Update: as of 20th April, Ofcom agrees with me!
The X Factor cleared over Rihanna and Christina Aguilera dance routines | Media | guardian.co.uk
ITV faces a huge backlash after thousands of viewers protested about lewd performances on the X Factor final.
Critics called on media regulator Ofcom to launch an inquiry into why ‘disgusting’ routines were shown before the watershed.
The performances by U.S. pop stars Christina Aguilera and Rihanna could have broken Ofcom’s broadcasting code which seeks to protect children from sexualised content.
And I must say, they have some rather nice photos to show “bums hanging out”. Interestingly, it has an issue showing this between 7 and 9pm on TV, but not at any time during the day if in print.
The Mail really needs to look at the difference between”sexualised” content and “Sexual” content. Sexual is the kind of thing we see in a Sex scene – watch “Sexarama” if you are confused. Sexualised, however, is refering to sex without showing it – and I think you will find this is what Mumsnet (the “experts” behind this complaint) are complaining about at the moment – High heeled shoes for toddlers, “Porn Queen” T-shirts for 12 year olds etc.
While I support this protest and agree with the “let children be children”, being prudish about a tame set of dancing in a family show that is no more suggestive than any other dance / ice skating / performance in general shows an element of prudishness. This is not something that will help the main argument – the overt sexualisation of children.
A few pointers – beside the misunderstanding of the two terms, it doesn’t matter how many people complained. And Never, ever, let the Daily Mail attempt to discuss Offcom’s role. It will just end in tears.
Here’s a good example of how two different papers treat the same story.
First up, the guardian’s Chris Goodall which reports Lord Stern’s opinion about the impact of meat farming on the climate. It feels like a balanced argument – it states the opinon, and points towards the opposition to the idea.
To me it is clear that one of the problems that the piece points out is not eating meat per se, but the overeating of meat by affluent countries.
So, onto another view of the story. This time, Christopher Booker publishes this piece in the Daily Mail.
Read the rest of this entry