|
||||||||
Ofcom to investigate Amandas Dress and The Dog Double. |
![]() |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
#1 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Liverpool
Posts: 4,106
|
Ofcom to investigate Amandas Dress and The Dog Double.
|
|
|
|
|
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
|
|
|
#2 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 4,533
|
Ofcom are pathetic. They investigate literally every non-issue and then....guess what? No harm done.
|
|
|
|
|
#3 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Cornwall (ex-London)
Posts: 65,312
|
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
#4 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 3,719
|
OFCOM will investigate find its fuss about nothing end of story.WHy investigate Amanda's dress,why not ALesha Dixon's too? It's patheitc people have nothing better to do than moan about a cleavage.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#5 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Another time, another place..
Posts: 24,629
|
Ofcom aren't pathetic, the people who complain to them are. People with bugger all better to do but feign mock outrage and get their knickers in a twist over something and nothing, and report it to make themselves feel good and full of self importance. They must get some euphoric rush or something from doing it. I'm sure the 14 who complained must feel so good that they've reported such a heinous horrific abhorrent crime, they probably floated out of their front door this morning feeling on top of the world *rollseyes*.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#6 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 12,776
|
Ofcom have to investigate complaints made to them.
Their investigation may be to ask if anyone in the office saw it & what did they think. But they have to investigate. Though I think I would cry a little if it was me who drew the short straw and had to investigate these non-events. |
|
|
|
|
|
#7 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 19,936
|
Maybe the OP should have read the link they provided.
The complaints were about the dresses worn by the two female judges. The article then went on to mention the dog act, but with no suggestion of a complaint to Ofcom. |
|
|
|
|
|
#8 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 727
|
I thought Amanda's dress on Sunday was unnecessarily revealing, but I'm not about to report it to OFCOM...
|
|
|
|
|
|
#9 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Albert Square.
Posts: 46,296
|
Oh for god's sake, some people are so sad, complaining and moaning about everything, get over it! I bet it was just jealous fat women complaining about Amanda's dress, and as for the stunt dog, it's happened, get over it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#10 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: It's Grim
Posts: 24,403
|
I think Ofcom will rule against ITV on the "dog double". (no, not Alesha and Amanda)
It was misleading and you just cannot do that sort of thing on TV. It would have been so easy for ITV to do a big reveal after the act and bring on the third dog, it wouldn't have changed things that much. |
|
|
|
|
|
#11 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 3,236
|
Quote:
I think Ofcom will rule against ITV on the "dog double". (no, not Alesha and Amanda)
It was misleading and you just cannot do that sort of thing on TV. It would have been so easy for ITV to do a big reveal after the act and bring on the third dog, it wouldn't have changed things that much. People are looking for something to moan about because their favourite didn't win. |
|
|
|
|
|
#12 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 2,424
|
Maybe they'll insist on a renaming of the show to "Britain's got Puppies".
|
|
|
|
|
|
#13 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 4,533
|
Quote:
Ofcom have to investigate complaints made to them.
Their investigation may be to ask if anyone in the office saw it & what did they think. But they have to investigate. Though I think I would cry a little if it was me who drew the short straw and had to investigate these non-events. |
|
|
|
|
#14 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 4,533
|
Quote:
I think Ofcom will rule against ITV on the "dog double". (no, not Alesha and Amanda)
. |
|
|
|
|
#15 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 10,199
|
Maybe there will be a replay of the final. After all it would rake in plenty of money which is what the show is all about.
|
|
|
|
|
#16 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Derby
Posts: 27,583
|
Quote:
I really don't think they will. I think they'll see it as a massive over-reaction.
I said Ofcom would investigate and some here said they wouldn't. I also predict BGT will be found to have breached the code. |
|
|
|
|
#17 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 4,533
|
Quote:
Maybe there will be a replay of the final. After all it would rake in plenty of money which is what the show is all about.
|
|
|
|
|
#18 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 4,533
|
Quote:
I'm not so sure. After all why did the BGT producers issue an apology if they thought that they'd hadn't done anything wrong?
Quote:
I said Ofcom would investigate and some here said they wouldn't. I also predict BGT will be found to have breached the code.
It's not breaching anything. We saw Chase in the semi final. It was therefore made clear that Jules' act featured more than one dog.
|
|
|
|
|
#19 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Derby
Posts: 27,583
|
Quote:
It's not breaching anything. We saw Chase in the semi final. It was therefore made clear that Jules' act featured more than one dog.
|
|
|
|
|
#20 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 4,533
|
Quote:
Well that's going to be the crux of the investigation. Could a reasonable person assume that a third dog was in use during the act. .
|
|
|
|
|
#21 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 508
|
Quote:
I don't know how it was misleading. We saw both dogs in the semi final. We knew about them both. Yes, I thought it was Matisse on the rope but when I found out it wasn't it didn't annoy me because I already knew there were two.
People are looking for something to moan about because their favourite didn't win. I don't get what's so hard to understand for some people, the question you have to ask is, did they want you to think/give the impression it was Matisse on the tight rope? I think the answer is a clear yes. |
|
|
|
|
|
#22 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 4,533
|
Quote:
Well done you, but plenty of people did find it annoying because they were given the impression it was Matisse.
Quote:
I don't get what's so hard to understand for some people, the question you have to ask is, did they want you to think/give the impression it was Matisse on the tight rope? I think the answer is a clear yes.
Of course they did because it was part of the narrative. Wouldn't have worked otherwise.
|
|
|
|
|
#23 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 508
|
Quote:
Many of these people are the same ones who didn't want Jules & Matisse to win. Sour grapes.
Of course they did because it was part of the narrative. Wouldn't have worked otherwise. The question has been asked already, but why then, didn't they show us the third dog at the end, and why did Jules answer Ant n Dec about how long it took "him" (matisse) to learn the trick. |
|
|
|
|
|
#24 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Yorkshire - God's Own County
Posts: 14,160
|
Quote:
Let me answer that for you: yes.
Quote:
Well done you, but plenty of people did find it annoying because they were given the impression it was Matisse.
I don't get what's so hard to understand for some people, the question you have to ask is, did they want you to think/give the impression it was Matisse on the tight rope? I think the answer is a clear yes. |
|
|
|
|
|
#25 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 4,533
|
Quote:
Which is misleading.
. |
|
|
![]() |
|
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 02:34.



