately not made aware of the contents of such a list and get no guidelines whatsoever on what they are allowed to import. Of course the penalty for overstepping this secret line is truely gruesome and involves house raids, prison sentences etc.

Anyway, a recent edition of BBC's Panorama included an interview with a customs officer (complete with officious Soviet style minder hovering in the background to ensure that the interviewee did not say too much). The interview included a brief shot of the customs shopping list (titled Appendix F). Observant viewers were able to make out much of the list.

As predicted previously, the BBFC are having difficulties with and so delaying SCi's "full blood" version of Carmaggedon II. Meanwhile, SCi has placed an upgrade on the Net that converts the 15 certificate version of Carmaggedon II into the "full blood" version.

The 15 certificate version featuring zombies and green blood has been licensed by the separate European Leisure Software Publishers' Association (ELSPA). The BBFC only need to get involved in the certification process when life-like animation is featured. As the full blood version is more life-like, the manufacturer voluntarily asked for an 18 BBFC certificate. SCi claims the BBFC is dragging its heels over a decision on the full-blood version and has issued legal proceedings in an attempt to force the body to make a prompt decision so any appeal can be held before Christmas. The BBFC have already taken two months so far in failing to make their decision.

SCi claims it is doing nothing wrong as the "patches" are on an American site and so are not distributed from within Britain. However, its British registered site - with a .co.uk address - provides links to the pages where the bloodier version of the game can be downloaded. The computer company says that 90% of its revenue derives from exports and that the patches are there to give players a choice.

This means that regardless of whether the 18 certificate version is passed, it will be available as an upgrade to the existing 15 certificate version. The BBFC is privately upset at this apparent sidestepping of the certification process but it is refusing to comment on SCi's application.

A spokesman for the board said the game was still being assessed by child psychologists, in the first referral of its kind by British censors. He added: The problem with this game is that it awards points for killing people.

Kevin Browne, a psychologist advising the BBFC on Carmageddon II, believes both versions of the game should be illegal and is outraged that the Net is being used to sidestep the certification process. It really isn't on for a company to ask for a game to be certified and then irresponsibly make the gorier parts available on the Net anyway. I fail to see why the games are considered separate just because one has zombies in it with green blood and the other people with more realistic red blood. The premise of the games is still the same. You get rewarded for running over pedestrians. In those predisposed to joyriding, it will reinforce their anti-social behaviour. You then have to ask the question that if they are excited by running over people on their computer, will they have the same disregard when accelerating at great speed in a stolen car in real life. (worse than that, they are so morally corrupted they may want to grow up to be psychologists!)

In the game, players race round a track and pick up bonus points by mowing down innocent bystanders - a feat accompanied by large splats of blood and flying limbs. Carmageddon II boasts improved graphics and more options to create "fender-bending mayhem" and includes a reminder that "reckless driving gains points".

(Look out for an interesting interview with Gianni Zamo, a BBFC examiner specialising in digital media. This will be in the next issue of Station magazine published on 26th November). 

James Ferman said this week that he wished he had cut Pulp Fiction, claiming its depiction of drug use had increased the number of young people injecting heroin. He continued to say that Quentin Tarantino's 1994 box-office hit was a socially irresponsible glamorisation of drug abuse which should never have been screened uncut even though it would damage a "wonderful" film.. (uncut at cinema, but it was cut for video). He said that some cinema-goers were likely to have tried to emulate John Travolta's character. Travolta shoots up heroin, drives along blissfully happy, picks up Uma Thurman, the most beautiful young woman in the film, goes dancing and wins the dancing competition.

Some anti-drug campaigners welcomed Pulp Fiction because of its scene where Travolta revives an overdosed Thurman by plunging a needle into her chest, but Ferman believes young people would have concluded they should avoid stupidity, not heroin. Thurman snorted it by mistake. Travolta used it properly and had a great time.

Mary Whitehouse, the veteran pro-censorship campaigner, said she was glad. It takes a certain amount of courage to come out and admit he was wrong. It needs people with courage to keep control of this medium. The effects, especially on young vulnerable people, can be severe. (Not a very dignified way to work out ones last few week in office, fancy saying stupid things that allow even Mary Whitehouse to gloat).

The Home Secretary Jack Straw announced today his proposal to designate Lord Taylor of Warwick and Janet Lewis Jones, the new Vice Presidents of the British Board of Film Classification, under section 4 of the Video Recordings Act 1984. The designation is subject to the approval of Parliament.

Lord Taylor and Janet Lewis Jones will replace Monica Sims and join Andreas Whittam Smith as the authority responsible for making the arrangements laid out in the Video Recordings Act.

Does designated mean that Jack Straw has now forcibly appointed all three presidential roles of the BBFC? Am I living in a nation of Thought Police and Government censors? Is Jack Straw a reincarnation of Stalin? Liberal minds want to know!

Robin Duval, 57, who next year succeeds James Ferman as the director of the BBFC, said that he had been uncomfortable about the number of gratutiously violent films such as Eraser and Terminator which had flooded the market in the 1980s and 1990s, making icons of actors such as Schwarzenegger and Sylvester Stallone. He now welcomes the trend away from macho heroes towards more sensitive role models such as Leonardo DiCaprio.

He also said that he had not liked the violence in Quentin Taratino's films Reservoir Dogs and Pulp Fiction and believed that Tarantino would soon need to find another hole to come out of creatively. I think Tarantino is an incredible talent, but I didn't particularly like the violence in those films. Having said that, I don't think Reservoir Dogs is as violent as its reputation suggests. It's very bloody but you don't actually see a lot of the violence on screen. It is a Hollywood problem, however. It is not reasonable to turn to the BBFC and say 'It's your fault - you should have stopped this. Hollywood is now moving towards less aggressive heroes like Tom Hanks and Leonardo DiCaprio who, let's be honest, is the opposite of machismo.

Duval said that he would not single out any violent films in particular for criticism but objected more to their high numbers. I didn't have any particular films in mind. The problem is where there is a flow of violent movies at once.

Duval's favourite film is the 1956 classic western The Searchers, starring John Wayne. He also cited Ingmar Bergman's 1957 film Smultronstallet (Wild Strawberries) as another favourite. "I must have seen The Searchers a dozen times or more," he said. "It is a great movie."

It was under Mr Duval's reign than the ITC allowed Channel 5 to screen Natural Born Killers. However, he defended the decision explaining that it had been broadcast very late and censored in parts.

Duval said: I think anybody that moves into a job likes to do things differently. Jim has done a fine job, however. I think fundamentally I'm very similar to him. I was very flattered to see myself called a Channel 4 liberal in the Daily Mail. I think a lot of people at Channel 4 would find that very amusing. I think the regulator has to be very cautious before steaming in and telling people they don't know sufficiently what's good for them and that they have to have it imposed. (This is the making of a classic I don't believe in censorship, but....)

The government's Human Rights Bill, which incorporates the European Convention on Human Rights into British law, has received Royal Assent - although it will not come into effect until 2000. The act will allow people who believe their human rights have been violated to have their cases judged at home rather than in Strasbourg. The legislation is seen by many as the most important human rights reform in the last 50 years and the most far reaching legal change to our system since joining the European Community.

Lord Williams denied it would reduce the power of parliament by devolving power and responsibility to judges. He said: It gives judges discretion and obligations to decide our law in a way that is consistent with the European convention. It still maintains the absolute sovereignty of parliament and that is very important.

(So hands up those who think it will make a jot of difference to our non-existant right to free speech? How many of you think that Government censorship will continue unabated?....Thought so)

Yet another minister, Janet Anderson, has joined New Censorial Labour and has therefore been admitted to the Hall of Shame.

Films minister Janet Anderson has  confirmed that she was considering an Order which will proscribe the porn channel Eros TV. She said: Hard-core pornography is not acceptable in this country The Government will always put the welfare of children first. We simply cannot tolerate broadcasting of graphically explicit material of this kind.

I received notification from the ITC of a pornographic service, Eros TV, which the Commission considers to be unacceptable and should be the subject of a proscription order. I have viewed the channel and consider that a proscription order would be in the public interest. In accordance with the terms of the EC Broadcasting Directive, the   broadcaster, the French authorities and the European Commission have  been notified that we consider this service to have manifestly,  seriously and gravely infringed the Directive's provisions on the  protection of children.

If we are unable to resolve this matter within 15 days of this  notification and the broadcaster continues to transmit such offensive programmes, we shall proceed to make an Order effectively proscribing the service in the United Kingdom.

The Sunday People recalled that, as shadow women's minister, Anderson outraged MPs at the Labour Party conference two years ago when she said: Under Labour women will become more promiscuous.

(New Censorial Labour are currently excelling themselves in the hypocrisy stakes. They are currently pleading for tolerance and privacy when it comes to their own sexual pleasures, yet at the same time they are actively trying to ban the sexual pleasures of an awful lot of other people. They get no sympathy from me when they get caught with their pants down, they haven't done anything what so ever to deserve privacy and respect).

Porn channel Eros TV has moved on to the recently-launched Hot Bird 5 satellite (which has replaced Eutelsat II-F1) at 13 degrees East. From today, the D2-Mac channel will be available at 11.623GHz/V where it retain its existing transmission hours. The satellite's wide footprint will enable Eros to almost double its coverage across Europe, the Mid-East and parts of Russia. The announcement will end rumours that the channel is considering ceasing analogue transmissions. Meanwhile, viewing cards for Eros TV's digital service at 12.379GHz/V on Hot Bird 3 will become available in the next fortnight.

The BBFC have decided to open up their website to the public free of charge. Gone is the £250 entrance charge. The public will then be able to access the 100,000 entries in the classified and rejected archives.

As the BBFC themselves stated: British citizens are entitled to know about decisions of the BBFC which affect their freedom to see the films and videos of their choice.

The Melon Farmers applaud this decision (especially as it will mean less work for us).

The BBFC have decided to ban the video release of  Deadbeat at Dawn. This 1990 US film was directed by Jim Van Bebber. The leader of one of two rival gangs leaves but gets his girlfriend murdered for his troubles. He ends up taking revenge on both of the gangs invoking a fair bit of violence and some cheap gore effects in the process.

I found one review to give  an insight into what we are missing courtesy of our moral betters: Before seeing this film I heard a lot about its director and star Jim Van Beeber who has been said to have a style all his own. Deadbeat At Dawn shows clearly why Beeber is praised. His work has an intense feeling to it, pure raw power, and some different ideas. The creative camera work in DAD and style, along with the great lava lamp like intro's between scenes, are quite unique. What it fails to do in good acting and budget it makes up for in energy. The film is a little rough around the edges but it’s just fun to watch. The conclusion is the high point of the whole movie, it has some great action sequences which are extremely brutal and violent.

From my limited research I cannot find any particular reason why this particular movie should be singled out for a ban. I suspect that Whittam Smith is playing silly buggers and arbitarily picking on the little films to keep his mate David Alton happy. Perhaps he will put me right in my conspiracy theories and issue a press release to justify this ban.

The BBFC have appointed Robin Duval as their new Director. He will take up the post on January 4th. He previously worked at the ITC as Deputy Director of Programmes.

James Ferman said of him, "We could not have found a better all-rounder for the post. Robin is an experienced film maker, a sensitive media regulator, and a man steeped in the best traditions of public service." Andreas Whittam Smith said that he too was "delighted that we have been able to make such a strong appointment."

On accepting the post, Robin Duval said, "I am honoured to be asked to succeed James Ferman, whose authority and expertise are recognised in the UK and internationally. He will be a tough act to follow."

The Melon Farmers also welcome Robin Duval with the hope that one day British people will be treated with a little bit of respect and that maybe the BBFC will eventually live up to its name. More details available on the BBFC web page.

The Italian satellite porn channel Satisfaction Club Television (SCT) has returned in a digital MPEG2 reincarnation. It is available on Hot Bird 2, 11.843 Ghz vertical (Stream), encrypted in Irdeto and Hot Bird 3, 12.303 Ghz vertical (Croatian/Slovenian platform), encrypted in Viacess.

From January 1999, SCT in Irdeto will extend to a 24-hours-programm. The Viacess-version will have switched to a full-time-service from March 1999.

SCT is available in all European countries and North Africa for annual subscription of around 450 DM/500 000 Lire.

Meanwhile Eros TV has committed to maintaining an analogue D2Mac service for another year prior to going digital. It is not yet clear which transponder they will be using as they appear to have lost their existing one during the frequency swopping implented to accomodate the new Hot Bird 3 satellite.

Sales Curve Interactive, publishers of the video game Carmageddon 2, have again submitted to the BBFC a version of the game featuring zombies with green blood. The games plays in exactly the same way as the red bloodied version but the BBFC somehow think it less offensive to mow down zombie pedestrians.

Of course potential purchasers should not be put off, there is bound to be another internet patch to put things back to rights.

The 25th anniversary cinema re-release of The Exorcist is coinciding with halloween this weekend. I thought I would gather together a few news items in celebration.

It has been the case for some time that James Ferman has been a lone but powerful voice in demanding a continued ban on the video release. As Ferman is now sitting out his last few weeks in the Director's chair, perhaps fresh blood will see things differently. To this end, Warner Brothers have formally submitted the video for classification. At least we should get an answer, rather than the perpetual tease we have suffered up until now.

The US recently celebrated the 25th anniversary with a special edition video re-release and a Sunday afternoon TV showing. I have since heard that this TV viewing suffered some heavy cuts: The crucifix scene was watered down (the close up shot was cut) and the head spinning scene was cut where Regan said "...your cunting daughter".

Closer to home the cinema re-release has apparently kicked up a few protests. Religious groups, concerned by the film's graphic portrayal of demonic possession are asking once again for the film to be banned and are expected once more to lobby their local cinemas. Warner Brothers has received letters criticising its decision to mark the film's 25th anniversary by putting it out on general release and many of the 257 cinemas showing The Exorcist have been lobbied by protesters. Warner Brothers will not be posting the fleets of St John ambulances at cinemas to care for casualities as it did in 1974, but it is expecting protests.

One evangelical group in Wiltshire has a team of counsellors on hand this Halloween weekend to help people who feel they have been adversely affected by what they have seen on the screen. The Rev Malcolm Hathaway said that The Exorcist was evil: of course society's senses are dulled by horror and violence nowadays but The Exorcist is something different; the devil and the demonic are very real and have a very real affect on people, particularly young people who often cannot cope with their feelings afterwards. We will be there for those people. Hathaway even wrote to his local cinema in Salisbury asking it not to show the film but said that his request was ignored. It's going to be shown - there's nothing we can do about that but I will be placing adverts in the local paper warning people not to see the film and offering help to viewers who are disturbed by what they feel."

One for the Hall of Shame I think.

Sales Curve Interactive, publishers of the video game Carmageddon 2 are seeking a court order to try and force the BBFC to get their act together. The BBFC have been doing their usual trick of perpetually delaying difficult decisions and wont even decide about a certificate for the trailer of the the game.

The launch of Channel 4's new film channel on November 1st is being accompanied by what the channel's chief executive, Michael Jackson, describes as a "Freedom to See" campaign. The channel is meeting the Independent Television Commission to lobby for more liberal regulations covering films broadcast on satellite and cable television channels. At present, pay television channels are allowed to show only versions of films that have been approved for video distribution by the BBFC.

Pay television is different to broadcast television in that viewers have to make a positive choice about what they watch, says Jackson. We already know from Channel 4 that when you explain the context of a film in detail you get far fewer complaints, because people have to choose to watch it and far fewer people who are likely to be offended wander into things.

The ITC looked at the proportion of complaints it received from satellite and cable viewers. In 1997, out of 2,894 complaints only 142 were about cable or satellite programmes. Then a research company, Millward Brown, asked 3,000 viewers about their attitudes to sex, violence and bad language on television. In every case viewers of satellite and cable television were found to be more liberal. Only a minority of cable and satellite viewers are shocked by what they see on television, and they were twice as likely as terrestrial-only viewers to agree that cable and satellite should be able to show more sex and nudity.

We are not seeking an argument, says Jackson. We want to go with the flow of society. And people are more tolerant and they are more diverse. We want to work with the ITC over time to explore how people tolerate films.

The advertising pamphlet already boasts that: The FilmFour channel is uncut, initerrupted and broadcast in widescreen just as film should be. No compromises. We shall soon see whether they live up to their laudable declarations as Bad Lieutenant makes an appearance on the Novmeber 2nd. Will it be the horribly cut video version or the uncut cinema version?

The Independent Television Commission (ITC) has notified the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport, Chris Smith, that the satellite service Channel Bizarre is unacceptable. (Strange! by all accounts it has proved a rather good service so far)

The unelected quango advised the Secretary that the channel should be subject to a proscription order under Section 177 of the Broadcasting Act 1990.

The satellite service was launched on 15 July, and transmits for up to four hours seven nights a week after 11pm. Its head office is in Maastricht, but it is also available to, and marketed to, viewers in the UK. The Commission decided that the service repeatedly included sexually explicit material which offended against good taste and decency, and that a proscription order would be in the public interest. (I personally cannot think of a more inhumane thing to do than to unnecessarily deprive one's fellow man of their sexual pleasure. The ITC are clearly depraved and corrupted.)

A proscription order makes it a criminal offence to supply any equipment for use in connection of the operation of the service; to supply programme material or arrange for its supply; to place ads on the service; to publish any programme details of the service; and to supply or offer to supply any decoding equipment to enable the service to be received.

The Broadcasting Standards Commission (BSC) have published a report, Men Viewing Violence, which presents striking differences between the attitudes of men and women to rape and violence on television. The study of 88 men of different ages and backgrounds was compared with a study of women viewers from 1992.

The women viewers all condemned rape and were concerned about the way it was portrayed on screen. Women indicated that no one had a right to rape and no one deserved rape, whereas male respondents were less likely to adopt that viewpoint. 

The men were shown extracts from the television drama Trip Trap, which relates how one man battered his wife and later raped her friend, with whom he was having an affair. While most were sympathetic to the abused wife, they tempered their reaction to the rape of the other female character because the victim was "deceitful". Some Pakistani and West African respondents said she had "learnt the hard way", while many young, white, working-class men argued she "deserved" it.

The commission said: Whilst women do not endorse rape under any circumstances, the men's attitude to the plight of the woman who was raped was almost dismissive. Many of the men drew a firm distinction between the "good" and "bad" female characters and some viewed the rape as warranted through her 'bad' behaviour.

Shown real closed-circuit television footage of a violent assault, young, white working-class men admitted they enjoyed watching it and did not think intervention was required. Although many of the men studied did condemn violence, some admitted they found it stimulating, they did not consider television violence to be a significant issue. While all men distinguished between factual and fictitious depictions of violence, there was little support for cutting violent scenes from fast-moving action films because they were seen as fantasy

Lady Howe said she did not want to make any firm recommendations to broadcasters, particularly by suggesting what they should or shouldn't screen. She said: What we are trying to do is give information to broadcasters so they can better self-regulate what they show and when they show it.

I reported last July that the the Skin Two CD-ROM had been languishing at the BBFC for several months. It finally got a certificate at the end of August but the experience of dealing with the BBFC left them a little battered and bruised.

Skin Two is a magazine featuring fetish and bondage material. They submitted a CD-ROM to the BBFC in March which was initially assessed within a week and immediately referred to Ferman. It remained in Ferman's office until mid July dispite numerous polite but increasingly frustrated phone calls. Eventually a slightly less than polite call resulted in the disc being passed on to Assistant Director Margaret Ford. She was able to review it and respond within a few weeks. Several cuts were demanded relating to images of women in bondage.  The cuts were implemented and an 18 certificate was finally issued at the end of August.

Skin Two rightfully felt aggrieved that they had paid £1000 in advance for the privilege of being censored only to be subjected to a totally unreasonable delay. Apparently Margaret Ford did apologise for the poor treatment and waived the fee for the second assessment (another £1000)

The real financial damage to the project created by a delay of this magitude is hard to calculate. The delay occured because one man, on whose opinion the classification depended was unwilling or unable to review the disc for 4 months, highlighting the potential for abuse of the censor's power.

Excellent attitude from Channel 4: I was well impressed

FilmFour, the new subscription film channel to be introduced on November 1 by Channel 4, has appealed to the Independent Television Commission for the right to show films in their original, uncut cinema form. The ITC said that FilmFour had been told it would be able to show films only in a form cleared for video distribution - a restriction that applies to other broadcasters of subscription film channels. Channel 4 is likely to put forward a formal case to the commission, arguing that FilmFour subscribers should be allowed to see the version of films as screened in the cinema.

Channel executives believe that they should not have to show films in the form approved for video by the British Board of Film Classification because it is a channel that viewers choose to subscribe to.

Because video and television enter the home, the board imposes stricter standards on depictions of extreme violence and sexuality. Those standards often require bigger cuts for films shown on television than for those screened in the cinema.

Michael Jackson, the Channel 4 chief executive, promised yesterday that the film channel would be "risky, nearer the knuckle, edgy and provocative". It would "push the envelope of what can be shown on TV".

The channel will be available to about five million homes at a cost of £5.99 a month. It plans to show violent films such as Reservoir Dogs and to offer a "naked cinema" segment every Friday night. In its promotional video for the new service, Channel 4 promises that the films will be uncut - a claim that could put it in conflict with the Independent Television Commission.

An early preview of Playstation fighting game Thrill Kill recently fell foul of the BBFC over a dominatrix making orgasmic sounds on killing an opponent. Recent reports have stated that this controverisal title will now never see light of day.

The original publisher, Virgin Interactive has been consumed by the massive conglomerate Electronic Arts who have announced that the title will not be published by them, nor will it be tendered for publishing by any other party.

There are several possible resons for this:

• Electronic Arts has taken a particularly nauseous moral stand over Thrill Kill's apparent content (a slighty dubious morality when one considers the fact that   Electronic Arts publishes the Strike series featuring real world war scenarios).
• To generate publicity for a change of heart and subsequent publication
• To cover up the fact the title was an unsaleably poor product.

A gay magazine, London Metropolis, planned to publish the Robert Mapplethorpe pictures showing anal sex that had recently escaped prosecution. Unfortunately their printers, Eastern Counties Newspapers got worried and sought legal advice. Their lawyers advised that the printers could be prosecuted and so the printers pulped the entire issue. (I suppose that the lawyers felt that although art students are unlikely to be depraved by a picture, gays were up for a bit of depravity and corruption)

Eurotica/Rendez-Vous are still intent on an heroic legal battle against the UK Government's recent proscription order. In the meantime they are still selling cards to UK subscribers. The channel carries a few minutes of clear programming each night with the following banner: Viewers from the UK can purchase cards from Card Services. English speaking operators await your call. Delivery free to the UK. The viewing of Eurotica/Rendez-Vous with a valid card is not a violation of British law.

Worse news from Eros TV though. The hypocritically intolerant Chris Smith is confirmed to be in the process of setting up a proscription order on Eros TV perhaps due by November. It has been reported (this must be taken with some scepticism) that Eros TV are to close D2-Mac transmissions from this time. They currently transmit in analogue at 13 degrees east 11.658 V and are set to focus on their digital platform which at the moment is not fully operational. Current subscribers will be offered the deal of a digital decoder and a viacess smart-card.

Ironically if Eurotica/Rendez-Vous manage to overturn their ban, it would equally help their competitors, Eros TV, whose ban would then probably not come into force either. Good luck to Eurotica/Rendez-Vous in their commendable actions.

Immediately after the video Makin' Whoopee won its appeal for an R18 certificate, the distributors submitted 4 further videos with similar strength material, ie with some hardcore content. The BBFC have now returned some of these with a list of cuts as long as one's arm.

This poses an interesting dilemma. If the material is absurdly judged as illegal then someone must have been at fault in granting the Makin' Whoopee certificate. If the material is legal then surely the BBFC are acting illegally in demanding cuts. The BBFC guidelines clearly state that for an R18 certificate, consensual adult porn should only be limited by the laws of the land, ie the obscene Obscene Publications Act. I hope that the distributors can sue for loss of earnings resulting from an incorrect decision.

In the meantime BBC's Panorama has been researching into James Ferman's call for the liberalisation of Britain's archaic porn laws. This is due to be shown on 26th October or soon after

An attempt by police to censor and destroy supposedly "obscene" pictures by the photographer Robert Mapplethorpe has failed in an landmark case, it was revealed yesterday. The West Midland's paedophile and pornography unit threatened to prosecute the University of Central England in Birmingham and Random House, the publisher, over two photographs by the controversial American artist. But the Crown Prosecution Service yesterday ruled that there was no realistic prospect of a successful conviction. (Notice that they are not willing to say that the pictures are not obscene). The CPS argued that under the obscene publication laws a book must tend to deprave or corrupt a significant number of the people who see it. But this was highly unlikely because the two offending pictures were published along with 380 others and most of the people who would be interested were art students or artists. (Are they suggesting that the rest of us would be depraved? This assumption is far more offensive than any picture of anal sex!)

In addition, in the CPS's view, publication of the book could be justified as being "in the public good". It was also a defence to an obscenity prosecution that a book or article was published "in the interests of science and literature, art or learning".

The police were particularly disturbed by two pictures. One was Helmut and Brooks, NYC, 1978, which shows a form of anal sex and the other was Jim and Tom, Sausalito, 1977, which is of a man clad in a dog collar, a leather mask and trousers, urinating into another man's mouth.

In an unusual move the West Midlands police decided to announce the decision yesterday on local radio. Assistant Chief Constable Anne Summers took a copy of the £75 book on to the BBC's Ed Doolan Show to explain why no action was being taken.  Dr Peter Knight, vice-chancellor of the University said: The police made a bad judgement call. It should never have been referred to the CPS. This unprecedented case shows the Obscene Publications Act is ridiculous and out of date. (Too true!)

The Commission for Racial Equality is being investigated by police for inciting racial hatred after a provocative advertising campaign depicting black people as rapists and orang-utans backfired.

The blatantly offensive advertisements which were designed as "shock tactics" to highlight racism in society, were posted on 192 billboards across the country on Wednesday and Thursday of last week. They gave no clue of the body's involvement and were intended as a "tease" to provoke complaints and test the strength of anti-racist feelings in society. A  second phase of posters is planned with the caption: "What was worse? This advert or your failure to complain?".

But the ruse rebounded on the commission when Avon and Somerset Police threatened the organisation with prosecution under the Race Relations Act - the same legislation used to create it in 1976. Officers on duty in Bristol on Friday complained to their superiors after seeing the adverts in the city centre. The force ordered the company responsible for the billboards to cover the adverts with blank paper. A file is to be sent to the Crown Prosecution Service.  The explanatory adverts intended to replace the originals have also been banned in the constabulary's area.

The Advertising Standards Authority, which had received more than 30 complaints by yesterday, has begun its own inquiry. The  Commission for Racial Equality who received 52 complaints themselves could have the embarrassment of being the first body to have its adverts vetted under new agreements with the poster industry.

The posters were purporting to promote companies and products. One, for the TDX-5 rape alarm, shows a white woman sitting on the top deck of a bus anxiously eyeing a young black man in the foreground. The accompanying slogan reads: "Because it's a jungle out there." Another, for a sports footwear manufacturer, shows a black man jumping to "slam-dunk" a basketball through a hoop. Next to him is an orang-utan in the same pose reaching for a branch. The caption reads: "Born to be agile."   The third poster, for a recruitment company, depicts two businessmen climbing a ladder, one black and one white. The white man is treading on the hand of the black man with the caption reading: "Dominate the Race."

A nudist club claiming to be a sanctury for 'liberated adults' was raided by police yesterday under the Sexual Offences Act after local residents complained of rumours of sex parties. Computer records and client lists were removed by police from the premises on the outskirts of Nevern in the Pembrokeshire National Park.

Run by a retired Army major, the Garden of Eden nudist club says that there is no limit to the self-indulgence on offer at weekend parties in its sauna, plunge pool and semi-tropical glasshouse. Roger Brett, its naturist owner, defended the club, visited by people from all over Britain and where underwear is banned. He said: I run a club for liberated adults and what they do when they get here is up to them. If they want to have sex with each other in private, then I'm not going to stop them. We don't run a brothel. We put on parties for liberated adults and what they get up to is their own affair. No one is suggesting that the manager of a hotel is arrested just because people stay in their bedrooms with different partners. The police had a look around and were very amicable.

According to an internet advert, special party weekends cost couples £20 and singles £100. It is a special place where you can fully express your sexuality," reads an internet advertisement. "The place is dedicated to the pursuit of pleasure where there are no limits to self-indulgence. Ladies should not wear knickers unless they are prepared to leave them in the trophy room on departure.

Dyfed Powys police inspected computer records and took photos and video shots of the club. They are also applying through the courts to see film footage shot by a Welsh language television documentary which investigated the club. A police spokesman said: A search warrant was executed at the Garden of Eden. Certain items of documentary evidence have been taken into our possession.

Aled ap Gwynedd, a local councillor and Congregationalist minister, has written to Raymond White, Dyfed-Powys Chief Constable, demanding that the Garden of Eden is closed down. He said: I am absolutely appalled by what I have learned is going on at this place.  The only thing that I find appalling is the attitude of this councillor and the police involved in the raid. What sort of lowlife wants to deny their fellow man harmless sexual pleasure?

The European Union meet next week to discuss how to bring a ban on satellite & TV piracy on into force. It is strongly rumoured that pirate mac viewing cards will be banned shortly, this will mean it will be illegal to sell, use, maintain or even own such equipment.

I have little sympathy for pirate cards where a subscription is available. However, if a subscription  is denied then I see it as fair game. How is it that the EU have bowed to Hollywood's insistence on regional licensing by setting up some gruesome sounding enforcement methods (particularly in allowing another excuse for police house raids). The whole crime could have been eliminated by ensuring that films are paid for on a head count basis rather than a regional basis. EU citizens could then subscribe to any EU service from any country.

The distributors of Makin' Whoopee are rightfully trying to capitalise on their successful appeal for an R18 certificate. On the day after the appeal they submitted four further titles to the BBFC  containing similar strength material including some hardcore footage. It will be interesting to follow the progress of these titles.

By law, the content of R18 videos should only be limited by the laws of the land, notably the Obscene Publications Act. It is becoming increasingly difficult for the authorities to maintain that such videos 'deprave and corrupt'. Hardcore has become so commonplace in the western world that it is now provably clear that it is not turning entire populations into depraved monsters. Secondly as more and more people get to see hardcore, they realise for themselves that it does not deprave and corrupt. They therefore become less likely to admonish others, both in terms of community enforcement and support for the official line as enforced by juries.

According to today's Independent, Peter Rogers, head of the ITC has said that from now on the ITC will allow anything that gets a cinema certificate to go straight on to TV. This will dispense with all the battles fought over such films as Reservoir Dogs in their efforts to get a TV showing. He went on to say that this should remove the opportunity of causing upset to certain moralising newspapers and rent-a-quote MPs.

Good news on two days running. Things are looking up

Excellent News! The BBFC have finally granted the R18 certificate for Makin' Whoopee! complete with hardcore content. James Ferman left things until the last moment and signed the certificate marginally before today's High Court action. Perhaps the BBFC were worried that a lost case in High Court may have set some sort of damaging precedent.

Congratulations to Sheptonhurst for their sterling efforts.  And of course, thanks to James Ferman for last years effort in starting the R18 ball rolling. I wonder what will happen next in this fascinating saga, hopefully a veritable flood of similar success.

As previously reported, the video Makin' Whoopee (complete with some hardcore content) successfully passed through the BBFC appeals procedure in July. Theoretically the BBFC should have complied with the appeal and issued a certificate. Instead, the BBFC decided to address the problem head on and they came up with the solution of going into hiding. Suddenly senior members of the board became unreachable and calls were not returned. I presume that the BBFC were buying time before their lords and masters at the Home Office dreamt up some appropriately repressive solution.

The distributors are gamely pursuing the elusive certificate via the legal process. They may have to call upon the high court to issue a Writ of Mandamus that would compel the BBFC to issue the certificate. This is an order (I think) used to deal with people or organisations that refuse to comply with legal processes. I wonder if there is a chance of Ferman or Whittam Smith spending some time in the clink for contempt.

On the subject of obeying the law it would appear appropriate to remind Ferman of a quote from his own recent annual report: The law may be an ass, but it is the Board's job to uphold it.

Update

The distributors go to the High Court on Monday morning (14th September). Lets hope it goes well for them

Eurotica/Rendez-Vous are to return to court on Wednesday 9th September, to try and overturn the ban, placed on them by the U.K. government. Eurotica previously won an injunction and it is strongly rumoured that Wednesdays outcome will still not force an immediate ban in the UK. Eurotica have now stopped shipping their millennium 16 month subscription cards.

Update

Danish Satellite Television the owners of Eurotica Rendez Vous have been granted leave for judicial review on the basis that the Judge thought that there were complex issues that needed to be substantially addressed. There is no date for a hearing at this time. However, the judge refused to continue a legal order preventing him from outlawing Eurotica Rendez-Vous until after its operators have had a chance to challenge the action

So in the meantime, the proscription order will come into force but there is a certain risk for the Government because if the judicial review were to find in favour of Eurotica Rendez-Vous then the Government will have to compensate the channel for any losses incurred

Chris Smith confirmed that an Order which proscribes the service in this country will into force at 00:01 Friday 11 September. From that moment it will be a criminal offence to supply dedicated equipment (e.g. smartcards) and programme material, advertise for or on Eurotica Rendez Vous, or to provide any other service in support of the channel.

Chris Smith said: Televised hard-core pornography is not acceptable in this country. We must guard against the possibility that children could be exposed to sexually explicit material of this kind. I received notification from the ITC of a pornographic service, Eurotica Rendez Vous, which it considers to be unacceptable and should be the subject of a proscription order. I considered that a proscription order was in the public interest.

We are determined to protect children from satellite pornography and my message to pornographers is clear, we will not tolerate material such as this on our television sets, and the Government will not hesitate to take this action again in future.

Short of physical assault, I cannot possibly conceive of  a nastier thing to do to a fellow human being than to deprive them of their sexual pleasure.  Why on earth do politicians seem to glory in such debase treatment of their fellows?

Why do they insist on perservering with their lame excuse of protection of children? If this was an honest driving factor then surely pornography would be allowed in cinemas for example where age restrictions could be enforced.

One satellite news service reports that the ban has now been delayed again whilst the court case is referred to the European Court

Apparently the police and Crown Persecution Service are still pursuing the University of Central England for carrying a copy of one of Robert Mapplethorpe's works. Jeff Rooker, the minister for food safety said that police are wasting their time investigating a book celebrating the work of Robert Mapplethorpe. He said that he had read a copy from the Commons library and found it to be a serious piece of artistic work. I am a bit surprised the Crown Prosecution Service has not yet thrown the whole thing out.

Refreshing to see a Government minister who is an independent thinker as compared with the rest of New Censorial Labour.

The ITC have consistently received less complaints about satellite and cable TV than they expected. Eg in 1997 they received 2894 complaints about programmes on commercial television, of these, only 142 were about cable and satellite. 20% of commercial television viewing was to cable and satellite channels, yet less than 5% of complaints were about these services. In fact, subscribers were more likely to complain about advertising on cable/satellite than about the programmes.

The ITC therefore undertook research about this observation and published the results today. They feel that cable and satellite viewers not only have the option of the ‘off’ button, but they can stop their subscription if they are unhappy with the service. They have definite images of the channels and generally know what to expect of them, so avoiding programmes that are not to their tastes. ITC Director of Programmes said: There is no suggestion that cable and satellite viewers are less likely to complain in other areas of their life. Indeed, consumer research has shown they do complain if they get poor value or customer service from satellite and cable operators.

Age and personality played a role in the likelihood of complaining about television programmes, which may also explain the lower level of complaints from cable and satellite subscribers. They tend to have a younger profile and research consistently shows that viewers’ tolerance of stronger material on screen, such as bad language, violence and sexual portrayal, decreases with age, particularly from the mid-40s. Cable viewers are slightly less liberal than satellite viewers, perhaps because satellite owners actively go out and buy television services, whereas subscribing to cable is more passive, and is frequently linked to purchasing telephony services.

Top of the list of dislikes amongst older viewers (aged 45-65) surveyed was bad language, and older women also mentioned sexual portrayal, especially minority preferences such as homosexuality, lesbianism and transvestitism. They appeared to find this more objectionable than excessive violence. Another issue for older viewers was the perceived lack of morality in storylines. Younger viewers were more liberal about programme content. Many young men appeared to accept almost any adult material after the watershed. The 25-45 age group, in particular, objected to programmes being edited after the 9pm watershed.

Today's Sunday Times carried the brief news item that the public is going to be given the right of appeal against censorship decisions under reforms planned at the BBFC.

Of course this is far more of a stitch up than it seems. The catch appears to be that only very carefully selected groups of people will be able to appeal and these are clearly likely to be pro-censorial. Whittam Smith alludes to this subject in the BBFC Annual Report:

The House of Lords has twice debated the work of the BBFC since I took office. On the second occasion, Lord Alton moved a motion that would have given organisations such as children's charities the right, along with industry, to appeal against the Board's decisions. I have sympathy with the nub of the proposal, but I believe that the practical problems it raises, as regards expense and sheer volume of work, could be great. The amendment was defeated. However, the Board intends to establish an advisory or consultative panel for the interests of children. Its purpose would be to monitor the work of the Board and to advise it when necessary. I am presently engaging in consulting widely about how such a panel could most effectively be set up.

Predictably it appears that consulting widely means consulting with the ludicrous David Alton.The BBFC is already heavily represented by examiners who are recruited from professions working with children. There has never been any indication that the BBFC do not take the issue of protection of children responsibly. Such a move by Whittam Smith must therefore be an imposition of increased censorship that will be cynically justified to the public on the back of protection of children.

Programme maker Peter Bazalgette's MacTaggart Memorial Lecture at the Edinburgh Television Festival has generated some debate about the excessive regulation of UK. He argued that regulatory bodies such as the Independent Television Commission should no longer be able to impose their ideas of what is high-quality programming. With individual electronic programme guides, people will make their own selections and we will bar their children from what they judge as unsuitable material. The audience will police themselves.

Bazalgette called for the scrapping of the Broadcasting Standards Commission. He described the commission's chairwoman, Lady Howe, as the biggest busybody of them all. He called the regulatory body a toothless poodle and also called for a curbing of the powers of the Independent Television Commission.

Instead of regulators, Mr Bazalgette argued that viewers switching off will be the way to determine the quality of television programmes. Because of this ITV's obligation to air public service programming should be ended. He predicted that the 9pm "watershed" would wither away with the advent of multi-channel television.

Replying to Mr Bazalgette's criticism, a spokesman for the Broadcasting Standards Commission said: Whilst he may represent the views of some programme makers he has misread the views of the consumers of broadcasting. Viewers supported the principle of taste and decency guidelines and the 9pm watershed for family viewing.

An ITC source rubbished Mr Bazalgette's claims, citing several surveys it has commissioned which showed that the public wants regulation. The source said: Viewers feel there should be some sort of buffer...he is very much a television insider commenting on his perception of regulation. Our perception of what viewers want is very different.

(From July 98)

ELSPA's Roger Bennett recently met with Linda Jackson, a senior Civil Servant at the Home Office, to discuss the simmering subject of games classification.

The meeting was requested by Lord Williams, the Parliamentary under Secretary of State at the Home Office, initially in response to the proposal from David Alton that warnings should be placed on driving games which present images of joyriding, but from that somewhat inauspicious premise it turned out to be both beneficial and fruitful.

The Voluntary Age Rating System was presented and it was explained to Ms Jackson how the industry, from publishers to retailers, had universally embraced and adopted it.

The need for the BBFC to be far more aware of the requirements of games publishers was also explained. Whereas a video or film distributor can make a 'cut' in a product relatively easily, to achieve the same effect in a game could be impossible. As a result, it is an absolute requirement that publishers should be informed as early as possible in a product's lifecycle of any areas which may present problems.

There is an obvious need for those assessing the classification of games to be experienced, knowledgeable and consistent in their decisions.

Still with classification, the recent proposal that demo discs should be VAR-rated before they are presented to magazine publishers for covermounting was also detailed. VAR-rated demos will ensure that no magazine publisher should ever be put in the position of having a title on its cover which should have been BBFC-rated but wasn't - resulting in them breaking the law and having an unsaleable product. It will also guarantee that no consumer will be exposed to a product content inappropriate to its age.

These, and other positive steps ELSPA has been instrumental in developing, were received with enthusiasm and a genuine interest by the Home Office, who were reassured to discover that the interactive entertainment industry had a trade body with a responsible attitude and pro-active systems in place to address Home Office concerns. It is anticipated that dialogue will continue on an ongoing basis, particularly with regard to classification.

On the very last day of Parliament before the recess the banning order was laid before Parliament meaning that unless someone challenged the ban in the high court the channel was to be banned on Thursday the 20th August 1998. If history has shown us anything it's that hardcore channels have never had the willing, the funds or the confidence in their case to challenge the government on this particular issue. This is despite the fact that many legal experts reckon that the banning of EC based channels by the UK govt. is based on a very dubious legal framework. Several legal experts have gone even further saying that this sort of action is in fact illegal under EC broadcasting law.

It has long been known that Eurotica/rendezvous were keen to fight the ban, and they proved their mettle (and their desire to protect their best source of revenue - the UK) by going to the high court on Wednesday the 20th August and successfully arguing their case. This means that the channel now cannot be banned before the 10th of September 1998, and that the 2 sides will now have to meet before then to discuss the case.

If the channel wins then the high court will probably rule that the case will have to be heard before the European courts. If this happens then it could be years before a result. Sources at Eurotica/rendezvous feel they have a good case, and if they do indeed win this would mean an end to bannings in the UK.

This would of course have plenty of very interesting effects on the UK satellite market. I have also heard that Canal+ may be interested in competing in the UK market if hardcore were to be sanctioned. I for one would therefore subscribe to Canal+ whereas I am not willing to part with hard earned cash for the current Sky service.

In the meantime lets condemn Chris Smith for his hypocracy of expecting tolerance for the minority sexual preference of gays whilst simultaneously banning the minority sexual preference of those that enjoy watching porn.

The BBFC had a recent change of heart towards a series of mild fetish videos featuring pregnant and lactating women. The first four in the series of Pregnant & Milking videos were passed 18 but Pregnant & Milking 5, containing similar material, proved personally distasteful to Whittam Smith and was therefore classified R18. Unfortunately for the distributors, this certificate precluded their usual mail order business so they appealed against the decision. Even more unfortunately for the distributor, the Video Appeals Committee turned down their appeal by a vote of 3-1.

The appeal highlighted a number of predictably alarming trends. First of all it must be emphasised that the video is strictly softcore. The only addition to the usual sexless material allowed by the BBFC is that some of the participants were pregnant and a couple of scenes showed milk spraying from breasts. The BBFC contended that reasonable people would find it offensive to have the video generally available even to those over the age of 18. I don't know who on earth gives the BBFC the right to speak on behalf of reasonable people, but any pretentions to such a right were surely forfeited when the BBFC started to become staffed with Jack Straw puppets. In fact the BBFC admitted to being deeply divided on this particular decision and it was the new president and his newly appointed cronies that swung the decision. At least this video provides measurable proof of a swing to the censorial.

The appeal also showed a serious defiency in the law in that R18 certificated videos are not allowed to be sold by mail order. This seems a strange constraint as one of the principles of the R18 certificate is that it keeps films out of the public gaze. Mail order seems ideal to uphold this requirement. Both the BBFC and Video Appeals Committee agreed with the need to relax the law on this point and showed a certain sympathy for the distributor who has basically been screwed by bad and increasingly discredited UK law.

A rare piece of good news. The police have dropped their charges against David Flint who suffered a police raid earlier in the year. Further good news is that all the videos that were siezed will be returned to him.

Update

I have heard that the police received an official complaint from a member of the public and that the case caused a few waves at the Home Office who asked to speak with the police force involved. Let us hope that the happy outcome of the case somehow reflects a more reasonable view from the Home Office.

There is a very tricky problem going down at the BBFC with regards to the certificate for Makin' Whoopee. On one hand the Video Appeals Committee have passed Makin' Whoopee as R18 complete with hardcore inserts. On the other hand, those dreadful people at the Home Office have decreed that there shall be no further hardcore material certifiicated.

The BBFC appear to be stalling in the issuing of the certificate possibly waiting for a reponse from the Home Office. One response may be to order a Judicial Review that may investigate the BBFC appeal procedure to try and find a loop hole that invalidates the appeal. A possible danger to the Home Office is that a high ranking judicial review may agree with both the appeal procedure and the conclusion that adult consensual hardcore does not contravene the Obscene Publications Act. This may then prove a pretty powerful precedent undermining Jack Straw's noxious stance on porn.

Given ever increasing familiarity with explicit porn in the UK, there must come a point when the vast majority of people have seen porn and according to the Home Office should therefore be depraved and corrupted. The fact that this is clearly not true suggests that only people making such a ludicrous and offensive presumption are so affected.

I saw an unverified posting to the European satellite news groups indicating that Eurotica/Rendez-Vous proscription had been delayed as the channel is taking the government to a highcourt debate over the issue. So the station is not banned in the UK until futher notice. Never before has a porn channel taking legal action of this kind to stay available to UK viewers.

The Obscene Publications Act seems to be coming under fire from many different quarters at the moment. There seems to a building groundswell of opinion that is no longer willing to accept that adult consensual porn 'depraves and corrupts'.

An early preview of Playstation fighting game "Thrill Kill" recently fell foul of the BBFC over one of it's characters (a dominatrix) making orgasmic sounds on killing an opponent.