Looking for punters

[hockogrockle]

If "she" really is a TV producer (and in my experience TV producers leave this sort of task to their research team), I wouldn't have anything to do with it. They are only after something that brings in the viewers. I once worked for a company which declined to co-operate with a TV production company. A rival did co-operate, obviously thinking there was some good publicity in it. They ended up having their products lampooned in prime time in fornt of an audience of several million. Clearly, we retained more streetwise PR consultants.

[AnthG]

Personally, if i was admin id have nothing to do with this

Its got tits up written all over it

I don't like the fact that she is implying she is going to be interviewing WGs for the documentary and has the co-operation of a full on escort agency in making it to then try and get punters from here to get involved and be interviewed.

Only to then find  - if the link Ali Katt has posted on the north east topic is correct, that she is actually working with a mother and daughter run massage parlour and not an escort agency.

Therefore the only people she is going to be interviewing on the female side of this is the masseuse who work there.

So you can picture that documentary it will be along the lines of the women saying the men who see her keep trying to get sexual favours out of us and we just want to massage them.

And then there will be a full on punter saying I see these girls to pay for sex. Total and complete misrepresentation.

[NIK]

If "she" really is a TV producer (and in my experience TV producers leave this sort of task to their research team), I wouldn't have anything to do with it. They are only after something that brings in the viewers. I once worked for a company which declined to co-operate with a TV production company. A rival did co-operate, obviously thinking there was some good publicity in it. They ended up having their products lampooned in prime time in fornt of an audience of several million. Clearly, we retained more streetwise PR consultants.

All these 'reality type' documentaries prey on the fact that lots of people are desperate to appear on telly and will do anything to achieve that. You will usually get nothing out of it, unless you become one of the lucky small percentage such as 'White Dee'  or that woman who died and use it to make a 'career' (usually doing fuck all!).
These producers are simply using ordinary people to further their careers. Often they aren't even that interested in the subject they're making the programme about, it's just another notch on the career ladder.

I actually met up for a coffee with a producer of the last one. I told her I'd written a book about punting and that if she wanted to know what I thought about the subject and my experiences she could read that rather than have me appear on TV. She politely brushed that off and insisted it would be good I appear on camera as she felt I was knowledgeable and had something to say about the subject. I asked her quite straight what was in it for me. She said they weren't allowed to pay people as it may be seen as compromising the integrity of the programme. I asked if they could at least promote my book then. She said that couldn't be guaranteed either, but she'd love me to appear on the programme.

Flattery got her nowhere and I equally politely declined and suggested she just buy the book! 

[NIK]

Personally, if i was admin id have nothing to do with this

Its got tits up written all over it

I think you can rest assured Adam will have absolutely nothing to do with it.

[greychap]

What is really funny is that they have not mentioned anything about PAYING PEOPLE to appear, they obviously expect it for free why they make a fortune from this programme.

Plus they get to make the punters look pathetic as they pay for sex, so only a win win for channel 4.

The only punters that would probably agree to do this are the ones that are attention seekers and like a bit of drama and there 5 minutes of fame

[NIK]

Just imagine if I had have been daft enough to appear, especially if I was billed as NIK from UKP, the sisterhood would have been creaming their fannies! 

[greychap]

I think you can rest assured Adam will have absolutely nothing to do with it.

Its obvious Adam/Admin will have nothing to with it, he just let the post go up and let us do the rest with Zoe the producer

I wonder what poor Zoe is really thinking by all these comments

[NIK]

What is really funny is that they have not mentioned anything about PAYING PEOPLE to appear, they obviously expect it for free why they make a fortune from this programme.

Plus they get to make the punters look pathetic as they pay for sex, so only a win win for channel 4.

The only punters that would probably agree to do this are the ones that are attention seekers and like a bit of drama and there 5 minutes of fame

They don't pay people to appear in these programmes. See my post above.

[greychap]

Just imagine if I had have been daft enough to appear, especially if I was billed as NIK feom UKP, the sisterhood would have been creaming their fannies! 

Nik this might have helped with book sales if you agreed but had it written in the contract for it to be mentioned

[finn5555]

Just imagine if I had have been daft enough to appear, especially if I was billed as NIK from UKP, the sisterhood would have been creaming their fannies! 

Creaming of fannies for those is long over they are all dried up 

Mind you if you and JRC went on the show the ratings may soar 

[Falstaff]

I've had a number of encounters with TV types in non-punting areas. Every time they have deliberately misrepresented their intentions.

So I would be instinctively mistrustful of anyone despite their 'assurances', without independent corroboration of bona fides. Not saying never, but it would have to be with someone with good previous form for balance in this controversial area. Rupert Everett, or Nick Davies, spring to mind.

[greychap]

Nik this might have helped with book sales if you agreed but had it written in the contract for it to be mentioned

Well I take that back, they want the public watching the programme and having a good laugh. Don't see why we should make them money from exposing ourselves!

[greychap]

Well I take that back, they want the public watching the programme and having a good laugh. Don't see why we should make them money from exposing ourselves!

If Zoe really wanted a true representation she would go undercover and work at an escort agency herself or go on AW, but she is not willing to do that is she???

She just wants lots of escorts and punters showing themselves up on tv.

[roo222]

Hi Zoe,

I'd actually like to help, but much like the others I don't see that I can trust you. Documentaries are notorouis for putting an unfair spin on things like this and you make no gurantees as to our anonymity. Meanwhile you are very reluctant for us to know who you are. At the very least, you could identify what production company you work for and give company contact information (corporate email or landline number to your company switchboard). Frankly, your approach feels unprofessional and untrustworthy.

[cunnyhunt]

I've had a number of encounters with TV types in non-punting areas. Every time they have deliberately misrepresented their intentions.

In 2009/10  my part of the company was contacted about making a documentary about it ( we recover insolvent companies and restructure to avoid bankruptcy) The TV company had extended negotiations about how it would be filmed, when they eventually realised  that we were not asset strippers they dropped the idea as they admitted they could not sell the program on. We were pissed with them as we wanted it to show that even when the economy was suffering there were alternatives to keep business going but they just wanted a program about sharks and greed and stated that a program that was informative would not get airtime.

[sublimetoridiculous]

I've had a number of encounters with TV types in non-punting areas. Every time they have deliberately misrepresented their intentions.

Yes, same here. Used to be involved in the entertainment and events field.

The TV people will lie in much the same way as some WGs lie about services. They are simply not to be trusted.

[regenmeister]

I still think it would be a more interesting if Zoe worked in the brothel as a WG, the first time she does anal would a ratings winner.

Or maybe she could get some savvy punters and prossies to live in a big house for a week big brother style.

[Sedlmayer]

Yes, same here. Used to be involved in the entertainment and events field.

The TV people will lie in much the same way as some WGs lie about services. They are simply not to be trusted.

I had dealings, at work, with an ITV production team, who said they wanted to use the company that I work for as part of a documentary blah blah blah....they were the biggest bunch of arrogant, self-centred, deceitful arseholes I have ever met. Ever.

[Diehard]

How admin must be pissing himself with laughter. Stroke of genius letting Zoe post on here, I'm sure he knew full well the reaction she would get, and figured better doing it is way then telling her to fuck off.

I would think this thread a depressing read for Zoe and any other journalist. Someone above stated itv production team were arrogant, to be fair I would suggest we returning the favour in spades to their profession.

Did anyone else spot Zoe major faux pas? She said, like us, her several identities are secure!!!!!! Enough said really!

[CaptainRoscoe]

Adam has definitely fed the lamb to lions in this thread. With all due respect Zoe, you show the naivety of a nun in a brothel (pardon the pun).

Basic journalism 101:

1. Research thoroughly the topic you are going to do your documentary on. People on here now will be more apprehensive to approach you since you clearly have done your little to no research through Wikipedia, a daily telegraph article  or a cheap late night public access documentary. Why would anyone want to be interviewed by someone who has such a slender grasp on the rudimentary facts of prostitution in the UK.

2. I respect the fact that you've come on here to speak directly to the "customers", but with your wishful thinking and your "idea" of how the documentary will come out, it again shows your complete inexperience.

I can't be arsed to write anymore. I apologise if this came off as an attack, just as someone who works in the media, it frustrates me to see what passes for journalism these days. I'm not saying you should ask for your degree back, I'm just saying, you may as well use it as toilet paper.

[James999]

Zoe has gone very quiet, perhaps she's trying to locate a pro$$ie that pays proper tax   

[Diehard]

 

Zoe has gone very quiet, perhaps she's trying to locate a pro$$ie that pays proper tax   

 

[NIK]

Zoe has gone very quiet, perhaps she's trying to locate a pro$$ie that pays proper tax   

Think I've paid the prossies tax for them this week! 

[ZoeTVProducer]

Hello

First off - apologies if this post doesn't answer all concerns/criticisms, and if it ignores some of the insults If I wasn't here in a professional capacity, then a bit of banter with you all would have been fun!

There are some assumptions being made about me/TV/journalism - all of which I respect. Some of them are very fair too. But, I would like to suggest that these preconceptions are based on stereotypes and hasty judgements; not that dissimilar to the way some react to WGs/punters. I believe that not every punter or prostitute is the same, in the same way that not every journalist or TV producer is equal.

In answer to queries above; I have been working in television for 14 years, and in my capacity as a producer, have spent over a year working with WGs/punters/brothels/agencies/organisations across the UK.  A couple of people have suggested that I am naive and I'm open to the fact that's a possibility, but every conversation I have with people in the industry helps towards rectifying this.

I am grateful to all those who have so far contributed to my research, and those that have already appeared on camera for this film. The reason that I am seeking more individuals is to help the film to present a balanced range of personal viewpoints from punters.

Additionally, a few of you have suggested that I know nothing at all about prostitutes - and I wouldn't claim to. I just know a little about the individuals I've been working with - but I don't know what a punter knows. If you spend an hour of your time with a girl, you will know what she is like in bed.

If I spend an hour of my time with her, I will know where she grew up, the names of her children, what benefits she claims, how much tax she pays, her real name, if she has a pimp, that she is allergic to dogs, and that she prefers certain types of customers to others. I will hear some of the things she doesn't tell a client.

However, for the purposes of this film, I don't need to know what a girl is like in bed Instead, I'm hopeful that one or two pioneering punters will stick their heads over the parapet and bravely agree to be interviewed about their experiences and motivations. This is a film about a business, just like any other, and it needs to present all sides. The aim is to try to reduce the stigma attached to both the buying and the selling within this industry - existing preconceptions about both are interrelated - and it's these that I'd like the film to challenge.

I would like help in doing this from the punting community. I appreciate that some of you feel that telly hasn't managed to get it right yet on this subject, which is why I'm persisting with this, in the hope that it will yield some articulate gentlemen who can present their own personal opinions on the subject of punting!

With regards to the particular establishment I'm working with, I have not named them out of respect, as I didn't want to give people the impression that if they go there, they will get filmed, as that is not the case.

In terms of discussions about money, channels, production companies etc - I am bound by guidelines that means I cannot publicly discuss these, but I can of course speak to people on an individual basis.

For those of you with the very understandable concerns about trust, anonymity and editorial guarantees, I can again talk to you individually if you are interested in contributing to the film about ways in which you feel comfortable participating.

Thank you to all of you that have reached out to me so far and I will be getting back to you over the next couple of days with answers to your questions. If you want to get in touch please PM me, or a quick call/text on 07548 944 348.

[AnthG]

in my capacity as a producer, have spent over a year working with WGs/punters/brothels/agencies/organisations across the UK. 

Which agencies have you been working with? I am sure they wouldn't mind the free advertising of your naming them. You indicated in your original post it was a north east agency. Which one is it; Amour, Diamonds, Naughty Northern, Adore?

And when you say you have been working with WGs. Do you mean working with? Or just messaging one or two via adultwork or on saafe?  Or have you actually been in the house while a girl was working?

[ZoeTVProducer]

Which agencies have you been working with? I am sure they wouldn't mind the free advertising of your naming them. You indicated in your original post it was a north east agency. Which one is it; Amour, Diamonds, Naughty Northern, Adore?

And when you say you have been working with WGs. Do you mean working with? Or just messaging one or two via adultwork or on saafe?  Or have you actually been in the house while a girl was working?

As mentioned, I don't think it's fair for me to name the business.
In terms of "working with", it means that I have been in the homes, hotels, flats, walks ups and massage parlours of WGs across the country, sometimes when they were working but not in the same room on those occasions. When they haven't been with clients, working with means I have been filming with them.

[knightofthegarter]

Hi Zoe. Years ago, I worked briefly as a lowly television researcher. Having been in that industry, I am prepared, on this forum at least, to give you the benefit of the doubt, although I am not prepared to go on camera myself. I have to say, I think the way you are going about this is unusual. When I worked as a researcher on documentaries, I would contact potential interviewees and I would give the name of the company involved, my own name and work contact details. You seem to be using a level of secrecy that comes across as quite cloak and dagger. I would say if you and your company were a bit more transparent, you might have more luck getting some interviews. As it is, you are asking punters to take a hell of a risk phoning what may as well be a random phone number and potentially some kind of scam or wind up.

I don't see what the justification for this secrecy is. It is not as if another tv company will get wind of it and think "oh we must do a punting documentary ourselves now". The reality is such programmes are ten a penny and if another company is not already making such a programme they are not going to start any time soon. If I were the type of person who was prepared to talk on camera, I would not do it on the basis of the information you have given, which so far,sounds rather dodgy. If you are genuine, I would advise you to sort these issues out and good luck to you. If you don't, it only seems to suggest that there is something fishy to your proposal.

[ZoeTVProducer]

Hi Zoe. Years ago, I worked briefly as a lowly television researcher. Having been in that industry, I am prepared, on this forum at least, to give you the benefit of the doubt, although I am not prepared to go on camera myself. I have to say, I think the way you are going about this is unusual. When I worked as a researcher on documentaries, I would contact potential interviewees and I would give the name of the company involved, my own name and work contact details. You seem to be using a level of secrecy that comes across as quite cloak and dagger. I would say if you and your company were a bit more transparent, you might have more luck getting some interviews. As it is, you are asking punters to take a hell of a risk phoning what may as well be a random phone number and potentially some kind of scam or wind up.

I don't see what the justification for this secrecy is. It is not as if another tv company will get wind of it and think "oh we must do a punting documentary ourselves now". The reality is such programmes are ten a penny and if another company is not already making such a programme they are not going to start any time soon. If I were the type of person who was prepared to talk on camera, I would not do it on the basis of the information you have given, which so far,sounds rather dodgy. If you are genuine, I would advise you to sort these issues out and good luck to you. If you don't, it only seems to suggest that there is something fishy to your proposal.

I quite agree with you, and the guidelines to which I must adhere on public forums do not do me any favours. However, I am able to obviously discuss production company details with individuals who get in touch - and there is no need to call or text. People can simply PM me if they'd prefer.

[AnthG]

As mentioned, I don't think it's fair for me to name the business.
In terms of "working with", it means that I have been in the homes, hotels, flats, walks ups and massage parlours of WGs across the country, sometimes when they were working but not in the same room on those occasions. When they haven't been with clients, working with means I have been filming with them.

And did you instruct the WG to tell the punter that you were allowing the WG to break the law when you were there?

Personally I don't believe a word you are saying. My opinion is you are some kind of fantasist.

Can I ask have you provided some proof you are who you say you are to Admin?

[knightofthegarter]

In terms of discussions about money, channels, production companies etc - I am bound by guidelines that means I cannot publicly discuss these, but I can of course speak to people on an individual basis.

So Zoe, when you say you can speak to people on an individual basis, do you mean that you will then disclose the name of your company ? I would suggest the first thing a shrewd participant would want to do after speaking to you, would be to contact your company and get some info to corroborate that you are who you say you are. At the moment - no offence, people are taking a massive risk. Regardless of people's attachments, all punters have a lot to lose if exposed.

[ZoeTVProducer]

And did you instruct the WG to tell the punter that you were allowing the WG to break the law when you were there?

Personally I don't believe a word you are saying. My opinion is you are some kind of fantasist.

Can I ask have you provided some proof you are who you say you are to Admin?

I don't have the authority to allow anyone to break the law. However, whenever I and my team are working, we ensure that everyone there is comfortable with our presence in the building. If they are not, we leave.

So Zoe, when you say you can speak to people on an individual basis, do you mean that you will then disclose the name of your company ? I would suggest the first thing a shrewd participant would want to do after speaking to you, would be to contact your company and get some info to corroborate that you are who you say you are. At the moment - no offence, people are taking a massive risk. Regardless of people's attachments, all punters have a lot to lose if exposed.

Yes that is correct. As explained, it is frustrating that I cannot just name everything on here but I'm hopeful that those interested will get in touch. There is nothing to lose from sending a PM.

[Diehard]

Hello

First off - apologies if this post doesn't answer all concerns/criticisms, and if it ignores some of the insults If I wasn't here in a professional capacity, then a bit of banter with you all would have been fun!

There are some assumptions being made about me/TV/journalism - all of which I respect. Some of them are very fair too. But, I would like to suggest that these preconceptions are based on stereotypes and hasty judgements; not that dissimilar to the way some react to WGs/punters. I believe that not every punter or prostitute is the same, in the same way that not every journalist or TV producer is equal.

In answer to queries above; I have been working in television for 14 years, and in my capacity as a producer, have spent over a year working with WGs/punters/brothels/agencies/organisations across the UK.  A couple of people have suggested that I am naive and I'm open to the fact that's a possibility, but every conversation I have with people in the industry helps towards rectifying this.

I am grateful to all those who have so far contributed to my research, and those that have already appeared on camera for this film. The reason that I am seeking more individuals is to help the film to present a balanced range of personal viewpoints from punters.

Additionally, a few of you have suggested that I know nothing at all about prostitutes - and I wouldn't claim to. I just know a little about the individuals I've been working with - but I don't know what a punter knows. If you spend an hour of your time with a girl, you will know what she is like in bed.

If I spend an hour of my time with her, I will know where she grew up, the names of her children, what benefits she claims, how much tax she pays, her real name, if she has a pimp, that she is allergic to dogs, and that she prefers certain types of customers to others. I will hear some of the things she doesn't tell a client.

However, for the purposes of this film, I don't need to know what a girl is like in bed Instead, I'm hopeful that one or two pioneering punters will stick their heads over the parapet and bravely agree to be interviewed about their experiences and motivations. This is a film about a business, just like any other, and it needs to present all sides. The aim is to try to reduce the stigma attached to both the buying and the selling within this industry - existing preconceptions about both are interrelated - and it's these that I'd like the film to challenge.

I would like help in doing this from the punting community. I appreciate that some of you feel that telly hasn't managed to get it right yet on this subject, which is why I'm persisting with this, in the hope that it will yield some articulate gentlemen who can present their own personal opinions on the subject of punting!

With regards to the particular establishment I'm working with, I have not named them out of respect, as I didn't want to give people the impression that if they go there, they will get filmed, as that is not the case.

In terms of discussions about money, channels, production companies etc - I am bound by guidelines that means I cannot publicly discuss these, but I can of course speak to people on an individual basis.

For those of you with the very understandable concerns about trust, anonymity and editorial guarantees, I can again talk to you individually if you are interested in contributing to the film about ways in which you feel comfortable participating.

Thank you to all of you that have reached out to me so far and I will be getting back to you over the next couple of days with answers to your questions. If you want to get in touch please PM me, or a quick call/text on 07548 944 348.

Oh well, so much for being polite. Zoe......you are talking horse shit! You are digging a hole for yourself, I suggest you quit while people just find you an amusing prat.

So, you think it is believable that after one hour, a hooker will divulged her tax affairs, family life, and general life history and problems to you a total stranger!

Here is a tip, why don't you post the very same opening gambit on SAAFE and see how many hookers on there reply to you!!!!

FYI, the so called guidelines to which you refer are bollocks. Journalists pay for a story, that is a fact sweetheart. There are no guidelines stopping you as you are not a regulated industry in the true sense. By that I mean you have no body that can sanction you so you lose your job. That is why you journalists get away talking shite for most of your lives.

Now, a bbc journalist in lets say Syria or Afghanistan or Pakistan I can understand requiring the level of secrecy you seek to hide behind, but frankly your attempts to justify the rubbish you are talking are laughable.

[Bigus Dickus]

Infowanker sounds the ideal candidate for this show! He'll be even more famous than he is on here! 

[Jason]

Zoe, dear. If you really want to know about how punters think and act simply read this forum. Plenty of threads on pretty much any conceivable topic related to our thoughts, behaviour and actions as punters. Also other topics like about our ages, professions, hobbies, etc. Of course some posters are trolls, snakes etc but there are a lot of genuine answers by genuine posters. What more do you want to learn? You have zero chance finding any sane punter here willing to come out and show their faces on national television. Not sure with face blurring and voice morphing but I am sure you are looking for fools willing to show up uncovered. Good luck especially with no money offered.

You also mention that you interview WGs and you get their real feelings, hobbies, names, background, life, etc. First do you believe that punters never ask prossies questions about their life? Or do you think that all punters pay 1 or 2 or even more hours and fuck non-stop? Most prostitutes are expert liars they are having a story they say hundreds of times and perfected it over time. Not necessarily completely artificial - more likely a twisted truth. The fact that your ‘experience’ with them made you believe that they pay taxes and even correct ones proves they were lying through their teeth when interviewed. Your ‘research’ so far has been a fiasco. 

P.S: Btw perhaps I could do it by wearing a External Link/Members Only–and say the legendary words ‘Hi, I’m the great (Johnnie) Walker. I am 6ft'2, 225lbs, 12% Body fat and train MMA 6 days a week’.  Also if the topic of the documentary was “Romanian prossies are ALL shit service providers. When will you guys learn that you must avoid ALL of them?” then I am sure there is one particular member who would come to you in a blink of an eye.

[ZoeTVProducer]

FYI, the so called guidelines to which you refer are bollocks. Journalists pay for a story, that is a fact sweetheart. There are no guidelines stopping you as you are not a regulated industry in the true sense. By that I mean you have no body that can sanction you so you lose your job. That is why you journalists get away talking shite for most of your lives.

Now, a bbc journalist in lets say Syria or Afghanistan or Pakistan I can understand requiring the level of secrecy you seek to hide behind, but frankly your attempts to justify the rubbish you are talking are laughable.

I work for a television company, who have been commissioned by a channel, who are regulated by Ofcom. There are broadcast guidelines about paying people for participation in documentaries. Newspapers, magazines and blogs are not subject to the same rules and regs.

And I am not being secretive, I'm just not publicly posting certain details - details which I am able to provide directly to individuals that do get in touch.

Anyone interested is invited to discuss their possible participation with me directly.

[AnthG]

And I am not being secretive, I'm just not publicly posting certain details - details which I am able to provide directly to individuals that do get in touch.

Have you provided any proof of who you are to Admin?

You are dodging the question, so this implies no you have not. You are saying you will freely give this information to people who contact you. And yet you will not provide any proof to the admin of the forum you are using as the platform for your whole TV show. Seems a bit disrespectful don't you think?

[CoolTiger]

And did you instruct the WG to tell the punter that you were allowing the WG to break the law when you were there?

Personally I don't believe a word you are saying. My opinion is you are some kind of fantasist.

Can I ask have you provided some proof you are who you say you are to Admin?

+1

Zoe, you faied to answer the above. Also, did you register on this site using a Hotmail Email address, or your work address. I would expect your work address, for Admin to take you seriously.

Did you also exchange PM's with Admin, clarifying your intended post (or possibly for help in making the post, etc), or did you simply make your first post without any input from Admin? 

[Dani]

If I spend an hour of my time with her, I will know where she grew up, the names of her children, what benefits she claims, how much tax she pays, her real name, if she has a pimp, that she is allergic to dogs, and that she prefers certain types of customers to others. I will hear some of the things she doesn't tell a client.

NO you wont.  You will know what she wants to tell you which invariably will not be the truth.  I know I am a prossie myself and I have spoken with Ladies who have done these type of documentaries before and they lie through their teeth.  First off if she claims benefits she wont be telling you as she is working as well and wont want it advertised, If she doesn't pay tax (a hell of a lot don't) then she will not tell you that either.  She wont say if she has a pimp unless working for an agency or brothel as then it is obvious she has.  she wont be realistic about her children on TV unless she is totally crazy and doesn't give a crap if her kids get hurt or not.  She will also fob you off about the customers she likes.  It would be bad for her business for her to say she hates everyone over 45 or hates anyone overweight etc. 
as for hearing what she wont tell a client, no you will hear the same bullshit she tells her clients as it is a well practised story that she tells everyone who asks.  In this job we learn very quickly to not trust anyone with our personal details especially TV companies who just love to edit what is said to make the woman look bad as it grabs better ratings.

The fact you wont give the name and details of your company is very fishy as every other TV production company that has gone onto Saafe has given these details up front so we can check them out before contacting them.  After all any freak can write they are part of this TV company without giving checkable facts and then meet and film punters and then blackmail them afterwards.  You really do need to give the name of your company and a way to contact them to check you are who you say you are before expecting anyone to contact you.  Why should they have to contact you to find out who you work for when every other company puts the details up so we can check without having to waste time sending pms and waiting for a response before being able to check you out

[ZoeTVProducer]

I registered with my work email address.
I wrote to the Admin explaining what I'd like to do, outlining the nature of my intended post, and asking permission. The Admin granted permission and told me to make sure that I marked my post clearly to let you all know that I'd been in touch first.

He rather kindly also warned me that I may receive some negativity, but I was already anticipating some as I understand how sensitive this subject can be. Participating in something like this is not for everyone, but there are two options:

1) If you are interested in participating, but justifiably cautious, please do get in touch via PM/SMS/Phone to ask questions
2) If you are not interested in participating, I hope you will consider watching the show when it goes out next year.

[Northerndave666]

Good lord, there is a high-level of scepticism on this thread. We probably all like to think that UKPunting is a great source, if not THE source of info that is trustworthy about the scene, so I can fully understand why a researcher / producer would post on here asking for possible participation. One of the drawbacks of UKP becoming more popular I guess.

As for asking for ID, I trust Zoes latest post has allayed some fears, I am sure any respondents (use a punting phone all) can judge themselves of validity and involvement after contact has been made.

I would only hope that UKP is not named on any documentary and that Admin made this a condition of using this forum. We don't need Harriet Harradian casting her gaze upon us.

[AnthG]

Good lord, there is a high-level of scepticism on this thread.

There is a high level of scepticism due to the high level of fantasists who have signed up to the forum previously over the years.

And the fact that she has been unwilling to show proof - even it seems to the admin of the forum - of who she is supports this.

Who is she to feel she needs secrecy? Her bosses at channel four will know she is doing this documentary. Her family will likely know she is doing this documentary too.

She has got nothing to be embarrassed about that she is doing this documentary. Northing to lose from doing it either.

When the thing airs this time next year it will be all over IMDB that she produced it. She can't be worried about someone pipping her to her story.

The fact that she is coming on here all secret means she has an agenda of some sort.

Has anyone actually got in touch and she gave some credible info to them?

[Diehard]

I work for a television company, who have been commissioned by a channel, who are regulated by Ofcom. There are broadcast guidelines about paying people for participation in documentaries. Newspapers, magazines and blogs are not subject to the same rules and regs.

And I am not being secretive, I'm just not publicly posting certain details - details which I am able to provide directly to individuals that do get in touch.

Anyone interested is invited to discuss their possible participation with me directly.

I now question whether you are even a journalist. Ofcom have no power at all and their is no legislation preventing financial inducement for a television interview. To be blunt, journalism is not an important enough job for the strict guidelines that apply to other professions to apply to you.

I can see right through the crap you are spouting. You are desperate to snare someone off here. Thing is sugar, nobody here is that stupid. You are wasting your time. You were daft enough to claim you needed to have secure identities. Again, to be blunt, you don't! You are a mere journalist, you have no risk in your job, you live life on easy street.

As others have said, you should provide your name, linked in profile as you admit to having one, facebook account details, company name, company registered address, and a landline telephone number. And you should do so on this thread. If you cannot do that then every post you submit becomes more laughable as basically you come across as a fantasist.

Another thing is you made reference to personal insults you had suffered. I've read every post, again you are talking bollocks. Every member who has posted has been politeness personified so straight off the bat you have shown yourself to be dishonest by making an accusation of a behaviour towards you that has not happened.

If you really are a journalist, again to be blunt, You require re-training as your approach has to be one of the most naive a journalist could do.

[Diehard]

There is a high level of scepticism due to the high level of fantasists who have signed up to the forum previously over the years.

And the fact that she has been unwilling to show proof - even it seems to the admin of the forum - of who she is supports this.

Who is she to feel she needs secrecy? Her bosses at channel four will know she is doing this documentary. Her family will likely know she is doing this documentary too.

She has got nothing to be embarrassed about that she is doing this documentary. Northing to lose from doing it either.

When the thing airs this time next year it will be all over IMDB that she produced it. She can't be worried about someone pipping her to her story.

The fact that she is coming on here all secret means she has an agenda of some sort.

Has anyone actually got in touch and she gave some credible info to them?

This is spot on, and why I'm beginning to lose patience with her. I am in no doubt she has an agenda.

Nothing she has said makes sense, it is all contradictory nonsense.

[Diehard]

NO you wont.  You will know what she wants to tell you which invariably will not be the truth.  I know I am a prossie myself and I have spoken with Ladies who have done these type of documentaries before and they lie through their teeth.  First off if she claims benefits she wont be telling you as she is working as well and wont want it advertised, If she doesn't pay tax (a hell of a lot don't) then she will not tell you that either.  She wont say if she has a pimp unless working for an agency or brothel as then it is obvious she has.  she wont be realistic about her children on TV unless she is totally crazy and doesn't give a crap if her kids get hurt or not.  She will also fob you off about the customers she likes.  It would be bad for her business for her to say she hates everyone over 45 or hates anyone overweight etc. 
as for hearing what she wont tell a client, no you will hear the same bullshit she tells her clients as it is a well practised story that she tells everyone who asks.  In this job we learn very quickly to not trust anyone with our personal details especially TV companies who just love to edit what is said to make the woman look bad as it grabs better ratings.

The fact you wont give the name and details of your company is very fishy as every other TV production company that has gone onto Saafe has given these details up front so we can check them out before contacting them.  After all any freak can write they are part of this TV company without giving checkable facts and then meet and film punters and then blackmail them afterwards.  You really do need to give the name of your company and a way to contact them to check you are who you say you are before expecting anyone to contact you.  Why should they have to contact you to find out who you work for when every other company puts the details up so we can check without having to waste time sending pms and waiting for a response before being able to check you out

Spot on Dani. I think all us guys on here must be in a festive mood in that we have given her so much time on here!

[Krystyna]

Exactly -  thats if it IS  a woman in the first place !
Load of bollox !

[iceraider]

Someone contact her, get the info and PM the rest of us. I'm sure we could then dig around enough.  Simple really.

[GreyDave]

Dani is spot on as another punter says. + me.
My Dear Zoe,
If I see people with cameras in Soho like many, I all ways back track and keep my head down, I have been punting for 35 years.. I sudder to think of the cash I have put in to my hobby
I lost it in soho like many here who have and been to swingers events, partys gang bangs, bukkake showers, porn star specials and many indpendent girls and couples. I now punt 2-3 days a month in Soho I have been in 3 partnerships and punted though out. I have never caught anything been atacked robbed or to my knowing seen any trafikked (if they cant speak understanabale english I walk*) I have never wanted an affair just to put my cock and cum in to as many diffrent shaped coloured  and aged women as I can while on this earth. Its my hobby  I hurt no one and judge no one(maybee*). It is now I feel a golden age for punters the posibilty to find a provider matching (big tits, Indian large clit, male partner to join in DP, 20ish 50ish endless list ) my wish has never been easier!
As John Beechman the poet said I only regret not having more sex with more diffrent women
In my civie world I feel I respect care and love women I do not try it on with any, I pay and respect the ones I fuck and thats all punting is a paid for fuck.

[peter_bungee]

Did anyone watch the recent BBC documentary Prostitution Whats the Harm?  It was the first documentary iv ever seen which was balanced, non judgemental and portrayed sex work in all forms (e.g. web camming, massages etc) as a safe, non discriminatory and non abuse activity. It also showed how normal people do this not just "dirty old men"

However Channel 4 are much more sensationalist than the BBC and look what they did with benefits street for example, initially tricking people into what the propose of the show was then editing to show most of them in a bad light

To Zoe:  I would be happy to speak to you anonymously only e.g. Email/Phone/Even in person but you would have to strip to show you are not carrying any recording devices.   However as someone said you can find all this info in discussion topics in this forum, so this might not be of interest

[GeeWiz]

Did anyone watch the recent BBC documentary Prostitution Whats the Harm?  It was the first documentary iv ever seen which was balanced, non judgemental and portrayed sex work in all forms (e.g. web camming, massages etc) as a safe, non discriminatory and non abuse activity. It also showed how normal people do this not just "dirty old men"

However Channel 4 are much more sensationalist than the BBC and look what they did with benefits street for example, initially tricking people into what the propose of the show was then editing to show most of them in a bad light

That Billie JD Porter one and Stacey Dooley's "Sex, Stags and Prague" were both discussed on here.  Both BBC productions, they used camming and lap dancing as filler/wallpaper though.

My question to Zoe would be, given that Channel 4 recently aired the two part series "Love For Sale with Rupert Everett" (Episode 1 - Why People Sell Sex, Episode 2 - Why People Buy Sex), then why is this show even necessary?  With that in mind and knowing that is based on a particular parlour, I can only imaging it being Benefits Street-esque.

Also, shouldn't you be asking punters/customers of this actual establishment?  Wouldn't that make more sense editorially? I see escorts, but haven't been in a MP for years and have no plans to ever set foot in one again.  Two different worlds as I see it.

[OldAdmin]

This is it:
External Link/Members Only