Going out with a bang….Beyer wants Watercolour Challenge not nudity

Beyer’s still a rent-a-quote for the Daily Mail even after he’s stepped down as Mediawatch UK director.

The Daily Mail tells us that there were dozens of complains but in reality the complaint is coming from Beyer who is complaining to Ofcom after he was contacted by “concerned parents.”

The Mail continues to hold up Mediawatch UK as some great authority as if it represents the entire TV viewing public who are all so disgusted by nude life art drawing being shown on daytime TV and that TV bosses should be worried about Beyer winging to Ofcom on behalf of hordes of professional compaliners.

A lot of Beyer’s mates really are lazy so and sos. They can’t be bothered to get up off their bumbs and complain to Ofcom themselves so they get Beyer to do it for them. Well now he’s stepping down maybe they might have to do it themselves.

From the Daily Mail:

Model poses nude for Life Class art show… on DAYTIME TV

By Paul Revoir

Lunchtime TV is well known as the preserve of news bulletins, women’s talk shows, Australian soap re-runs and cosy family dramas.

So you can imagine the surprise when mothers sitting down with their children flicked over to Channel 4 yesterday and were greeted by a fully naked woman.

Dozens of viewers are understood to have complained after they saw more than they bargained for of fashion model Kirsten Varley.

Outrage: Ofcom received dozens of complaints after fashion model Kirsten Varley was seen posing for artist Gary Hume on Channel 4 at lunchtime

She stripped off and posed for artist Gary Hume in the programme Life Class: Today’s Nude which aired at 12.30pm.

The show was up against Bargain Hunt on BBC1, Daily Politics on BBC2, Loose Women on ITV and House Doctor on Channel Five.

The programme saw the camera lingering on the model’s naked form as the artist talked through the process of drawing her. But the show which was filmed at Mr Hume’s studio has sparked a backlash from viewers.

 

At one point, the artist tells Miss Varley to have a rest if she needs one as he is going for a toilet break. He is also heard saying: ‘One of the things about art is that you have to be embarrassed. You have to be embarrassed to make it.’

Yesterday’s broadcast was one of five programmes about how to paint the naked body, which is running throughout the week on Channel 4.

On Monday, distinguished painter and sculptor Maggi Hambling drew male model Matthew Oghene. Tuesday’s episode featured portrait artist Humphrey Ocean painting female model Tinka Ziff.

John Beyer, of TV pressure group Mediawatch UK, questioned showing the programme at lunchtime.

He has referred the matter to media regulator Ofcom after being contacted by concerned parents.

Complaints: Artist Alan Kane sketches a nude model for another show in the Channel 4 daytime television series

Mr Beyer said: ‘I have had complaints about this. Obviously people feel this is not really suitable for daytime TV when they have got children at home.

‘One was particularly incensed because his child was at home and thought it was not appropriate.

‘It’s a pity Channel 4 cannot revive its Watercolour Challenge show.’

One viewer who was in her sick bed watching daytime TV, said: ‘It nearly gave me a relapse. It was adult viewing, not for screening in the middle of the day.’

Channel 4 has defended the programme,  insisting it was not gratuitous and saying it was meant to help artists capture the beauty of the human body.

In the series, each episode features a different type of life model including a dancer and a highly sought after male model.

Gary Hume is renowned for his paintings of simplified forms usually using high gloss paint on surfaces such as aluminium.

He was nominated for the Turner Prize in 1996 and was made a member of the Royal Academy in 2001. The audience is invited to pick up a pencil and use the class to develop their own interest in drawing with the artist’s guidance.

 

“Obviously people feel this is not really suitable for daytime TV when they have got children at home.”
 

Erm no Beyer. More like the people who contacted you feel this is not really suitable for daytime TV when they have got children at home. Their views arn’t representative of what people feel in general.

Beyer wants to end his days as Mediawatch UK director by making out that he speeks for the entire TV viewing public.

‘It’s a pity Channel 4 cannot revive its Watercolour Challenge show.’

And Beyer ends his time as Mediawatch UK director with the most pointless and inane statement he’s ever made.

“One viewer who was in her sick bed watching daytime TV, said: ‘It nearly gave me a relapse. It was adult viewing, not for screening in the middle of the day.’”

Yee gads! She must really be sick that she can nearly be given a relapse by the sight of a naked human body. What does she have?

Lol!

As usual with these things the Daily Mail take one outraged comment from one viewer and try to make out as if hordes of viewers are up in arms with moral outrage!

Mediasnoops notes that the majority of readers’ comments on the Daily Mail website are in favour of the nude life drawing on daytime TV and lots of readers are saying that people should get a life and stop complaining.

We wonder how in touch with their readers the Daily Mail really are.

Two Feet In The Grave and one moan from Mediawatch UK

“The hour-long special includes footage of funerals and corpses in mortuaries. It is also thought to include photos of the dead taken by their relatives as keepsakes – a ghoulish practice considered normal by the Victorians.”

That’s just what The Sun is telling us. The programme hasen’t been aired yet but as per usual Mediawatch UK are rushing to condem.

Beyer’s depature and the lack of a replacement rent-a-quote explains the abscence of a spokesperson.

From The Sun: 

Two feet in the grave
One Foot in the Grave star Richard Wilson is to present a controversial documentary about DEATH.  Richard, 72 – who played legendary moaner Victor Meldrew – was hired by the BBC for a show investigating how people cope with bereavement.  The hour-long special includes footage of funerals and corpses in mortuaries. It is also thought to include photos of the dead taken by their relatives as keepsakes – a ghoulish practice considered normal by the Victorians.  mediawatch-uk branded the show “distasteful” and said the choice of host was inappropriate.  But Beeb chiefs insist the documentary – called Two Feet in the Grave – is “a sensitive exploration of attitudes towards death”.
The Sun 6/7/2009

“mediawatch-uk branded the show “distasteful” and said the choice of host was inappropriate.”

The show hasen’t even been made! But Mediawatch UK can brand it “distaseful”. They look into their crystal ball and see TV shows even before they have been made. Woooooooooooooooooooooo! Spooky!

Following in Beyer’s footsteps: 5 steps to being Mediawatch UK boss

Well John C Beyer has stepped down as director of everyone’s favourite self appointed moral guardians Mediawatch UK.

Now the self proclaimed crusaders against violence, sex and swearing on our airwaves and DVD players will be thinking about who should take his place.

Mediasnoops’ money is on David Turtle who often popped up as a replacement rent-a-quote for the tabloids whenever Beyer was unavaliable.

Or maybe either Miranda Suit or Pippa Smith who head up Mediawatch UK’s sister group Mediamarch.

Whoever takes over in the hot seat will need to follow these five steps to make sure they follow in Beyer’s footsteps……

1.Base all your views not on fact but on what you hear from Daily Mail journalists who are ringing you up looking for an outraged quote to make a story look more interesting.

2.Always react to what the tabloid press tell you about the latest violence/sex filled TV show/film/video game with total and utter outrage and condemnation without seeing said violence/sex filled TV show/film/video game yourself. Then without seeing said violence/sex filed TV/film/video game yourself demand that it be banned.

3.Always believe everything tabloid journalists tell you without checking it for yourself.

4.Demand that people who view adult consensual sexual entertainment are locked up at her Majesty’s pleasure for three years not because there is any actual evidence that such entertainment is harmful but because you find it disgusting and don’t think people should be allowed to look at it.

5.Have agenda against both the BBFC, which is allowing endless amounts of violent, sexually explicit pornographic filth (add on: always base your views on violent sexually explicit films on Christopher Tookey’s reviews in the Daily Mail) to be released and seen by children and the BBC which is run by lefty secular liberals who want to destroy the very moral fabric of our great Christian country.

Mediawatch UK’s summer briefs

Here’s Mediawatch UK’s summer newsbrief:

http://www.mediawatchuk.org.uk/images/stories/newsbrief_summer2009.pdf

Apart from Beyer announcing his retirement as director highlights include a report by a brave soul who’s on a one man campaign to put an end to internet porn.

After over hearing two teenagers talking about what they been looking
at on the internet the interepid warriror decided to search out porn websites and what he saw disgusted him. He then went and wrote to all the heads of the governments of the countries which supply the porn sites (including Australia, USA, Great Britain, China, Russia and Poland..WOAH!!!) and wrote to his local MP and MEP and reports that he got some very positive results.

He tells us that he has reviewed what his happening on the porn sites and has found that a number of them are longer accesible which he says is “fantastic news”.

Presuambly he believes that the heads of all those countries plus his local MP and MEP headed his calls and shut down those websites that he found so utterly disgusting. Yeah as if the heads of some of the world’s most powerful countries would close down internet porn sites just because some self appointed filth seeking moral guardian has written to them to vent his disgust. What an elevated sense of self importance these doo gooders have.

Essensially what this guy has done is gone onto the internet to search for porn websites, been disgusted by them and lobbied government leaders and his local MP to shut the sites down just because he found them disgusting. Oh great!

He tells us not to forgot there are hundred of other sites and if everyone did as he has done we can rid the world of this “cyber evil”.

Oh how great if everyone did as this self appointed crusader against net porn. Go onto the internet to seek out vile disgusting filth and then try to stop everyone else from looking at. Oh great indeed……NOT!
Then there’s a report on a sexually violent DVD which the BBFC has rejected for classification. Mediawatch UK applaud the decision (yes yes the BBFC’s only any good when it’s banning films Mediawatch UK dissaprove of) but asks the question “What sort of people want to make such a film and what sort of people want to watch it?” 

What sort of people want to watch it? People who should be locked up for three years eh?

An an end of an era as Beyer retires

Mediasnoops is sure that Mediawatch UK will find someone fitting to take over
leading the crusade to try and stop people watching things that they don’t like.

From the Melon Farmers:

Bye Bye Beyer Goodbye…

John Beyer steps down from Mediawatch-UK

A voice whingeing in
the wilderness

John Beyer has announced his retirement from Mediawatch-UK

“The many hundreds of responses from members to the news that I have decided to
retire from mediawatch-uk after 33 years were over whelming and very humbling.”
Speaking at the Annual General meeting in May, John Beyer said:

“There were just so many letters and messages that it was impossible to reply to
each one personally. The gifts that so many people sent were very generous and
the messages that accompanied some of them were very touching and will always be
greatly treasured. Above all, these showed that mediawatch-uk is rather like an
extended family with a unity of purpose that binds us all together.”

In his reflection on his time with mediawatch-uk John said: “The challenges now
are far greater than when Mary Whitehouse pioneered the campaign in the 1960s.
In those days there were just two TV channels and a handful of radio stations.
There was no internet, no computer games, no satellite or cable TV and video
recorders were confined to the TV studios.

The greatest difference then, however, is that there was a much stronger public
consensus of what was acceptable on TV and what was not. There was greater
certainty about what was good or bad taste and what was decent or indecent.
Sadly, all that has changed and broadcasting and film have contributed
significantly to the erosion of that consensus and the fragmenting of values.

“The ongoing challenge for everyone involved is to reverse the
responsibility-free attitudes and behaviour of the permissive 60s, which,
combined with a political ideology, had a huge impact on the social, moral and
economic development our society and culture. I am confident that mediawatch-uk
is up to the challenge. Please continue to support the new team”.

Goodbye Johnny Boy it’s been a blast! We’ll miss your rent-a-quotes of outrage in
the Daily Mail!

Hopefully your replacement will give us as much of a good laugh as you have
done.

We are sure he or she will remember to keep campaigining for those dirty filthy
porn viewers to be locked up for three years.

Bye bye Beyer!

Glasgow life Life Of Brian ban….Green not pleased

Christians who called for The Life Of Brian to be banned when it was first released were aghast that people were being allowed to watch things that mocked Jesus and Christianity. The same is true today.

From the Scotsman courtesy of the Melon Farmers:

New lease of Life for Brian as Glasgow ends film ban after 29 years

01 July 2009
By BRIAN FERGUSON
FOR a city famed worldwide for the sense of humour of its citizens, it was always a glaring contradiction.

For almost 30 years, one of the classic comedy films has been unofficially “banned” in Glasgow, after it was branded blasphemous by councillors on its release.

Monty Python’s Life of Brian will finally get a screening after it was granted a licence by the city council yesterday – the last of 39 across the UK that imposed the initial ban.

The stars of the film, including Michael Palin, John Cleese and Terry Jones, will be invited to a special screening at the Glasgow Film Theatre in September.

In sharp contrast to the furore of 29 years ago, the city council’s licensing committee did not receive a single objection to the application heard yesterday.

The move was welcomed by film experts for bringing an end to a cinematic “anachronism”.

But Christian groups said the decision to grant the film a 15 certificate was a reflection of declining standards in society, and called it a “sad day”. The Biblical satire, about a Jewish man accidentally mistaken for the Messiah and crucified, was turned down for an AA certificate – the equivalent of the current 15 rating – in February 1980.

Dozens of protesters gathered outside a Sauchiehall Street cinema, where councillors were attending a private screening.

The late Pastor Jack Glass, who spearheaded the protest, famously said the film “crucified Christ afresh” and thrust three nails at the committee chairman, John Chatham. However, the pastor admitted he had not seen the film and was basing his views on a script.

Last night, a former lord provost, Michael Kelly, one of those who sat on the committee, but who voted in favour of it being given a licence, said councillors were “scandalised” after viewing the film.

“I distinctly remember a lot of outrage, mainly because most councillors on the committee were Catholic in those days,” he said.

“They were genuinely shocked, but I was completely against any form of censorship and voted for it to be shown.

“I remember seeing it a few years later when I was on a skiing holiday in France. It was shown in English with French subtitles. It was hilarious.”

Both the city council and officials at the GFT, which is planning a gala screening in its 400-capacity main auditorium, insisted they had no record of any previous attempt to secure a licence for the film.

Councillor Willie O’Rourke, the vice-convener of the licensing committee, said: “This is the first application we’ve received to show Monty Python’s Life of Brian since the first request in 1980. The world, and people’s attitudes, have moved on in the past 30 years, so I believe the committee made the right decision.”

Allison Gardner, head of cinemas at the GFT, said: “The film has been widely available to the general public on video and DVD and has been screened on terrestrial television. None of these events has caused widespread offence, or in any way destroyed the sanctity of the Church or undermined its place in our wider society.

“I believe the film is seen as an affectionate and inspired depiction of the life of Jesus from a perspective that is humorous, rather than blasphemous.”

But Stephen Green, director of the radical campaign group Christian Voice, which has organised protests against shows such as Jerry Springer: The Opera, said: “We know Glasgow was the last place in the country to keep the ban in place, as the only other area, Aberystwyth, had a screening a couple of months ago. It is a bit of a shame it’s now been granted a licence in Glasgow, but it shows how much we have let standards slip.”

But Richard Mowe, a film critic and festival organiser, said:

“It certainly does not even compare with some of the extreme films that are granted cinema licences these days.”

“It is a bit of a shame it’s now been granted a licence in Glasgow, but it shows how much we have let standards slip.”

Green believes that we have let standards slip because we allow any kind of criticism of Christanity at all. Best to get back to the good old days when we burned heretics at the steak! Those were the days when standards were upheld eh!

When The Life Of Brian came out is wasen’t enough for Christians who objected to it to just not go and see it. They were aghast that other people were being allowed to watch something that made fun of their beliefs and wanted them stopped from watching it.

Today nutters like Stephen Green cannot just not watch things which offend their beliefs. They have to try and stop everyone else from watching them too.

It goes on.

ASA ban ice cream ad after just 10 complaints

The ASA may as well make it part of their code that know adverts ever takes risks and all ads must become totally humourless just like the ASA.

From the Telegraph:

Gelato Italiano ice-cream advert banned over seductive nun

An ice cream advert for Gelato Italiano which showed a priest and a nun in a ’seductive pose’ was banned after readers complained that it was offensive.

 

01 Jul 2009

Ten people complained to advertising watchdogs that the ad was offensive to demeaning towards people who serve the church Photo: IMAGES INTERNATIONAL

Antonio Federici said the promotional material, which appeared in two magazines, was intended to portray the “forbidden Italian temptations” that its Gelato Italiano ice cream represented.

It said the advert was intended as a “light-hearted, tongue-in-cheek portrayal”.

But 10 people complained to the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) saying that the suggestion of a kiss between a priest and a nun was offensive. They said it was demeaning to people who followed a “religious vocation”.

The ASA announced on Wednesday that the complaints had been upheld and banned the advert from future use.

“The ad played on the theme of giving into temptation but stopped short of showing the nun and priest kissing,” the ASA said.

“The ad stated ‘kiss temptation’ and the two were portrayed in a seductive pose, as if they were about to kiss passionately.

“We considered that the portrayal of the priest and nun in a sexualised manner – and the implication that they were considering whether or not to give in to temptation – was likely to cause serious offence to some readers.”

Antonio Federici had argued that there was nothing in the advert, which appeared in the Delicious Magazine and Sainsbury’s Magazine, that would cause “serious or widespread offence”.

Seven Squared Publishing, who published the titles, said they were aimed at a target audience aged between 25 and 55.

The publishers told the ASA that they felt the material was unlikely to offend their readers but have apologised and said they would not re-use it.

“Antonio Federici had argued that there was nothing in the advert, which appeared in the Delicious Magazine and Sainsbury’s Magazine, that would cause “serious or widespread offence”.”

But just 10 offended people is serious and widespread offence in the eyes of the ASA.

The ASA is really going all out to please middle England by banning every ad that could be the slightest bit objectionable.

 

 

 

 

Brown’s Manifesto….Games age ratings and more censorship

The Daily Mirror reports on Gordon Brown’s Labour manifesto for next year’s likely General Election and details his plans for video games…..

Video games

Compulsory age ratings will be given to all video games.

The voluntary system will be replaced by a “new and strengthened system of statutory age ratings”, said the Prime Minister.

There has been increasing concern among MPs at the way the British Board of Film Classification rates games.

Critics say that, in recent years, it has adopted a perilous policy of allow-ing practically anything to be seen by adults – and offensive material to be shown to children.

A review of the impact of violent films and games on children was headed by TV psychologist Dr Tanya Byron.

It is also expected that the public will be given new rights to appeal against the rulings of the BBFC.

“Critics say that, in recent years, it has adopted a perilous policy of allow-ing practically anything to be seen by adults.”

Which goes to show that calls to increase regulation of video games and films is less to do with protecting children from potentially harmful material and more to do with stopping adults seeing things that the self appointed moral guardians don’t think adults should be allowed to see.

“It is also expected that the public will be given new rights to appeal against the rulings of the BBFC.”

But only the rights to appeal against rulings of the BBFC that allow films for release. The public won’t be given the right to appeal against rulings that ban films.
In esscence this would allow some members of the public the ability to dictate what other members of the public can and cannot see.

Mediasnoops backs new age ratings which will give parents the right information as to the content of video games so they can make (horror of horror for the moral guardians) informed decisions over what games to buy for their kids.

Of course the moral guardians won’t be happy until legislaiton is brought in that bans games they dissaprove of.

Inglorious Moral Deceny Crusaders

http://www.melonfarmers.co.uk/nwb.htm#MediawatchUK_3531

Very funny!

Fat stars blame bollox

What a wonderful message to send out to young kids who are worried about their weight…….

If you are fat you shouldn’t be able to be famous!

And we wonder why so many teenagers are starving themselves to be thin!

From The Daily Mail:

How chubby stars ‘are feeding the obesity epidemic’… by proving it is possible to be fat AND famous

By Fiona Macrae
 29th June 2009

 

Role models: James Corden and Ruth Jones are of generous proportions

Chubby celebrities are stoking the obesity crisis by proving it is possible to be fat and famous, doctors have warned.

Michael McMahon, an obesity expert and surgeon, said that super-skinny stars have long been blamed for fuelling anorexia and the reverse is true too.

The high profile of larger stars such as TV presenter Eamonn Holmes, comedian Johnny Vegas and singer Beth Ditto has shown that being plump is no barrier to success.

James Corden and Ruth Jones, of award-winning sitcom Gavin and Stacey, are also of generous proportions.

Professor McMahon, of the Nuffield Health private healthcare chain, said: ‘The increasing profile of larger celebrities means that being overweight is now perceived as being ‘normal’ in the eyes of the public.

‘We talk about the dangers of skinny media images but the problem actually swings both ways.’

Obesity cuts life expectancy by up to ten years and raises the risk of a host of health problems including diabetes, heart disease, infertility and some cancers.

There is increasing concern that bulging waistlines are being accepted as the norm.

A study published in the British Medical Journal last year found that obesity levels had doubled in an eight-year period but fewer people thought their weight was a concern.

Parents of overweight children are also in denial, with many dismissing dangerous levels of plumpness as ‘puppy fat’.

And research by Nuffield Health has shown that one in 12 British adults is so overweight that they could qualify for obesity surgery.

The group asked more than 2,000 men and women about their height and weight and used the answers to work out each person’s body mass index.

Plump: Beth Ditto proves that being overweight is no barrier for success

A BMI below 18.5 is regarded as underweight, above 25 is overweight and above 30 is regarded as obese.

Guidelines state that gastric bands should be considered for those with a BMI of 35 who have other health problems such as high blood pressure or diabetes and fitted in those with BMIs of 40 even if they don’t have other symptoms.

One in 12 of those surveyed had a BMI of 35 or above – potentially making them eligible for gastric band surgery.

This suggests that across Britain, up to 3.6million men and women are so fat that going under the knife is the best option.

Professor McMahon said: ‘If people continue to turn a blind eye to their weight problems, they will see their life expectancy considerably shortened.

‘The new research suggests that if the rise in obesity continues at this rate, the majority of the British population could be obese before the turn of the century.

‘Clearly this is a situation that cannot be allowed to happen.’

“Michael McMahon, an obesity expert and surgeon, said that super-skinny stars have long been blamed for fuelling anorexia and the reverse is true too. “

The suggestion by an obsesity expert that someone cannot be fat and famous will do more to fuel anorexia than super-skinny stars.

And that is what’s being suggested here. Overweight people should be ostracised from society and not seen on TV.

Would we be saying the same thing about other so called “undesirable” groups?

Maybe Christian nutters will start coming out and saying that gay celebrities is turning kids into homosexuals!

“The increasing profile of larger celebrities means that being overweight is now perceived as being ‘normal’ in the eyes of the public.”

No it means that society does not discriminate against people and ostracise them just because of what they look like or what lifestyles they lead.

Overweight people seem to be fair game! We can attack them and make them out to be terrible people. We do not do this with any other social group and quite rightly.

Young people today face enough confusion when it comes to issues over their weight without some self appointed health guardian telling them that being fat should stop them from being famous.

If young girls start starving themselves because they think they can’t be famous if they are a bit paunchy then this so called “expert” might want to consider where the blame for eating disorder lies.

Maybe it’s the self appointed health police who are fueling these health problems amongst youngsters.