Did Mary Whitehouse have a point?
- 28 May 08, 12:24 PM
Did Mary Whitehouse have a point? Has British society coarsened as a result of the media and has that really changed our culture?
Tonight - after the documentary drama about her life - we'll debate what impact, if any, sex and violence on TV and in the media has had on Britain. And whether it is right to blame any of society's current ills on what it watches and reads.
Leave your comments below.
And speaking of Mary Whitehouse, find out why she was writing to Special Branch in 1968 about the arrival in the UK of Jim Morrison and The Doors. Paul Mason has the story here...
Comments
Sign in or register to comment.
Absolutely!
Complain about this comment
I have never understood why so many people have said that, when you look at a beautiful painting, it is uplifting: then they say that watching pornography or violencs has no effect. It somehoe doesn't ring true.
Complain about this comment
Mary Whitehouse obviously had a point...
Read your newspapers or watching TV, even listening to the radio... it's there for the taking... our society is damaged and out of control...
Complain about this comment
She not only had a point but she has been proved right many times over. Britain is the most Godless, violent, shallow, broken nation in the western world. We have thrown God out and the nation is lost. Sexual perversion and degradation is the standard fare from talk shows to soaps. Well this is the legacy of the sixties so live with it. And when people wring their hands and consider the shattered society and broken families scarred by drugs, bastardy, abortion and divorce, remember - you wanted to make the rules. Now live with it. Or get on your knees and pray for help from the only One who can help. But remember - those MPS who voted for keeping the abortion time high, and support lesbian parents and the government which persecutes families and fathers - that is the legacy of the children of the sixties. And unless the children of the 80s get their act together - it is all over.
Complain about this comment
As much as people thought that Mary Whitehouse was as mad as a box of frogs, she stuck to he principles and fought her corner with vigour and with dignity.
Maybe she did have a point but it takes more than censorship to ensure moral rectitude; what about education, parenting...need I go on??
Complain about this comment
I think that TV has a lot to answer for, and its not really all about the sex and violence on TV, its about the perception of society, self perception and normallity.
Its true that TV presents disasters and people in adversity, but as a function of Human Nature we all aspire to belonging in the 'have' rather than 'have not' part of society; TV presents the top end of the 'have' part of society (in a way understandably because what is interesting when the topic is middle of the road?). This sets vast numbers of people to perceive that they are failing, perhaps even as far as hopelessly! I think it is this contrast that exacerbates the further negative influence that is the showing of the use of bad language as acceptable (e.g in the apprentice (taken naively to be a representative (not reprehensible|repulsive) group of educated people)).
However, the balme is not totally at the door of the TV controllers - no regulation, in the name of free speach, means market forces apply - these are not necessarily a force for good!
Complain about this comment
I consider there is too much violence shown on TV. However the news bulletings with which we keep in touch with the world is full of violence. The main difference is between natural disasters which arouse concern and compassion, and some of the plays etc. which children and young people often watch unsupervised, and which little ones take as real.
Also there has been a great break up of family life with the break up of marriages and partnerships which cause a great deal of confusion and unhappiness in the minds of young children. they also show a lack of morals and ethics which lower the standards of society in general.
Complain about this comment
They may play a small part but as part of something wider.
That wider issue being free market, neoliberal capitalism and individualisation. The latter being quite good alone, but in this case has pushed people to be as independent existing as possible from others and society, or as a family unit. Meaning that people are in competition with eachother for resources, jobs, services, houses, whatever. Society quietly breaks down as number 1 is infinitesimally more important than anything else. This obviously allows people to grow up alienated and removed, which is reinforced by media (which alone would have had little effect).
As for some of the comments above about repenting to some likely non-existant deity, I don't think that's really going to help us out. Mainstream religions seem to prop up such damaging systems as ours and so will only make the problem worse.
Ultimately, if people are not alienated by society itself, or don't have their own personal problems, then what they see on television is unlikely to have a personal effect on their lives in an derogatory way. Mary Whitehouse was wrong. Her zealous, followers are deluded.
Complain about this comment
She, and many others, were right as far as violence is concerned; yet totally wrong regarding sex.
Complain about this comment
The fact that after many a year you have this discussion, PROVES that she had a point, i guess, far sighted wisdom. But we are not experiencing anything that has not been written about already, what is taking place was prophecied in 2Timothy 3:1-5. ALl these experiences are a forewarning to something much greater, obey or ignore, you make the call?.
Complain about this comment
Mary was shunned and scorned for being a "prude' but now that we have had our way in being "free" to break all restraint and doing what's "right " in our own eyes, we are living with the consequences: broken families abounding, depression, our youth falling prey to violence and addictions of various kinds and our elderly struggling and abandoned in "care" homes. Our pre-occupation with self- gratification and "rights" to the point of killing our own children for the "inconvenience" they present has led us to where we are now.
Our eyes are the gateways to our souls, we have supported the media in feeding us perversion and distortion. Our teenage son is so sick of all the "gunk" on TV that he watches old movies on Youtube for inspiration as he himself and his friends recognize the modern media is pumped with "filth". There is hope as they decide to make a difference /train in media studies/ determine to restore some real talent, beauty and creativity to our polluted streams. THANK GOD for a generation arising that are repentant of their parents' rebellion against all loving restraint and who understand that boundaries are in fact not the enemy we perceived them to be!
We are LOVED and ETERNALLY DESTINED called for SO MUCH MORE than gutter filth!
Complain about this comment
Whilst the media took most of the blame in the beginning, I believe the internet has to now be the main culprit.
Complain about this comment
I think the problem is less about what the media does, and more about how people react to it. It seems that a lot of people are woefully inept at interpreting what they see and hear, determining fantasy from reality and truth from extreme bias/lies.
The answer is education, not censorship.
Complain about this comment
The media, particularly TV, become the model of the culture and form the personalities of the viewers.
Children and adolescents are more influenced than adults who have more real-life experience.
Reality demands that we recognize TV as a school for how life should be lived and treat it as such.
Let principles of freedom apply to the news and politics. Let principles of artistic expression apply when the young people are in bed.
Complain about this comment
Mary Whitehouse had many opinions some of them positive and others negative.
People should not forget that she was intolerant towards full equality, she took negative action against the LGBT (lesbian, gay, bi-sexual and transgender) community and its publications.
She held staunch Christian views and endeavored to impose them on to mainstream society; she desired to maintain a conservative, middle class approach to society and held repressive concepts about mass media.
It is important that when reviewing her legacy, that you examine both the positive and negative stances she took.
On a positive note she was correct that mass media would impact on society, that in certain cases pornography does have a negative impact on how people (participants either gender) are perceived and that we should be careful about what information/communications are disseminated and to whom.
There is a case that we should further restrict violent and sexually explicit materials from being accessible to children (gaming and or mainstream media) and provide methods to help parents ensure this is easier to monitor.
However we must be careful not to impose unnecessary censorship on the content that informed adults desire to view (have a right to).
Parental Responsibility:
Aside from mass media intervention/restrictions:
We must also not forget the issue of responsibility; parents have a clear duty to ensure their children are not accessing inappropriate content (not solely broadcasters) and high tech channel blockers etc are not essential (pull the plug and a TV/PC goes off etc).
It concerns me that many parents these days seem to be abdicating parental responsibility on the basis that many tasks are difficult and are becoming over reliant on intervention from government and industry (it is not their duty to govern the family unit).
It is evident in today's society that parents often let their children watch media content after the evening threshold and/or permit them to rent in appropriate DVD's, download in appropriate web content and/or do not even supervise what communications they access.
Wider society:
With regard to violence, other factors in addition to mass media must be considered - our role as a society and our current lack of community values, inadequate policing strategies for engaging with youth. Lack of youth resources in deprived areas.
Our society is not plaqued by violence soley because of sexually explicit/violent content on TV and other mass media channels.
Evidence that mass media is not the sole cause:
Many other European states that broadcast more sexually explicit and violent content do not suffer the same challenges as the UK.
I believe this is because they have stronger sense of citizenship, they have better social integration policies, they engage with their youth better, parents are clear about their duties and they have a wider respect for their communities and families.
So in response to the overall question, I would like to say that Mary Whitehouse was only partially right.
She had some good ideas - but she equally had some bad ones.
If we want to change our society for the better, we should invest and encourage our youth, we should look to other countries that are not facing the same challenges (or who have overcome them) and work out what they do well and how we can replicate it.
We should adopt such strategies here and we should reinforce the role of the parent and reiterate their duty of care to their children.
We should stop solely blaming the media for everything that is wrong in the UK and start working on a hollistic approach to tackling these issues.
Conor Coughlan,
London
Complain about this comment
I remember Mary Whitehouse well as a teenager. Even then, I had a healthy interest in what she believed and still do.
The moral decline in the UK is patently obvious; crime and disrespect being paramount.
I look forward to the programme and how it is arranged, to the negative attitude of the then Director General and how the producers will handle the outcome of the debate.
One has only to watch programmes on ANY channel, to understand that swearing in public is encouraged by the sequences being transmitted on TV. One should not berate the BBC in particular because ITV and most of the other stations are just as guilty.
I can use the English language without swearing, make myself understood an achieve results.
So I ask, why do people need to resort to using profane and obscene words in sentences to get their point across?
Complain about this comment
Mary Whitehouse would have had far more credibility at the time had she criticised awful programmes like Mind your Language and Love Thy Neighbour. However, this sort of programme apparently did us no harm!
Complain about this comment
Absolutely! I can not believe that we are still questioning this! Successful, intelligent people would not spend millions of pounds on 10 seconds of adverts. This is just one of many examples, some of which have already been bloged here.
It is time for media to seriously evaluate its responsibility and significant contribution to our ever collapsing society. Under the banner of entertainment, drama and free world the media has massively contributed to complete eradication of humanity’s “sense of shame” and led us to suffer from the consequences of what I call the obesity of mind! Please and for the sake of young generation and the future generations let this debate continues!
Complain about this comment
I am SICK of people talking about "Sex and Violence" in the same sentence.
Sex is an ESSENTIAL, ENJOYABLE, HARMLESS, "fact of life".
While VIOLENCE is an EVIL, HARMFUL, CRIME, that sums up just about everything Unpleasant about the Corrupt side of Society.
Society, and even Mankind itself cannot survive or propogate without Sex, while Violence does nothing but DESTROY.
All DECENT people should be Anti-Violence.
Only PRUDES are Anti-Sex.
Complain about this comment
The advent of slime line plasma screen TVs has made sex on the television almost impossible and responsible for an increasing number of casualty attendences.
Complain about this comment
To all those who claim that watching TV has no effect on behaviour whatsoeve. None. Ziltch. Nada.
I ask you, what about a multi-billion dollar industry that relies on 30 second TV clips to alter behaviour called advertising? That is just 30 seconds.
Repeatedly viewing violent films and playing violent films will alter and desensitise people and alter their view of violence and their relationship to it.
This does NOT mean that watching violence will guarantee that the viewer becomes violent, but that 'some people' who are susceptible, are more likely to become violent if that is what they surround themselves with.
If TV did NOT alter behaiviour at all, all these industries who buy advertising are wasting their money.
Complain about this comment
Yes she was the author of one of the best put downs ever. To a critic who told her that sex exists, she said or wote, Diarrhoea exists; I just don't want to watch it on television! Great one, Mary!
Complain about this comment
We have thrown God out and the nation is lost. Comment 4.
Lets not confuse a belief in a God or adherence to a religious doctrine with morality.
Many do not find the case for the existance of a God, heaven, hell, etc at all convincing. It is perfectly possible to be moral without belief in a God. Most human societies in history have developed a golden rule along the lines of - treat others with the same consideration and respect that you wish to be treated - regardless of their belief system or if it involves a god.
As for Biblical morality is what is moral commanded by God because it is moral, or is it moral simply because it is commanded by God?
In Leviticus 19:20-22 God demands that raping a slave woman is punishable by scourging the victim. The rapist is to be forgiven. In Exodus 20:17 God tells us not to free anothers slaves. Numbers 31:1-54 God tells his followers to commit genocide sparing only the virgin girls, who are to be raped.
As for the amount of slaughter God does in the Bible – first trying to wipe out all life on Earth apart from that on the ark. That was not too successful a strategy as after that he had to destroy cities, sell nations into slavery, (but on one occasion then had to slaughter babies all across Egypt, send plagues, famines and destroy an army to get them out of it), not to mention occasionally demanding sacrifice of his followers children. Genocide figures highly in his priorities and he seemed to like killing cattle too. I can see some street gangs really liking that God.
What has happened in the last 50 years is that mass travel means its now commonplace for people to move away from their hometowns to access to education and jobs. That more than anything has broken down the extended family. The economy changed so that jobs relied on physical strength less and could be done by both sexes. Society realised that people should be judged by their characters and abilities, not by one aspect of themselves that they were born with and so on.
I think we now have an over-developed society with an underclass that we can no longer find meaningful jobs for now our industry has vanished. The end of those industries also led to the end of close-knit communities with a sense of purpose and place. That is creating social problems, isolation and alienation in our cities. The spread of drugs and the arrival of immigrants are due to developments in mass transport and affect every country. They are factors too, but would have happened anyway simply because the jet engine was invented.
Can the media influence societal trends? I do think the whole gansta culture (music/videogames/movies) that permeates some areas does influence some young minds, but that is more to do with the export of American culture overseas via TV and film. Is society in terminal meltdown? No, it has changed, but change is a constant. I meet polite, well-behaved youngsters every day, some even brought up by working single mothers.
Complain about this comment
Before Mary Whitehouse we had the Lords Day Observence and countless other futile attempts to keep us a subject people
Complain about this comment
Of course she made some errors of judgement (who doesn't?), but you'd have to be peculiarly and dogmatically blind not to see how the general gist of her agenda has been borne out time and time again. I think we will see this with even greater clarity over the succeeding decades, as it becomes ever more painfully evident how destructive has been the "anything goes" approach which we have been conditioned to accept as normal.
That applies equally to sex as to violence – the casual commodification of both profoundly undermines the basis of what it is to be human. (And it is simply silly to say that M.W. was "anti-sex". How else do you suppose she had five children? Parthenogenesis?)
Complain about this comment
Mary Whitehouse was the Ultimate Porn Icon, porn being the opposite of discretion; the media found her useful, and then quite rightly disposed of her. We end up with the society we want, however flawed.
Complain about this comment
my god where do all the religious nutters come from?
No Marry Whitehouse did not have a point. She didn't like any minorities, didn't like sex, didn't like anything that wasn't part of her little Consertive, CofE word.
The Media is no more 'full of depravity' now than it was in her day and if I want a Moral Compas I'll take it from sources that mirror my own morals rather than ones that seek to enforce moral codes so outdated they where old hat in the middle ages.
Personaly I prefer to be reminded of the horrors out there by poeple such a sThrobbing Gristle (a band so outraged by sociaties ability to keep up with their own caracature of it they stopped making music.
Complain about this comment
comment 21:
The most offensive aspect of the 'some people are unable to watch explicit media' line is that it casts large sectors of the population as stupid.
In the Middle Ages people where able to consume scatalogical put-downs of receved Religious opinion perfoemed alongside the (slightly) more Othadox Mystery Plays without rioting in the streets and 'throwing god out.' Do you suges tthat we are less able to criticaly evaluate media that those people where? If so it says more about education that morals.
Complain about this comment
She was a most unpleasant woman who inflicted her bizarre views on her family long before the nation was forced to endure them.
I used to report to her son - the one she would never mention - and know a little of the extent to which this man was tortured by her.
When she returned to England in 1976 he had a party to celebrate the fact he would never see her again.
Complain about this comment
Nice to see some sense creeping into this debate. We take all the benefits of our modernist techno-society, and scream when it isn't quite the Enid Blyton scenario we think it 'should' be.
Newsflash: people were having sex in the Middle Ages, and, crikey, some of it was even illicit.
Complain about this comment
people didn't have sex in the middle ages silly, they where too Godfearing for that!
Complain about this comment
i have to agreed with Dougal [# 1] wrote:
Absolutely!
interest of full disclosure, i am not from the united kingdom
Complain about this comment
31.Elizabeth the First - you're stil denying it, after 4 centuries!
Complain about this comment
ABSENT FRIEND
Unable to post but no moderation either - odd?
Complain about this comment
BLAND TITLE
Dame Jane Goodall reminded us, today, on radio, that WE ARE ANIMAL. When "The Group" gathers round, and focuses on, the TV, what does the ancient brain of the animal infer? I suggest it responds as to an absolute leader and takes its behaviour therefrom. I make a prediction: Were we to scan animal brains in presence of the pack leader and human brains in presence of the TV, similar regions would light up. In so many walks of life we ignore our animal imperatives while they run us ragged. It has already been shown that a baby given a choice of Mother's face or a dumb rectangle, will fix on the rectangle. Our future culture is being shaped by a dumb rectangle.
Complain about this comment
WORD FOR WORD
I think I have cracked it! I used a word in my title that means an elongated square (ref. TV screen).
I can only assume that some filtering robot thought it was a word meaning a body orifice because the first four letters are the same.
I read all the stuff on "house rules" etc but found zilch. No mention of a robot with cyber scissors. Ho hum.
Complain about this comment
evenmorelovely: read my other comments
Complain about this comment
When you see Katie Price/Jordan held up as a modern role model for todays girls ..... Mrs Whitehouse quite probably did have a point! Shes a just an average looking slapper. Jordan not Whitehouse!
Complain about this comment
Since when has there been too much sex on British TV? Britain has one of the most repressive laws on porn in the western world (I'm surprised no-one has argued that there is a breach in free trade regulations across the EU) - it doesn't even do hard core porn - unlike other EU member states!
Complain about this comment
elizabeththefirst - I've tried to reach your comments, but it's not happening. How do I do it?
mullerman - interesting point re MW/Jordan:
imagine Whitehouse's attitude in Jordan's body. I wouldn't mind being spanked by that!
Complain about this comment
Pornography differs from eroticism. Mary Whitehouse could never distinguish between them. Unhappily nor can many people on this list.
Complain about this comment
British society has certainly become coarsened greatly and the threshold of acceptance for violence, intolerance and general courtesy and consideration for others has been lowered due to the younger generations being exposed to extreme violence, foul language and crudity for the last thirty years in the media, films and computer games.
Complain about this comment
To categorize anyone who speaks of media as a major contributor to the collapse of our society today, a "religious nutter" is simply ignorance. It would be the same as one calling you an immoral pervert!
I do not know anything about Mary Whitehouse, her school of thought, work, books or personal lif etc. The focus is not an individual, or one's taste on life issues; the focus is major factors, such as media, that affect masses of humanity and the change in society. Let’s think beyond our own little world --- and examine the facts and figures of the damage done to the masses.
Complain about this comment
If counting swear words was the point, then Mrs Whitehouse had a point. Hmmm..perhaps not then. What she failed to nail, or lets be fair, even to understand let alone embrace, was the issue of taste, whatever she called her shibboleths. Among their many benefits, the arts, properly conceived, militate against banality, value-emptiness. These deficits let people down, and the arts can lift them up again. I remember the Whitehouse years very well and found her waspish crusade as shallow in its values as the drab vulgarity we have indulged in and increasingly do, perhaps with satisfaction in the belief than Mrs W is turning in her grave. No: wiser and richer spirits than she are doing that, which is the real pity.
Complain about this comment
She was ahead of her time - although at the time I and many others had no idea
Complain about this comment
Mrs Whitehouse was a member of a fundamentalist Xtian group called Moral Rearmament. This group was obsessed with 'filth' on the BBC years before she came along.
She was dangerous in that she tried to impose her views on the rest of society - the Christian Right think they have all the right answers and if they ever got into power woe betide anyone who didn't share their views.
Complain about this comment
An english essay i wrote in 1965 for my mock o level on the influence of what children see on TV was acclaimed at that time. Television and the violence on it and in Hollywood movies has influenced the entire world now with satellite dishes. Most of your readers' comments seem to agree. However I read a recent article that such electronic games reduce violence in young people rather than promote it, any psychologists want to comment on that?
Complain about this comment
FOLLOW THE MONEY?
Hard to believe that electronic games (I presume positive-contributor means violent ones) do not lead to violence. We humans are group animals who follow trends (Dawkins' memes). Kids never did flying kicks in the playground until they were seen on TV being employed by exciting hero figures.
Perhaps the comment referred to came from a "biased" source?
Complain about this comment
Her views may, or may not, have been correct, but it was totally wrong of the BBC and the Government to cave in to her badgering.
She wasn't elected or appointed, she appointed herself as a Censor with no authority whatsoever. Freedom of speech is the corner-stone of our democracy, and Mrs Whitehouse did her level best to erode this key freedom because she did not agree with the views of others in society.
My objection is not a left-wing-wolly-thinking love affair with 'multiculturlism' but rather a deeply held believe in the freedom of thought and expression we enjoy in this country. In my view, she is as bad as the extreme Islamic clerics that call for people to blow themselves up in nightclubs.
Complain about this comment
No but she did have a perm.
Complain about this comment
As a teenager I though Mary Whitehouse was a joke, now at the age of 47 with two young children I am horrified at the bad language, sex and violence on TV. My young children copy what they see, and I even get the comments' well such and such charicter said/does that. Soaps are a terrible influence over my children, and I often find myself turning them off. Some children's programes are just as bad, Dick and Dom is banned in our house as is Cavegirl and Hollyoaks. I really do feel that the boundaries are being pushed more and more, and that TV is encouraging bad behaviour, bad language and sexualisation of our chidlren. The ' BOX' in the corner is one of the baddest influences over children we have. In saying all of this though, I do appreciate that with the advent of satelight television it is very hard to keep unsuitable programmes after the watershed, and that teresteral television makers feel they have to push the boundaries to compete. I really do feel that Mary Whitehouse was right, and that TV is getting really really bad now. As a post note, I was also appalled at the use of the C word in the Mary Whitehouse programme, as this word was not in popular use during that time, and definately would not have been used in such a throw away trivual way. It was just put into the programme to be a sensationalistic point. I think that we it would not be wrong to clean up the time before the watershed, as to be quite truethfull, the present watershed almost means nothing.
Complain about this comment
Mary Whitehouse
Enoch Powell
George Orwell
They simply saw the future and feared the social implications. What a pity their warnings were ignored.
Complain about this comment
Although her views seem out of date now, they are perhaps more relevant than ever. There is so much violence on TV currently, but it's not just that. How many *real* light entertainment programmes exist? How many 'gritty dramas' do we have? It's constant. I'm not against them per se but they're not representative of what TV should be. TV should really be entertaining and informative. We get masses of information through news and documentary - I've no problem with that.
But we don't have entertainment. What last made you laugh, that you could watch with your kids? Perhaps Ant and Dec - and that's about all. TV is getting too dour, too miserable - and that's going to have a negative effect somewhere.
Complain about this comment
I have just watched the segment regarding the legacy of Mary Whitehouse and particularly the section on video games.
I think it is utterly irresponisble that the BBC reporter sat by and allowed two young children to play an 18 rated video game (I believe that it was 'Mortal Kombat: Shaolin Monks'). The reporter was holding the box in her hand so there is absolutely no excuse not to have looked at the large (one inch high) ratings.
It is bordering on child abuse to sit by and allow young children access to that material.
And it is sloppy journalism to talk about children playing that game, and talking about other 18-rated games such as Grand Theft Auto without clearly stating that it is only because parents or another adult has bought these games for their children and has sat by while they play it - indeed allow a film crew to record them playing it - that they have access to it at all.
The reporter should be sacked.
Complain about this comment
Just having watched the debate on Newsnight, one thing springs to mind: the game that was mentioned as an example, Manhunt 2, and then said to be "available on high streets today", well, isn't. Nor will it be for the foreseeable future, for the very reasons mentioned (which come from a BBFC anouncement after denying the game a UK release). Demonstrating, quite unintentionally, that censorship is still used in exceptional circumstances today.
Furthermore, I agree that there is some responsibility of the media in causing our problems today, but not in content, by by facilitating lazy parenting. Why play with your children when they can play with a computer? Why teach them things when the Discovery Channel and the Internet can do that for you? And while there is a case that such things can be beneficial, this needs to be tempered by parental responsibilty and more traditional methods as well, which all too often is not the case.
Not usually driven to share my opinions, but this broke my usual blissful apathy, for some reason.
Complain about this comment
One would think someone should worry about more important things than Hollyoaks, of all things, corrupting society.
And the parents of those 2 children are obviously terrible ones. Mortal Kombat is not for kids, don't let them play it. If places are selling Mortal Kombat to children, maybe focus on that problem instead? Videogame consoles have easily accessible parental controls so there is NO excuse.
If people are nutters then they'll be set off by anything. Maybe focusing on how these nutters come about - gang culture flourishing because children have nothing to do possibly - is a better prerogative than just lambasting
Complain about this comment
I think that adults are taking this out of all proportion. video games and sexy olent films aren't turning us youths into mindless violent hybrids, the only damage they do is when people get ddicted to them and focus on nothing else. and who is to blame for that? The supposedly responsible adult. don't make me laugh, if parents let their kids have a balance of video games, tv and sports etc, society would be fine.
And if you would say why are all these kids getting murdered by other kids, well, i don't want to look like a racist but i blame immigration as none of the recent young murderers have english names. ponder on that one for a minute.
Complain about this comment
I'm sick and tired of criticism of computer games thrown about in relation to youth behaviour by the uninformed press. Do they not realise that a majority of those who take part in the sustained sadistic behaviour of 'Manhunt' are not teenagers but men in their late 20s/early 30s with the expendable income needed to pay the £300 for consoles and £40 for a single game? Oh, and just because Grand Theft Auto is the only game you've heard of and you (that is uniformed adults) think you understand it because you've heard some murmurings about violence DON'T BLAME IT FOR EVERYTHING! Until you've played it you'll never understand it's extremely intelligent humour and parody of popular culture.
Computer games are often labelled as killing simulators however they are not this in any way: playing Counter Strike online does not enable users to operate guns and bear arms. I do not understand how if computer games can be accused of this then activites such as paintballing can escape criticism; surely the act of shooting someone with any form of ammunition nurtures within those who take part a liking towards violence and numbs the process of inflicting it?
Complain about this comment
I'd also like to add my complaint that the report on the program had 11 and 12 year old children playing a BBFC 18 rated game. As well as discussing their friends playing a different 18 rated game, without making this explicit to the viewer.
Also during the debate segment there was no proponent defending video games. This is very sloppy reporting and I expect better from newsnight frankly.
Complain about this comment
Penny dreadfuls, silent movies, radio, horror comics, TV, films, video games and now the 'internet' - like that's all bad
Media gets blamed at every turn for society's ills.
Maybe society is just more complex than our white picket fence, everyone is happy, everyone is fulfilled, view of the world.
I'd hazard a guess that poverty is more to problem in society - ie people with very little struggling to get a share of scarce resources...
... but no one wants to blame that elephant in the room - far easier to side step it and point at the PC or TV screen.
Complain about this comment
I believe that television, Radio and Books are there for us to enter a world that isnt usually contactable for most of us... I am apparrently related to Mary Whitehouse and im inclined to believe it. I do believe that we as a species so easily swayed in any direction that someone promises to lead are going to be influenced by what we read, look at and hear we are guided by our senses and as such learn by using them. However we are also blessed with some thing called free will, the choice to do what is right and what is wrong. Yes Tv, Radio and Books influence us but ultimately it is our very own decisions that make us do the things we do, and to say that the Tv or a book or the radio is what made you make the choice is wrong; that kind of an answer is a cop out, a way of saying i did what i did because i liked not holding back but i dont want to be held responsible for my actions. Mary Whitehouse wanted to stop that decision making problem and make sure we did what was right, what ever that may be to her.
Complain about this comment
Don't get me wrong, I'm no prude, but my beef is the joke that is the 9pm watershed. I feel that the swearing, albeit the milder ones, have been allowed to creep into everyday speak before 9pm. Now i'm sure that there are worse things on tv than the words "Bl***y, P**s, Ar*e etc., but these words are routinely allowed to be aired when children can hear them. You may say "so what, most of the kids know these words because their parent etc use them all the time", but it still doesn't make it right to have nearly every American programme to use A** (Ar*e) several times per episode, even on the Simpsons. Dr Who with the words Bl***y and the Cockney phrase 'Bl**din' used the other night while my 8 yearold was watching, not to mention the scene of the two gays walking off hand in hand (I'm not Homophobic, I just don't think it's right to show this to kids!)
The TV censors need to put paid to the gradual creeping in of swearing on ALL channels including SKY channels because if they don't, the producers to show how 'NOW' and 'edgey' they are will creep in and downgrade the odd 'F', 'B', or 'C' at 7pm. Quite why i'm asterisking the swearwords out is laughable because if the TV people see fit to allow them to be said, then i can print them, but I, unlike producers consider if kids will read this!
My rule is if you wouldn't use this language in front of the kids and their teacher, then CUT IT OUT! It's not big or clever!
Complain about this comment
For an important argument about this subject, I would recommend reading the article on the In-vironmental Disaster website entitled 'Sex and Advertising'. It can be found at http://invironmentaldisaster.com/?page_id=27
Complain about this comment
There is a lot of far fetched rubbish on TV and this report and the interview afterwards displayed how out of touch people are.
We live in a different world to that one of 40 years ago --it is faster, more enlightened, more open, more commercial, more money getting -- less deferential, less polite, less willing to give time to our neighbour, less willing to understand than to complain, moan or blame someone else.
The modern family faces pressures that were only experienced by the rich 40 years ago. We can all go our different ways and sadly many do -- so we have fewer role models, less formative guidance, learning, instruction, and awareness of how to treat, handle, cope with others.
Sitting in front of a TV, playing a games cosole or browsing the internet cannot be good if done in excess but if someone learns that there are more important things in life then they will probably seek them out and become rounded human beings.
However not all this can happen by accident. We do need to learn how to inter-relate with others and in society itself. This is where other human beings become responsible -- they might be mums or dads, grannies or uncles, the family next door, the teacher or a childs older peers -- it probably is a variety at different times as children and young people develop.
A modern word is respect -- if we all practised that on a daily basis we would no doubt be a more civilised, a more caring, a less violent or imature people and society.
TV and the other impressionable forms of the electronic age cannot opt out of the need for practising respect, sensibility and awareness that being crude or highlightining violence is not good for individuals or society in general.
That does not mean that we should not witness death, violence, sex or listen to obsenity but when it is out of context, unheathily excessive or just not natural then we are all being fed a lack of respect.
Mary Whitehouse wanted to raise the draw bridge and hide behind a moat -- you could probably do this back in the fifties (when apparently everything was sweetness and light --excepting back street abotions, Suez, Hungaring uprising, the cold war, the loss of empire -- no probably no less violent or corrupt than now) -- in this age of instant communication and yet less appreciation of our social ills we need to educate our young to be aware, to act civily oh and to have more opportunity than we had forty years ago.
Complain about this comment
In the Newsnight piece, the two young kids who claimed that their friends played Grand Theft Auto and turned into foul mouthed, violent terrors, did you notice that they were playing Mortal Kombat? As far as I can tell, all the versions of Mortal Kombat on Amazon are rated 18+.
When parents take better care of what their kids are doing, then I will listen to them whining about how modern culture is affecting their children. Which is more harmful - Mortal Kombat, or parents who don't have the spine to tell their kids that they aren't old enough to play an 18+ game?
Complain about this comment
If, as it claimed, that the case for tv violence having negative influence on the viewer is still not proved ( implying that 'no, it does not have influence' -- otherwise it would surely be more regulated ), then the corollary is surely that it is not proved that educational programmes -- eg. Open University, BBC Learning Zone, etc -- have any positive influence on the viewer .. ie. student' !
So why are we paying for such pointless educational programmes in our licence fee ??
Complain about this comment
When I was younger I thought that Mary Whitehouse was just an interfering busy body who was stuck in the past. Now with the benefit of hindsight, coupled with the development of my own maturity and life experience, I understand better that TV programs have contributed to this decline of standards. I'm witnessing the degeneration of our society, through programmes like East Enders. It normalises the worst behavioural traits that embraces dysfunctionality and vulgarity. We should have more programmes that seek to uplift people to achieve higher standards of morality and personal values.
Complain about this comment
The truest statement I've ever heard on this matter is this. This stuff will only corrupt you if you let it, if you want it to. Violent people are attracted to images of violence. Everybody else recognises it for what it is and filters it out, or changes the channel.
It's like alchohol. Being excessively drunk doesn't make people who don't use violence a solution to the situations they are in start being violent. It's the people who are violent even when sober that are made worse by alchohol. Banning alchohol doesn't change that.
Complain about this comment
This Mary Whitehouse style argument seems to suggest that television and computer games should be used to make us better, more moral(according to who?), compliant, passive citizens. propaganda in other words. No she didn't have a point.
Complain about this comment
perhaps when thinking of questionable media, mighty mary whitehouse would have agreed with the old doctor's diagnosis of:"diareahea of the mouth and constipation of thought."
if hollyweird had a 1/2 dozen copies of mighty mary whitehouse, perhaps parents, and other sane people, wouldn't have to be so vigilent about getting out the teflon covered umbrella to protect innocent people from all the toxic fallout that spews out of the boob-tube and other hold your nose media.
Complain about this comment
It is missing the point to say that Mary Whitehouse didn't like sex, minorities or homosexuality etc, she objected to their exaggerated, explicit and exploited portrayal through the media. The problem is today is that the breakdown in marriage/partnerships, underage sex, petty crime, boozing and taking illegal drugs is celebrated, humorous and something to be admired - Eastenders, Emmerdale and pop singers etc. This portrayal has only limited impact on children in secure family settings with good parents and role models, but disastrous on the burgeoning sector of children from homes with multiple step fathers and half brothers and sisters living off benefit where there is no other role models than what they see on TV.
Complain about this comment
Mrs Whitehouse was little more than a dangerous bigot with personal problems about sex and sexuality.She came from a post war society riddled with repression and hypocrisy,and like many,used religion to justify her,even then, outdated notions of decency.More often than not,fundamentalist Christians seem obsessed with sex and she was no exception. Where she might have been right was on the subject of violence in the media and this has never really been addressed properly.
If you want to ascribe anything to modern society's problems you have to look little further than our old friends,greed and selfishness. I do not think freer attitudes to sex and sexuality are really the cause of all our societies woes.
I have fond and proud memories of protesting against her and even being dragged out of one of her 'Festival of Blight' meetings by suited thugs. Her meetings were nasty affairs,seething with hate. she was a rabblerouser and little different from right wing demagogues like Mosley.
Complain about this comment
No she didn't. Personally, I wouldn't someone like her telling me what I can and can't watch, read or play. Are people getting less violent anyway? I mean we used to hang people publicly didn't we? All those nasty torture devices, burning people at the stake, etc etc...
Also I watched violent programs, films played violent games but I've never been violent towards anyone else and nor would I be. Of course if the only thing to watch was songs of praise, I might start!!!
Complain about this comment
Sadly
I was far too young at the time to realise how right she was. But I have since thrown my TV into the skip and just use the Radio and Internet.
I definately blame the BEEB (upper echelons) for most of our societies probs. Perhaps they will eventually learn that you can't throw good-morals out of the window without somesort of recompense
:'(
Complain about this comment
The TV she complained about is a symptom, not a cause.
TV in a free country reflects the way a society is behaving, it does not lead it. If TV caused the problems we are seeing, then why are countries that censor or control their TV have exactly the same problems that we do?
Complain about this comment
Mary Whitehouse wanted Censorship on TV.
She wanted adult men and women never to see the harsh side part of life. She wanted to wrap everone in cotton wool and ignore the issues which affect us all.
When the play "Romans in Britain" was presented to the public, she had hissy fits because of a male rape scene. Guess what, that play was fully booked up. And theatre management were laughing all the way to the bank. People do not like being told they can not see something which has been censor by one person who was offended by it.
At the end of the day, Mary was blinded by her victorian/Christain values. It never makes sense to censor anything which is the normal part of life.
Complain about this comment
She was substantially correct - - -
We keep saying that kids learn by example from adults, we show them educational videos and expect them to absorb the content, food and toy manufacturers spend billions on advertising, we than say that violent TV, video and computer games have no affect on their behaviour.
It does not stack up.
Complain about this comment
Mary Whitehouse and the (tiny) National Viewers and Listeners association tried to view modern culture through the eyes of Victorian fundamentalist 'Christian's'.
No surprise that they were frightened and confused by what they saw.
Her instinctive reaction was to try and destroy what she didn't understand i.e. a changing world, by demanding censorship of everything that didn't accord with the narrowest worldview imaginable.
Fortunately, 99% of the population saw her as an amusing sideshow.
Complain about this comment
The main thing that comes over here is that most people think they can watch what they like and not be affected, but they aren't sure about other people - this is the same as everyone thinking they are the greatest driver in the world and the problem is all the others. It is almost impossible now to let adults see stuff and to keep it from kids - so we need a real good debate about how pornography, screen violence etc degrades women, and should it be allowed.
Complain about this comment
Mrs Whitehouse was a force of reaction, vindictive and obsessed by a perverse view of sex and sexuality (she was the one who used the words dirty and filth) she added TV violence to try and bolster her support.
Hugh Carlton Green was right to ignore her - some of the radio and TV of that time - Till Death do us Part, Round the Horn and some of the TV plays genuinely broke new ground.
If anything Mrs Whitehouse helped make things worse in relation to TV violence but associating it with sex - a more focussed and more intelligent approach might have caused a more thoughtful debate.
One final point - with more channels and remote controls - that switch is even easier to use.
Complain about this comment
I was around when Mary Whitehouse and her good friend Lord Longford were trying to impose their views on the rest of us. I didn't, and I don't now, agree with their stance on sex (any gender). But I do believe, beyond any shadow of a doubt, that the violence we are now seeing in our society has been helped to spread by the irresponsible actions of all types of media. I don't mean ordinary folk rushing out after a violent pc game and killing the first person they come across. I'm talking about people who are already predisposed to violence being given extra lessons in how to inflict pain, I'm talking about lessons in violence from news bulletins and newspaper headlines. I'm talking about stronger censorship on sex than on violence, it's okay to kill someone but not have sex. It has become 'uncool' for the media to advertise people being nice to each other (see Eastenders). Apparently it doesn't get as many ratings as nastiness. In that respect Mary Whitehouse had her finger on the pulse.
So what are the media going to do about it? Nothing, because they think they'll lose subscribers. Well, NEWSFLASH!, there are 65 million people in this country. What are they watching/reading if not your programme/newspaper? Have you got it wrong?
Complain about this comment
After all these years I do beleive Mary Whitehouse did have a point. There is no doubt in my mind that if you are exposed to such morally corrupt media such as tv, newspapers/magazines, computer games, internet on an everyday basis that the weakest/vunerable in society will mimic and aspire to a lesser or greater degree to be what they see.
I beleive that what some people see is also what they learn.
Because this moral corruption within the media is so prolific, people will beleive that this is what life is about - it isn't, life is what you make it. But sadly for so many people the media world is a role model and their bad behaviour/habits affect everyone else.
Just ask yourself this - were people anywhere near as morally corrupt before mass media came along as they are today?
Complain about this comment
I have always believed that the BBC has been taken over by the Satan's people. Mary Whitehouse is right.
Complain about this comment
If Mary Whitehouse had got her way, what's the worst that could have happened? It's not like it would have caused people to get killed or anything. The worst case scenario would have been that some couch potatoes would have got a bit bored watching telly - oh dear, what a tragedy!
But with regard to the negative consequences of a society getting desensitised to violence, hmm, maybe the couch potatoes will have to explain to the mothers of youth stabbing victims that their children's murder was worth it for the sake of some entertaining telly!
If Mary Whitehouse had got her way, our crime rate would have more in common with Japan than America.
Complain about this comment
yes, tv may show some things that are not pleasing to all. but this is the sign of a free and fair society that allows programs for people from all walks of life and provides good representation of the world today.
TV shows anything from songs of praise to Queer As Folk and i think this represents an accepting society.
sex and homosexuality is real life, so too is voilence. if we see it on the news and in our towns why should it be taboo on our televisions?
somethings especially need to be discussed, we should not hide from the world's problems.
I agree with a previous comment that TV is a symptom not a cause of any percieved moral wrongs.
Whether whitehouse could accept it or not, society has changed, Britain has a new modern identity and so too do the British people. Britain is more accepting of things like homosexuality so it will be shown on television because it is real life and i believe bbc is dedicated to portraying that. Britain also does have negative imagery in some areas such as sexualisation of young women but should we not be looking at other medias to combat this - for example newspapers. and women themselves who degrade themselves.
As for religion, it is simply a fact now that British people are less religious, less christian maybe specifically. I do not think the BBC has any need to enforce christian ideals on to their programs. Though Whitehouse maintained that the BBC used negative (filthy, whatever) propaganda surely christian control of our television would be indoctrination. at least tv is currently free to document any religion.
Most issues whitehouse was concerned with are simply change or sometimes problems within society.
Complain about this comment
She was a puritanical, interfering busybody.
Too many of this sort of person expect the government of the day to legislate for everything which appears to be immoral. This takes personal responsibilty away from the individual and encourages the "getting away with it" attitude which drives many of the more sordid and disgusting practises underground.
We need responsible parents, who know what their offspring are reading or viewing, and we need schools to be places where kids learned respect for others and where teachers weren't called by their first names. Then there is the final solution; if you dont like what you read or see, then dont read, dont look, and turn the damn thing off!!
Complain about this comment
"If, as it claimed, that the case for tv violence having negative influence on the viewer is still not proved ( implying that 'no, it does not have influence' -- otherwise it would surely be more regulated ), then the corollary is surely that it is not proved that educational programmes -- eg. Open University, BBC Learning Zone, etc -- have any positive influence on the viewer .. ie. student'"
This is assumption stupid, unless you remove free will out of the equation. People want to learn, they can, it's not against the law - TV is good medium to help some people.
Lets ban books too while we're at it because you can read books and learn; therefore violent fiction or erotic fiction is clearly a recipe for blood, thunder and debauch society - nonsense.
There is so much violence portrayed in the mass media today that is viewed by billions of people, that empirical evidence would have been compiled by now to show the causal links between acts of violence and watching violent media. A day wouldn't go by without another person triggered by TV or film to commit a violent act - funny it doesn't work like that.
Not surprisingly that database hasn't even started as there is no link - however violent people have been found to have been beaten as children, bullied, abused by adults and so on. Lets just stick to the facts and not perceptions dreamed up by the Daily Mail editorial team to help sell advertising space through breeding fear about the media's game plan to brainwash us all.
Complain about this comment
I've always wondered why people like Mary Whitehouse seem to always link sex'n'violence likes its one thing.
They must be doing something terribly wrong in the bedroom
Complain about this comment
Funny how the anyone who criticises the media is ridiculed, lampooned, misquoted, and maligned by ... guess who ... the media! Mrs Whitehouse was never given a fair hearing.
No doubt the liberal media clique patted themselves on the back for a job well done at stitching Mary Whitehouse up with their gross, one-sided caricature. Meanwhile the rest of us have had to pay the consequences.
Complain about this comment
Funny how the anyone who criticises the media is ridiculed, lampooned, misquoted, and maligned by ... guess who ... the media! Mrs Whitehouse was never given a fair hearing.
No doubt the liberal media clique patted themselves on the back for a job well done at stitching Mary Whitehouse up with their gross, one-sided caricature. Meanwhile the rest of us have had to pay the consequences.
Complain about this comment
I think MW's views were far more prophetic than even she realised. I'm no prude nor too sensitive but I deplore the diet of antisocial, immoral, uncouth and sometimes criminal behaviour beamed into our homes every day. If TV could not influence peoples thinking we would'nt have commercial channels. So we do need to be thinking about the examples it sets to the gulible and the young. I got rid of my TV a while back and now enjoy the Radio where the images are so much better and less offensive. But certainly programs such as "Eastenders" have sponsored the "Stuff You - Me First" society we now have to bear. So yes, MW was spot on and still is.
Complain about this comment
Arguably we live in one of the least violent times in history you were more likely to get murdered in 19th or 18th century England than you are today and 9 million Jews were murdered during the last war before we knew what Television was so the idea that it is responsible for all the ills of society is palpable nonsense. However anyone who says that Television does not effect peoples behaviour should ask them selves why companies spend so much money advertising on TV and ask themselves why after five years of broadcasting, Bhutan's government is considering legislation to regulate what the country's people can watch.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/3812275.stm
But if anyone can explain what the lyrics to “I am a Walrus” mean and how they are responsible for corrupting the youth of 1968 and setting in train the series of events resulting in today’s “knife culture” then please let me know.
"yellow matter custard, dripping from a dead dog’s eye.
Crabalocker fishwife, pornographic priestess,
Boy, you been a naughty girl you let your knickers down
I am the egg man, they are the eggmen.
I am the Walrus, goo goo gjoob g’goo goo g’joob
Complain about this comment
happybrian123 which sky fairy do you worship ?
Complain about this comment
I agree with Chris Dunkley it's too easy to blame the media for all society's ills. There seems to be some notion that in decades prior to 1960 Britain was a halcyon idyll and the 1950s in particular were a time when everybody ‘knew their place’ and nobody swore! This is nonsense. Blood sports and public executions had been the main ‘entertainment’ for centuries. Britain has a long history of being a violent (and drunken) society!
After WW2 there were gangs of feral children roaming Britain’s bombed out cities, gangs and black-marketeers thrived and some were developing into organised crime rackets. The 1950’s Teddy boys had their knuckle dusters and chains; while domestic violence, prostitution, child abuse, and back-street abortions, had all been going on for decades! Thus for many people in 1960s Britain the new ‘experimental’ dramas actually reflected the lives they knew and alerted the more affluent to the ills in society. “Cathy Come Home” and “Up the Junction” showed the horrors of homelessness and the dangers of back-street abortions but Mrs W condemned them both.
The breakdown of families is often deplored by those on the Right but let's not forget that it was a Tory government that oversaw the destruction of British industry much of it traditionally male (coal, steel, ship building) - thus forcing women to go to work because men were unemployed and the only jobs left tended to be low paid traditionally ‘female’ work. It was this same government that encouraged people to buy their own homes and mortgage rates have necessitated both parents working in order to keep up the payments. Hence more children are being left alone for periods of time and family time together is reduced.
These issues plus poverty and poor education are the root problems – but they are too complicated to deal with so it’s easier to ‘blame the media’.
Complain about this comment
If parents are so worried about what TV their kids watch or what videogames they play, they should take responsibility themselves instead of whining and expecting regulators to do it for them.
The TV has an "off" switch and a variety of channels - use them if you don't like what your kids are watching, or put on a video or DVD, or get them to do something else instead of watching TV. Nobody is forcing you to watch!
If young children have TVs in their own rooms... why? I don't think they bought them with their pocket money and carried them home! Don't buy your kids their own TVs and then complain when they watch them.
Violent videogames are age-rated like films and aimed at adults. If underage kids get hold of them it is not the fault of the games or the people who make them - it's the fault of parents or other adults who buy them for their kids, or adults working in the shops who don't ask children how old they are. Just because some adults aren't looking at the age rating on the games and the age of the kids, it doesn't mean all these games should be banned - that would be like using a sledgehammer to smash a nut.
If parents took more responsibility for their sprogs instead of expecting TV and videogames to do the childraising for them and then moaning about it, they wouldn't need any Mary Whitehouse types. Yes, she may have had a point about the more extreme content like pornography and violence, but I think that when it comes to what children watch, parents need to do the regulation themselves instead of expecting someone else to do it.
Complain about this comment
whitehouse was an interfering, out of touch busy body!
Complain about this comment
jayfurneaux comment 23:
Spot on all the way through.
Those who invoke god, most often the Christian god, in discussions such as this do not know their bible all that well. Many just remember the goodly bits cherry picked by the men-of-the-cloth and used as sermon topics time after time.
Complain about this comment
Yes I think she did have a point, but she was to the extreme which got many people's backs up. It's easy to say it doesn't but everything we are ever exposed to effects us and the media here sensationalise everything and have a bias for bad news.
Looking at the differences in crime and media reporting styles between America and Canada - which have similar gun laws and ownership - really highlights the power the media have on influencing social behaviour.
Life is much nicer without a TV and bias newspapers which breed hatred.
Complain about this comment
"Funny how the anyone who criticises the media is ridiculed, lampooned, misquoted, and maligned by ... guess who ... the media! Mrs Whitehouse was never given a fair hearing.
No doubt the liberal media clique patted themselves on the back for a job well done at stitching Mary Whitehouse up with their gross, one-sided caricature. Meanwhile the rest of us have had to pay the consequences."
You talk about the media like it's some cabal who rounded on her. By the 80s she knew exactly what she was doing in terms of the mass media market and how to work it... infact, the right wing, conservative elements loved her.
Complain about this comment
Mary Whitehouse certainly knew what she was talking about and was no fool. She worked very hard for many years to fight the television, radio and film producers and the publishers of pornography. Do these people - and their supporters - think that we are all fools? If people - the young especially - are no influenced by what they see on television and films and read in books and magazines, why is it that billions of pounds are spent each year in advertising? Of course, we are influenced. Not only have moral standards in the UK plummeted over the years, we have become a nation of extremely self-centered and inconsiderate people who think of no-one but ourselves. Our MPs are doing absolutely nothing to uphold society and the state of our country is worsening by the day. Thank you Mrs Whitehouse, you did what you could; it is now our turn - before it is too late.
Complain about this comment
Mary Whitehouse was an interfering old busybody. Religion has contributed far more to the ills of society than the media and continues to do so today, as is demonstrated by the latest divisive comments from Bishop Nazir-Ali.
Complain about this comment
As with everything its only with hindsight that we can see that yes, Ms Whitehouse was correct. We all thought she was a joke a prude, but look at the mess of our society and tv that we have now. If the bbc really wanted to change things then ditching Eastenders would be a very good start. Loosing all their satalite channels with profane and inane comedy shows would be a second good start, and finally getting back to family ideals rather than tv for the masses would sort out the rest. Now that society seems to be irrevokably corrupted by the box in the corner, heaven help the next generations.
Complain about this comment
On one level, Mary Whitehouse (was) to be admired for sticking to her principles - like Thatcher and others.
On another, she came from a generation and class that were educated to see things in a very narrow way, that saw certain things as "wrong" without challenging them, or realising the harm done by holding to these beliefs.
Its far too easy to blame the media on the ills of society today, and thus cite Whitehouse's crusade as being a moral stand.
First, you have to remember that 'morals' tend to refer to Christian morals, which come straight from the Bible and thus reflect the way of life in the 4th century. Not a bad thing, but I doubt anyone would fancy living lilke that any more, not even the fundamentalists who cherry-pick their way through the Bible.
Next, the media can only influence. Its the lack of anything else that causes it to become the moral compass - Parents have the absolute responsibility on that one, and that comes back to the destruction of society from the last 30 or so years, which in turn is really a lot of meddling politicians listening to too many interest groups and trying to please everyone at the same time.
Had Mary Whitehouse not have stood up and said something, I guess someone else would have. Many people don't like change, but without change we'd still be living in caves and grunting.
Complain about this comment
Nothing appears to bring out moral crusaders more than the knowledge other people might be enjoying sex without a sense of shame.
This country is more punitive about sex and drugs than many others and yet has among the worst drugs and teenage pregnancy rates in the developed world.
As a child, me and my friends would watch films involving shootings, then play them out afterwards, but none of us has ever shot or killed anyone, yet.
I can't think of any programme or series on TV where teenagers have been protrayed carrying knives and killing each other so who is to blame for that?
If only a small amount of the energy spent trying to control the behaviour of others was spent in trying to resolve the needs of the poor and the hungry the world would truly be a better place.
Hankering after a non existent period of social cohesion and stability is delusional. TV is largely a mirror to the people we are; get over it.
Complain about this comment
Mary Whitehouse probably had a point but to say that the media is to blame for violence is absurd.
Surely any adult should be able to decide what they want to watch and make decisions about what to believe.
Why religion is part of this debate is beyond me. A belief in god does not mean you have high morals or are a good person and certainly has nothing to do with the media.
The media does have too much power in this country however, but only over the weak minded.
Complain about this comment
Mrs Whitehouse has a degree of direct responsible for the items on television which so distress many of your contributors and even me.
Her achievement, in attacking serious items that were political anathama, like Kathy Come Home, in the relentless triviality of others like the astonishing Pinky and Perky episode, in asumming that her blinkered and ill informed worldview was the only acceptable viewpoint, she did more to discredit censorship abd responsible editing, than any other single person.
I once had a brief debate with her on the so-called "decline of the family issue".
Correcting her statement that there had been a continual rise in the divorce rate since 1870 I pointed out that official marriage breakup had varied over time and that peaks in the divorce rate had followed world wars, legislative changes and so on.
"She replied dsimissively that "all you sociologists say that sort of thing...you're all communists."
With that level of argument all responsible criticism became impossible creating the very moral anomie that she feared
Complain about this comment
She did a good job to protect the viewers and set high standards.
Complain about this comment
Shakespeare is violent. When did Stallone bake his enemies in a pie and serve it to the Queen? Or rape a woman, cut her hands and feet off and cut out her tongue?
Most violent crime in the UK is caused by foreigners, as we all know. The world's most dangerous people don't listen to any music or watch films, because it's against their religion. The most dangerous Americans are the most religious. The IRA are religious, and what about all those dodgy priests?
Complain about this comment
Once upon time people would have spoken openly about God and would have been embarressed to speak about sex. These days people speak openly about sex and are embarressed to speak about God.
Mary Whitehouse was right to campaign in the manner she did and she is sorely missed. The level of violence, sex and bad language on television today is disgraceful. It's all very well saying we must push the boundaries but what happens when there are no boundaries left to push?
Complain about this comment
Yes, Mary was right.
I threw my TV away in 1976 and haven't had one since ... and I'm frequently reminded just what a good decision it was.
Occasionally I see the likes of Ross and Norton at friends' houses. I wouldn't have these coares and objectionable people in my house, and I certainly won't have their images.
It is precisely because the envelope has been pushed too far that crude and witless people like them pass for entertainment.
Complain about this comment
In comment number 62, the writer says, ".....the scene of the two gays walking off hand in hand (I'm not Homophobic, I just don't think it's right to show this to kids!)"
And doubtless some of the posters' best friends are gay :-). Seriously, it is about time surely that people realised that there is nothing abnormal abut public displays of affection between adult males, and there is absolutely no reason why children of any age should not see such things on television. Ms Whitehouse would no doubt be apoplectic at the sight but time has moved on.
Complain about this comment
Society has always been coarse and obsessed with sex and violence, from ancient Greece and Rome to the Middle Ages to the Victorians (yes, the Victorians) to now. All you can do is take responsibility for what popular media you consume or don't consume.
If you don't want to watch sex and violence on television, don't. If you don't want your children to watch sex and violence on television, don't let them. Simple as that.
And if you don't want other people to watch sex and violence on television, think: how happy would you be for them to decide what *you* should watch?
Complain about this comment
All modern television sets have a feature which may not have been around in Whitehouse's time.
Located on the remote control handset, usually in one of the top corners, is a round, red button: to further aid identification, it is also slightly larger than any of the other controls. When this is pressed, the screen will go blank and the speakers silent. The viewer is then free to leave the television set and go and do something else instead.
I am informed that the fitment of these so-called "off switches" will be mandatory on all digital receivers; so after the digital switchover, every set will be equipped with one.
Complain about this comment
I watched the programme last night. It had a rather mocking tone .
Whitehouse was , by and large , right. It is the silly "media" types that look old-fashioned and out of step with a world battling to confront violence, the sexualisation of children, and an obession with satifying ones own needs at the expense of others.
Complain about this comment
I don’t think TV is solely to blame, social breakdown and the removal or responsibility in exchange for votes by out "leaders" also have us where we are today. However it has been proven that we can, as a species be desensitised and that is what TV is doing to our kids. The pad parents must also take the blame here but her whole point about "moral breakdown" is sadly coming true. I for one, would like to apologise to Mary for laughing at her at first. At first society laughed at her. Now, I think she is having the last laugh....
Complain about this comment
Did Mary Whitehouse have a point? Probably not. She pushed for government censorship of the media, and that cannot be supported. However, she was mostly opposing the BBC and that is where the issue really lies. If we don't like the channels streaming content into our living rooms we can simply switch channels - but we pay taxes to support the BBC - so in this regard you have to give her some credit as the BBC often get it wrong . . .
Overall, she wanted to ban smut. She failed, and on balance we should be glad about that.
Complain about this comment
if violence on tv causes violence in real life then why arnt we all in prison? ive seen pornography, very violent films and i play computer games including grand theft auto and guess what ive never raped or murdered anybody. violence existed long before television or did you all think god created the tv on the 8th day? its about time we stopped blaming things that cant answer the accusations and start blaming the people who commit these crimes blaming porn or violence on tv is just a feeble cop out
Complain about this comment
i'm all for doing away with obscenity....
nuclear weapons,
the arms trade,
self serving politicians,
huge wealth, power and land inherited from ancestral slave owners,
racism,
homophobia,
snobbery,
class prejudice,
multi million bonuses handed out in the city for playing numbers games with poor peoples lives.
i could go on...
but nudity? sex? why are people so hung up about it?
Complain about this comment
Your portrayla of Harman Grisewood in the Mary Whitehouse programme was pretty poor. He was not a giggling twit, as shown, and he would never have called his wife "love"!
Complain about this comment
I think she went 'over the top' with her objections to what was becoming the accepted way of life for the young - admit to enjoying sex, do it and not be ashamed, whether be married or not.
I think she would have been horrified, and I agree, to see today's soaps - always arguing and fighting, domestic violence, crime, deceipt - everything undesirable about society. And this is being watched by millions, kids and all, who learn that this is the norm.
Soaps are the most popular programmes. I read the details in my weekly TV mag and always it says, "Mrs X is furious...storms round to..."
Glad my parents didn't watch them either.
Complain about this comment
I admit to laughing when Mary, wrapped up in bed, had to take her glasses off so her husband could kiss her and climb on top. Nice touch. She would have been all for sex, within marriage at any rate.
She grew up in an era that knew little of sex outside marriage, social abortion, STDs, children stabbing each other on the streets of London, teenage binge drinking, consumerism, selfish ambition and greed. I believe that the most cunning aspect of the modern media is to persuade the viewer that such violence and sexual immorality are 'the norm'. The media, of course, has its own agenda, and social responsibility isn't profitable.
Secular liberalism has been a disaster for Britain just as Mary predicted all along.
Complain about this comment
The Story So Far:
120 Postings
101 Posters
For MW (or otherwise 'moral'):53
Against(no prisoners): 44
Comedy/Other: 4.
Conclusion - whatever you want it to be.
Complain about this comment
TV is an easy scapegoat for stupid people. How much violent media was Hitler exposed to?!
The real reason for the decline of decent society is the me me me philosophy fostered by her fellow Thatcherites, if the haves want even more you can't expect the plebs to cheerlead them.
Complain about this comment
"She not only had a point but she has been proved right many times over. Britain is the most Godless, violent, shallow, broken nation in the western world. We have thrown God out and the nation is lost. Sexual perversion and degradation is the standard fare from talk shows to soaps."
well it did not take long for the religious nuts to come forward. the old fool is gone and I wont lose any sleep over it
Complain about this comment
In the 1950s, as a very young woman raising a family, I must admit I saw Mrs Whitehouse as a figure of fun. My family grew up as decent people, despite a lot of rubbish 'on the box.' We self-regulated ourselves, if it was witty we watched, if it was just cheap smut it was turned off and we listened to music.
Today, my feelings towards her are mixed. I still do not like censureship, but it's very worrying the way things are going. In the newspapers tonight, there is an article about a cinema film on bestiality with horses. The whole idea is to me revolting, but with civil marriage being the norm now, perhaps soon it will be illegal to deride or condemn those who have sexual relationships with animals. I can see a law being passed allowing a new form of civil marriage to guarantee the rights of a horse, rattle snake, or whatever. This is not being sarcastic, in Mary Whitehouse's day, did we ever believe the things we take for granted today would be happening and being shown on TV and in cinemas?
Complain about this comment
Did Mary Whitehouse have a point?
Has British society coarsened as a result of the media and has that really changed our culture?
Yes and Yes.
When I was a young lad I thought Mary Whitehouse was something of a kill-joy, wrong-headed, old fashioned.
Now, some 30 years later, I see the 'anything is fine', 'diversity is good', attitude as saddening. Britain is the poorer for losing its previous standards.
I believe that for modern Britain the rot set in with Roy Jenkins and the 1960's. We are reaping the crime wave and decadence of a liberal secular society, and far too often the church leaders are silent.
I suspect that in time the pendulum will swing another way, and we will rediscover the need for morality, and the benefits it brings.
Complain about this comment
"She not only had a point but she has been proved right many times over. Britain is the most Godless, violent, shallow, broken nation in the western world. We have thrown God out and the nation is lost. Sexual perversion and degradation is the standard fare from talk shows to soaps."
well it did not take long for the religious nuts to come forward. the old fool is gone and I wont lose any sleep over it
indeed!... if there was a god to thank, we could thank him/her for the likes of Dawkins, Hitchins, Harris!
i just will never understand why people think they have the right to control other peoples lives in respect of what they watch etc. what makes them more 'righteous' in the first place other than their own self-righteousness!
- usually these are the same people that in another breath will bemoan the 'nanny state' or some such cliché.
Complain about this comment
mightyangela: to use civil marriage as the bedrock of your argument against humans having sex with rattlesnakes shows how pig-ignorant you people really are.
Gloves off: you and and your Godfearing friends are not moral - you're just a majority. Whitehouse was a weakling - a schoolyard bully who picked on anyone with anything approximating a subtle sensibility. She was everything that's wrong with this society, and the reason why this is the most depressing thing I've ever bothered with.
We laugh at 'God-fearing Texans',but they're no different to berks like you. Stop inventing British history in order to make sense of your messed-up lives.
Complain about this comment
What right has Mary Whitehouse or anyone else (including the BBFC) to tell me what i should or shouldn't be allowed to watch?
What happened to the freedom of the individual to view something and decide for themselves whether it is suitable for them to watch or not?
If you don't like something, then you turn it off!
Of course, I believe in making sure that children don't see something they are not supposed to be seeing and I approve of the watershed and the classification system, but it is not the media's role to be the parent regulating what children see, but the actual parents themselves.
Indeed by forcing censorship on adults is merely saying that adults are too stupid and feeble that they can't decide for themselves what is suitable for them to watch.
I have no time to interfering do-gooders like Mary Whitehouse or her prudish out of touch chums past or present.
Complain about this comment
If Mary Whitehouse had got her way, what's the worst that could have happened? It's not like it would have caused people to get killed or anything. The worst case scenario would have been that some couch potatoes would have got a bit bored watching telly - oh dear, what a tragedy!
But the worst thing that can happen if TV makes society 'more coarse', is that young lives end up getting killed. ie all the stabbings and teens getting shot in the head recently. Are the couch potatoes willing to risk people's lives for the sake of making telly a bit less boring? Will the couch potatoes/ media types be able to look into the eyes of the victims mother and say, 'sorry, but my entertainment needs are more important than the life of your child'
If Mary Whitehouse had got her way, our crime rate would have more in common with Japan than America.
Complain about this comment
The media doesn't lead society, it reflects it. Pre-marital sex became the norm on TV long, long after it became the norm in society. It's very tempting and easy to blame the media for the world's woes, but the world moves on and changes, and all the media does is show the changes. If the world is wrong, the thing to blame is the people living in it, and the best way to change it is to change yourself.
Mary Whitehouse hated free thought and free speech, and hated progress. If she had her way, we'd all be sitting at home watching 24 hour Songs of Praise - no news, no drama, no Pinky and Perky, with not an innovative or clever or original thought between us. We'd be automatons, and our culture will have diappeared.
Complain about this comment
ClownsRunTheTowns, all you are doing is making assumptions, rather looking at solid facts. Like it or not, it is simply not the job of the media to decide what is best for children to watch.
The job falls upon the parents of children - they buy the telly and they are responsible for the kids upbringing. And if they can't do that, then blaming the media isn't going to help the victims of crime.
The buck stops with parents.
Complain about this comment
Watching the dramatisation of the confrontation between Hugh Greene and Mary Whitehouse I thought what a pity is was they never met to discuss their views. However conservative repressive and prejudiced she may have appeared to have been, Charles Hill's meeting with her was productive for the media. Better to meet critics and listen to them than to shun them. Hugh Greene's determined opposition to Mary Whitehouse and all she stood for was dangerous when the powerful position he was in is considered. If all viewers were happy with and in agreement with everything the media put out there would be no healthy debate about content. It would result in a sort of "agreed censorship". Is this what we want? In the play was amused when she commented on the fine collection of hats worn by those sitting in the audience of Birmingham town hall. Even today many of us like to see people making an effort and looking smart, something which is often forgotten... look at theway in which intended adverse propaganda in regard to top hats and tails may worked towards the winning candidate's advantagein the recent by election.
Complain about this comment
If Mary Whitehouse had got her way, our crime rate would have more in common with Japan than America.
you have obviously never been to Japan.
i have - you are talking rubbish.
Complain about this comment
Mary Whitehoudse wanted to drag society back to the 1950s and a nice, middle class, Xian, father, stay-at-home mother, 2 children family civilisation. A stifling class-ridden society lacking much empathy and compassion.
Consider why "Kathy come Home" was such a wake up call - nice middle class peolpe couldn't belive that such things happened - especially after the war and the austerity.
Our present society is obsessed with money and celebrity. Our heroes are footballers and people who appear on "Big Brother". We have had at least two generations that were cossetted and lacked little. This isn't solely., or principally, down to the media, it's also down to politicians going for quick fixes. It's down to parents who can't raise their children, or don't bother to.
I do know that everyone wanted to give their kids a better time than we experienced in the '50s (rationing, etc, etc) but at the same time we spoilt them. We have allowed a young society to grow up that is semi-feral with the good kids ganging together for mutual protection, and often too domesticated to go out alone.
There is no esay answer,but saying MW was right is definitely the worng one. As are those people who claim god would solve the problem - see the US: a highly religious society if ever there was one!
Complain about this comment
We accept censorship at the cinema and understand what PG, 12 and 18 ratings mean.
Similarly we now accept that TV material that may be unsuitable for younger viewers should be broadcast after the "water-shed" at 9pm - this was without question one of the lasting positive legacies of Mary Whitehouse.
Trouble is you now can record and play back films and other programmes at the flick of a few switches on the remote, and at any time of day. And the internet makes it even easier.
As a 'baby-boomer' child of the 60s I do accept that many banged on about rights and not enough about their responsibilities and this has led to the litigious society we have become - "had an accident, can't possibly be your own fault, sue someone !"
As a parent I accept I have huge responsibility to act as a teacher and role model for my kids, as does the rest of my family. But I think broadcasters also share in this responsibility in promoting role models that may help society not lead it further into the mire - some of our sportsmen and entertainers are totally inappropriate role models and commentators might do well to point that out rather than accept it as "well, that's life".
Complain about this comment
Re: Comment #130
"If Mary Whitehouse had got her way, what's the worst that could have happened?"
State approved censorship of any expression of notions offensive to conservative Christianity.
Complain about this comment
Clowns Run The Town:
"If Mary Whitehouse had got her way, our crime rate would have more in common with Japan than America."
did you you know that when America were enjoying the delightss of Spielberg's ET and it topped the video charts, Japan was clammering after Cannibal Holocaust (a film that our government banned in 1984 with the Video Recording Act).
So you're comparing like with like are you? Or would you prefer gore to sentimental alien fiction to help build a better society and low crime rate.
Complain about this comment
As a child of the eighties it is no surprise that I only partially agree with Mary Whitehouse's ideas.
Anyone with religion that feels it their 'god given' right to dictate to others is wrong.
You just cannot blame media for the demiss of Britain.
Media is the scapegoat for the government, however hard that is to admit for some.
At the end of the day the media supply what we as a society demand.
The media would be nothing without us, we are the media.
Why should the media have the resonsibilty of being a role model!
Its purpose is not to rear the UKs children.
Complain about this comment
Re: Comment #130 TheMaskedMarvel
"If Mary Whitehouse had got her way, what's the worst that could have happened?"
"State approved censorship of any expression of notions offensive to conservative Christianity."
Unlike what happens today with regard to the state broadcasters reporting on Islam:
BBC chief Mark Thompson warns of 'over-cautious Islam coverage
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/faith/article3724384.ece
Re: Comment #138 Leytonred
Off the top of my head, here is a list of American v Japanese cultural exports:
Japan:
Hello Kitty
Super Mario Brothers
Pokemon
Nintendogs
Brain Training
Various Horse Dating Simulators
America:
Texas Chainsaw Massacre
Die Hard With a Vengeance
Mortal Kombat: Annihilation
Silence of the Lambs
Lethal Weapon
Various rappers that have been sent to prison for violent crime
Complain about this comment
Re: Comment #140
"Horse Dating Simulators"
However one interprets it, that phrase leaves images in the mind that will be hard to erase.
Complain about this comment
I liked the debate after the mary whitehouse film on newsnight and i must say i agreed with the conservative mp who took part in the discusion. i think tv does have a part to play in making violence seem normal in everyday life,such as in the recent episode of eastenders(which i dont like much lately anyway) and that mary whitehouse may of had a point
I also agree with his view that we should do everything to repair our society,especially after the disturbing spate of recent knife deaths that has been in the news lately
Complain about this comment
When was this golden age? Just because people were not informed about many things doesn't mean they didn't happen. The most violent people in todays society is governments. The Christian church has got a very violent history. The people of past generations were just has perverse and violent, and there wasn't any television or films to watch then. Why must we always try to blame our actions on something other than ourselves? If society adopts a materialistic philosophy of life then we must accept the consequences, not curtail the freedom of the individual.
Complain about this comment
Clowns around town - you missed my point with your comparison list.
You forgot to say that America gave us Google, Microsoft, Apple, Cisco et al - foundations of the information society and nothing to do with violence.
However the point I was making is that Japan enjoys consuming gore like Cannibal Holocaust - making it popular culture - and their society has n't, as you point out with you crime stats, gone to hell in a hand cart like is pre-supposed by our consumption of violent media
Maybe if we look deeper at the US vs Japan we'll find that social welfare, care for elderly/young is much more accessible and amenable to all Japanese rather than a me me me culture of those that can afford it.
I still maintain violence is society is caused by poverty and inequity - more and more people competing for scarcer and scarcer public resources. Not what TV and films they watch.
When I read that that kids going to Eton and the like start stabbing each other I may believe otherwise
Complain about this comment
Leytonred: Japan's democracy is based on shogun culture - it doesn't get nastier than that.
Complain about this comment
I don't know what shogun culture entails - I'll take your word for it; I wasn't defending/supporting it vs the US/UK cultures. I was merely pointing out that it was different. The person who mentioned Japan (point 130) earlier was saying their violent crime rate was lower than ours - "If Mary Whitehouse had got her way, our crime rate would have more in common with Japan than America"
Also that Japan has given the world progressive things and the USA has given us a litany of violent media and concepts (point 140).
Maybe with your knowledge of Japanese culture you could shed some light on both our misunderstandings.
However, I stand by my final point about poverty and the competition for scarcer and scarcer resources being the cause of violence.
Maybe politicians and their lobbyists are seeing how far they can push society. If you think it took near anarchy after the second world for the Welfare Acts of parliament to come into force and appease the masses. But maybe that's too far fetched.
Complain about this comment
All she did was to point out that sex and pornography are not the same thing, one is a natural human activity, the other degrades everyone involved and fuels violence against women.
Complain about this comment
My, the lunatics really have come out to play, haven’t they?
Mary Whitehouse was a nutter whose arguments have been comprehensively and convincingly proven wrong, rooted, as they were, in a fundamentally flawed view of what it is to be human. The proof is simple:
It is physically impossible for a human being to be the product of the media – to be, in effect, spontaneously compelled, against your will, to copy what you have seen, heard or read. This perceived magic-like power of the media is at the root of the belief of some that the media must be ever-more-tightly controlled and is complete idiocy. The truth is that humans haven’t ever and won’t ever be susceptible to this kind of influence as we have ‘free will’. Our every action, every waking second of our lives, is determined by our education and upbringing and not by the content of a music video or the front cover of a magazine. What, on Earth, is the point of an education and being raised by adults, if what they teach us cannot protect us from what is portrayed in ‘the media’? I find it offensive to claim I don’t determine my own actions – I’m a Human Being, not a monkey.
It is astonishing, after forty years, Mary Whitehouse’s disciples – those who see the same ‘filth’ in the media as I do and yet aren’t harmed by it – still don’t understand this. THESE people are responsible for society’s problems (by ensuring our rulers ignore the real, ROOT causes); they don’t offer any SOLUTIONS. They form part of the growing band of people who display that bizarre trait in some humans: to be simultaneously intelligent and stupid. They join those who think we, realistically, can tackle climate change by turning back time; that there can’t ever be too much ‘child protection’; that ‘binge drinking’ is the cause of drunken violence; that ‘speed kills’; that cigarette advertising is the cause of people smoking; that the fashion industry is responsible the plight of some girls who starve themselves; that music causes suicide; that a ‘cervical cancer’ jab causes sexual promiscuity; etc. They don’t understand the concept of ‘cause and effect’.
Ask these people to explain, in as much detail as possible, the physical and psychological processes whereby they believe people are harmed by what is shown on television and they’ll be baffled. Ask them what happens to a child after witnessing a T.V. character whisk off his/her clothes or hit another character or swear. Does the child spontaneously start to act in a sexual manner; does he/she spontaneously reach puberty, if it hadn’t already happened (sexually explicit images, we are told, sexualise children); if a girl, does she spontaneously become pregnant; does he/she spontaneously become violent; does he/she suddenly fill his/her speech with expletives? As disappointing as it will be to these people to learn: nothing happens. Your child continues to be the person he/she was BEFORE watching the programme – a product of the education system and your parenting. If other societies with access to a far more explicit and less repressive media don’t suffer the same problems as Britain, then the media cannot be the cause of the problems WE have. We are, after all, the same human beings.
There has been some support, here, and a lot in 'The Radio Times', for the ‘watershed’, but I’d like to ask a question about it: does it still exist? I can’t remember the number of times when I have gone to bed before 11 p.m., having not seen one genuine post-watershed programme, due to the bleeps, pixellation, editing or bans on certain programme topics having deprived me of the ‘grown-up’ T.V. I used to expect long before 11 p.m. There should be MORE sex and MORE violence on T.V., not less, as today’s television seems to be mainly for children.
One of the "Newsnight" interviewees mentioned the recent U.N. report on the relative merits of being a child in various Western nations and I’m glad he did as no-one seems to have fully understood the report’s implications. Consider the one-thousand-and-one differences between the Netherlands and Great Britain, supposedly the best and worst nations, respectively, in which to spend your childhood. In the Netherlands, for decades, the sale, purchase and smoking of cannabis has been legal; prostitution, similarly, has been legal and advertised openly for decades (although perhaps not for much longer); ‘sex’ education in schools is far more explicit than in Britain and starts from a very early age; and, for more than forty years (as far as I know), there haven’t ever been any restrictions on the availability, whether in shops or on T.V., of hardcore pron, including some pretty extreme stuff. All of these aspects of Dutch society and many others, though, are either BANNED or very heavily controlled in Britain, such is the belief in their harm to society. Why, then, when four generations of Dutch children, over forty years, growing from four to fourteen, five to fifteen, six to sixteen – the ten crucial developmental years of your childhood – have matured in a society with access to all of this, does the Netherlands have a usage, per capita, of Cannabis, no higher than Britain, one of the lowest rates of underage sex and teenage pregnancy, far more respect between the sexes, a lower rate of divorce and some of the lowest rates of almost every kind of crime? This report proves, beyond any doubt, that these freedoms and many others the Dutch enjoy are not the causes of society’s problems. Until our idiotic rulers understand this and focus on the education system and parenting, society will continue to plummet down the toilet.
One point which hasn’t been raised, by any of the posters, is how much the media, itself, has become complicit in the belief they are the root of all evil. How often do you hear those who earn a living in the media blame their profession for some perceived societal problem? With the media increasingly run by traitors, with 'Ofcom' having taken on an incredibly illiberal and puritanical zeal (persecuting some broadcasters) and the political parties being clueless, freedom of speech and freedom of expression, in Britain, appear doomed unless something is done.
Let ME offer a solution to society’s problems. People claim, despite blaming the media for many of society’s ills, to understand the incredible importance of an education and a proper upbringing to a stable society, but it isn’t REALLY the case. They public doesn’t TRULY understand how absolutely FUNDAMENTAL, above ALL else, a successful education system and knowledge of how to correctly raise children are. We spend a vast amount of money on education but not at a sufficient level commensurate with the understanding of its true importance. If we scrapped the hundreds of quangos that monitor and control our lives, scrapped the thousands of laws restricting our freedom and their enforcement and spent the tens of billions freed up on a cradle-to-grave education system (necessary in the short term) and parenting classes, you could transform society. As naïve as this sounds, it really is this simple. Free the people to free the money to free the people from their stupidity.
Shouldn’t 'Ofcom' be abolished and the media, once and for all, stand up for freedom?
Complain about this comment
Strugglintostaystaycalm: love your rant, but, if they can be bothered, the zombies will be back (they say hate tv, but now the media fuss has died down, they've vanished!).
Leytonred: I don't know anything about Japanese culture - I was sort-of agreeing with you. If you think of Alien v Predator, then the Predators are beefed-up Samurai: you want them on your side,but you're always treading on eggshells!
Complain about this comment
Strugglintostaystaycalm - took my breath away there
It is funny that without any hard evidence other than right wing think tanks offering opinion cloaked as fact, the debate continues to erode free will in film and TV
Wasn't Reservoir Dogs never going to be available on video? Now it is regularly played on free to air channels like channel 4 and society does fall over every time it is on. I remember the hysteria of the ear cutting scene from publicity hungry, not caring, MPs.
American Psycho by Bret Easton Ellis caused a huge furore when it came out, now it is in the top 20 of all time.
The chattering masses who claim we shouldn't see, hear or read something just make it up as they go along... while real adults, not too astounded by the new, bring up healthy children who turn into more adults who can take their art and entertainment for what it is, not a trigger to go on violent/sex mad orgy.
Conservatives eh? Terrified that someone, somewhere is having a good time
Complain about this comment
I am a "young" person at university, i think the way people react to video games is absolutely riduclous, i have played video games since i was 8, so far i have no police record and have never done anything that would cause me to.
I study video games and out of the 12 people in my year not one of us has a criminal record.
so this whole attitude of Games/Tv/Books make children and young people killers need to stop. now i've thought about this and if it doesn't then this is what we should do:
Ban spray bottles, thier lids are a basic gun shape and have a trigger, obviously you could train how to shoot people with one of those.
This is the kind of stupidity that things will get to. Now before people start saying "you think kids should play 18 rated games" no i dont, however, games developers such as Rockstar do not regulate themselves, the BBFC and the ESRB regulate them and give thier games age ratings.
i looked into my copy of Grand Theft Auto IV, on the special edition in total there are 7 i repeat SEVEN age 18 icons on it now for any adults who have kids and read this, this does not mean the games difficulty is to the level of an 18 year old (believe even if none of you do think that, there are parents that do) this means the game likely contains:
sex or nudity
violence (most likely extreme)
swearing
Drug References
and probably the commiting of some kind of crime
Do you as a "responsible" parent want to show that to your lets face it 3+ year old (scary thought but there are parents who let children that young play it)
now if my children, if i have them, ever went and bought an 18 rated game without being asked for ID especially if it was obvious i'd be going and demanding the cashier to be fired, which is why most game shops ask for ID
so i ask all the parents out thier, if your child has an 18 rated game? or indeed any game rated higher than thier age, follow that question with did you buy them it? if the answer to both of these is yes then you should blame yourself for allowing them to play it, not the company that made it or the company that published it, or the game shop that sold it to you (not your child), but YOU a couple of years ago the age ratings on video games were made larger, they are now i believe larger than the ones on DVDs
Games also do not teach people how to work, make or operate weapons, i have played most of the games people on this bored would deem "shocking" and i dare bet i couldn't even do something like put a freash clip into a gun let alone anything else you have to do before firing it. you also cannot train on layouts of buildings in games such as Counter-strike, someone somewhere has to actually sit there and make it.
there is even now a device sold (http://www.play.com/Games/PlayStation2/4-/3477780/Xploder-Parental-GameLock/Product.html) which allows the child to only play games upto a certain rating, the fact that this device exists i think means that video games do more to protect your children than DVD,CD and Books.
if your still not happy what more do you want? do you want some one from the developer or publishing company to come round pick up the game tell your child "no" and then leave with the copy of the game?
If parents took the time and effort to find out what went into the games thier children play and see what can be done to stop them playing games they shouldn't then this problem wouldn't exist
it's the same with everything really if a lot (that word is LOT not all) parents actually cared about thier kids (i often see kids as young as three left to wander the streets) then this problem wouldn't happen and im not going to blame people who came here from other places, because this is a problem that spreads probably to every race of people every where ever.
if you want to protect your children then:
enforce thier bed time
dont let them have a TV/PC in thier room
dont allow them to play games rated higher than thier age
Pay attention to what they look at online
encourage them to go outside
encourage them to read
dont fall for "well all my friends are playing it)
take a non-scary interest in what your kids enjoy
some of these things may sound silly but this is the way i feel i was brought up, i wasn't allowed a TV in my room till i was 14 i think, and was never allowed to have a PC in my room until i came to uni, i was always encouraged to read and play sports, my parents while not being invasive new roughly what i was downloading simply by asking "oh, what have you got downloading?" at worst they were being nosey but it was thier way of making sure i wasn't doing things i shouldn't.
My parents also took an interest in me even when i started playing video games asking me stuff about them to learn more my mother even plays certain games with me at times.
the most important thing is to be able to tell your child that they cant watch a program or cant play a certain game, but try and explain why, explain certain words are bad and i know i'm probably telling parents who know this already but who knows
I'll be very happy if this posts changes anyones opinion on what lengths people in the different areas of the video games industry go to, to protect children from adult themed games, but remember they can't and shouldn't have to do it all for the parent
Complain about this comment
sorry for the double post but i couldn't find an edit, anway i claimed the certifications were given out by the BBFC and the ESRB, it is actually PEGI and ELSPA both of which have websites i believe
Complain about this comment
Leytonred
The reason why I mentioned Japan is because some commenters here were blaming the violence on capitalism. I have always been told that Japan is even more right wing and capitalist than America and UK, so if captialism is to blame then surely Japan must be a lawless no-go crime zone, but it isn't. So capitalism isn't to blame. It's something else.
Complain about this comment
I think kibashinohinata has nailed to be honest - a refreshingly honest and real view of the world that a childs welfare is a shared responsibility between the adult (parent) and the child in how they spend their leisure time
Complain about this comment
Re comment 140:
"Off the top of my head, here is a list of American v Japanese cultural exports:
Japan:
Hello Kitty
Super Mario Brothers
Pokemon
Nintendogs
Brain Training
Various Horse Dating Simulators"
Off the top of my head:
Japan:
Ichi the Killer (extremely sexually violent film)
The Urotsukidoji series (features animated children being raped)
Battle Royale (brilliant film, you should watch it next time channel 4 show it)
'Beat' Takeshi (The star of Takeshis Castle and many movies, most of 'em extremely violent)
The point is you clearly don't see a lot of Japanese cinema as their ratings system and what they allow in films is the most liberal in the world
Complain about this comment
I was going to say that about Jap cinema
Complain about this comment
This Japan stuff is getting very convoluted.
Everyone's cherrypicking. Where would you rather live? Deep down.
Complain about this comment
Did Mary Whitehouse have a point?
Of course.
I enjoyed many aspects of the 60s. Jum Morrison and the Doors, even The Cyberman. Thought THAT WAS THE WEEK THAT WAS very self-indulgent and still do.
The thing is, did any of those things actually make us more resilient or happier as a society?
No, it didn't.
People who call her a psycho (and worse) are the symptom of the malaise that was infesting the UK and still does.
Strange that her beliefs actually coincide with the moral aspirations of most of the immigrant groups since her time.
Nobody's going to call them names, are they?
But that in itself is a sign of the moral hypocrisy of our chattering classes and media pundits.
Complain about this comment
View these comments in RSS