SilvaRizla wrote:
But it doesn't explain how ace it is!

SilvaRizla wrote:
Do you think we should all complain to OFCOM individually? Would they even care?

Babs wrote:
Its got to be worth a go, especially for just 2 minutes of your time I'd say

It can't be put to OFCOM because they are not broadcasting. To put a complaint to OFCOM it has to be related to the "content of the broadcast or transmission"
Internet transmission of programming is not covered by OFCOM's jurisdiction. That is why, in the UK, TV licencsing do not have the power of enforcement (laughable as it ialready is) to demand a fee for reception on a computer over the internet.

Icke and TPV never needed an OFCOM licence to do what they have done so far - however they did/do need a licence for what they have planned for the future (which they lied about initially and then contradicted themselves) namely broadcasting on the satellite platform.,,which IS covered by OFCOM licensing.

I thought we all knew this already...oy vey

Wise Haven wrote:
Their legal team and OFCOM themselves told TPV for the internet broadcast they DO need an OFCOM license, as the station (regardless of it being internet) is "TV like in nature" which requires an OFCOM license.

I thought we knew all this all ready....

E2A: To be clear, its not the indigogo campaign I'd be complaining to OFCOM about, that's why I'm waiting for some sort of fuck up as previously stated. There's always the volume I suppose, they still haven't sorted that and as such are in breach of OFCOMS regs.

SilvaRizla wrote:
My legal team told me "I have to wear brown trousers and stand on one foot" before I can broadcast anything - Doesn't make it TRUE.

Anybody or anything can make a claim that one has to fulfill certain criteria before they do anything - however, until those weird claims are challenged (in court usually - unfortunately) they will stand in law.
If people refuse to challenge this nonsense it does, by default, become a reality.

If TPV required an OFCOM licence to stream or post a video on the Interwebs there would be legislation for that. Fact is, there isn't.
Broadcasting, over Terrestrial or Satellite modes is covered by OFCOM. But TPV never did that - they applied for an OFCOM licence because they were considering it as a future capability.
Do you now realise how dangerous DI is? Look at the UK Column - do they need an OFCOM licence?

Wise Haven wrote:
Yes there is.

I dug out the relevant documents and posted them In this very thread in fact. Its all there in black and white. Read the thread.

UK Column isn't "TV like in nature". Where do you think I got this quote from?

SilvaRizla wrote:
Why couldn't TPV look at the UK Column model?
UK Column - No cash (Begging) campaign. Self-funded based on the merit gained by their product.
TPV - Huge public drive for cash donations. Lots of cash but very little value in the form of its product.

There's been a few times I've thought of reporting them to OFCOM. The only thing that stops me is the fact that David can then pass the buck to them as to why TPV failed.

When it inevitably comes crashing down, you don't want him to have an easy way to say it wasn't his fault.

3point5 wrote:
Good point!

After reading the last few posts a very clear picture popped into my mind.
It was Icke stood on his head in a prison cell wearing a torquise tracky waffling on about the body computer while other inmates lose patience with him.
Just thought I'd share that. Might send it into Jim'll Paint it.

3point5 wrote:
That's initially why I hadn't done anything, but to be honest mate, I'm past caring now. The fuckers just need stopping, by any means possible. I don't really give a shit what Icke says, I'll forever know the truth and as he likes to say "Even in a minority of one...."

E2A: I reckon he'll probably be glad, he's distancing himself a great deal from Sean and TPV these days.

Wise Haven wrote:
Many many people said this to begin with, and I wasn't one of them.

I had visions of TPV being something much greater than the likes of UK Column. They were supposed to have round the clock news reporting, and American office, Middle East Correspondents, no censorship, no adgenda. It was supposed to be something to truly stand up against MSM, not another nameless face in the melting pot of alternative news. It was supposed to be interviewing the countries leaders and world's most powerful men and getting answers to questions MSM wouldn't ask. It was supposed to be 100% open and transparent, it was supposed to be community centred/led. It was supposed to hold a mirror up to the whole industry and do away with all the media whoring ()

The potential that it had was unbelievable. I think there were plenty of people who didn't mind donating to such a project as long as it got results. But, like everything else, Sean fucked it up.

People are not seriously offering up UK Column as a broadcasting aspiration are they?
That thing is a shambles.

feather wrote:
I think the point is that it didn't cost a penny and its still bigger/better than TPV

If these are their current viewers, and last night at prime time it was 92, I really don't see how they think they're getting 1.6million a month.

Maybe they're going to say Youtube are scrubbbing the numbers to make it look like a failure?

SilvaRizla wrote: and it presents like it didn't cost a penny.

It's apples and oranges eh?
One group with no apparent media skills/knowledge trying to read off a laptop. (after having forgotten their reading glasses), on one side and a bunch of wannabe media luvvies on the other side trying to produce something which is 'state of the art' with full social media integration dahlink.

The answer, (as usual), is in the middle.
Spend a bit of cash wisely, utilise people who are genuinely capable and interested in more than massaging their own egos and embellishing their c.v.'s.

3point5 wrote:
Ironically, their biggest spike was when the move to Youtube was pointed out in this thread. lol

Briefly looking at the numbers, if we take 100 as the average view count and treble it to account for the gradual dribble of new viewers and drop off of old we get 300 maybe 400 a day. 400*30=12,000 a month.

I honestly don't know how they came to that figure, I don't even think they could count that 12,000 as accurate because most people watch it for less than a minute and then fuck off again, hardly a "viewer" are they?

The fact is, they might have an average of 100 viewers at any one time. This place usually does better than that

Half a million quid well spent eh.

Sanctum Zone - An Alternative People's Voice. Free Internet Discussion, no donations or subscriptions required.

Noticed on TPV facebook page, after nearly every 'news' article there's a link to latest indiegogo campaign.
Smacks of desperation now with a mere 6 days left.
Cue new video plea from someone at tpv anytime soon i reckon.

3point5 wrote:
This is what TPV has to say about thier viewing figures. Not sure that I read this earlier - methinks they have been editing thier original message, but I'm not sure on that one. My emphasis in red/bold

So they say they are basically counting all the youtube figures on every video, plus the streaming (and other platforms)

https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/the-people-s-voice-and-you#home

Still can't see that adding up to what they say, but I see they are being very careful to qualify what they mean when talking about viewing figures by that statement.