Beyer “wades in” as Bono swearing gets six complaints

The Daily Mail says it themselves. Beyer wades in! He always wades in whenever he gets a sniff of a chance at self promotion and promotion of his ailing pressure group.

Not only is this another chance for the Daily Mail/Mediawatch UK crowd to take a pop at the BBC over swearing but it’s a chance to attack them for apparently giving U2 lots of free publicity.

But hang on isn’t the Daily Mail giving U2 more free publicity by trying to whip up a storm over Bono swearing?

Go figure!

From the Daily Mail courtesy of the Melon Farmers:

U2 singer Bono apologises after foul-mouthed insult of Coldplay’s Chris Martin

By Paul Revoir and Simon Cable
Last updated at 10:56 PM on 27th February 2009

 

 

Pop star Bono made a foul-mouthed outburst on BBC radio minutes after the broadcaster kicked off a controversial day-long promotion of his band U2.

The corporation was forced to issue a humiliating on-air apology this morning after the Irish singer swore during a live morning show.

It comes amid a storm of controversy over the BBC’s decision to hand over its airwaves to the Irish band just days before the group’s album is released. One critic said they had been handed a million pounds’ worth of free publicity.

Looking down on the fans: Bono performs from the balcony outside Bush House, a free concert put on as part of the band’s tie-in with the BBC

Bono’s appearance was part of a series of special shows and appearances this week, just days ahead of the band’s new music release. These included a rooftop performance last night at Bush House, which attracted hundreds of fans

Critics said the BBC was acting like a publicity machine for the band.

There have been relentless trailers in recent days for promotion of the band, under the slogan ‘U2=BBC’.

The broadcaster has even set up a dedicated part of its website offering tickets to appearances and links to the band’s official site.

Sorry: Bono, pictured leaving the Radio 1 studios today, has apologised for swearing on live radio

Tory MP Nigel Evans, who sits on the culture, media and sport select committee, said it was ‘the sort of publicity money can’t buy’.

The band were less than two minutes into an interview with Radio 1 DJ Jo Whiley when Bono called Coldplay star Chris Martin ‘a w*****’.

A shocked Miss Whiley immediately interrupted the star to demand an apology for the gaffe which was being broadcast at 11.45am.

But despite a series of frantic apologies from the DJ, the BBC uploaded the interview onto it’s iPlayer website without editing the offending material.

Rooftop concert: U2 perform on the top of Bush House as the fans mass below

The incident occurred after Whiley played a Coldplay track ahead of the band’s arrival in the studio.

She asked Bono if he thought that Martin – the husband of actress Gwyneth Paltrow – was as talented as Paul McCartney.

Bono replied: ‘I think he’s that good a melodist, but he’s a w*****.’

Whiley then cut the star off mid way through his answer saying: ‘Would you like to apologise for what you’ve just said live on my show?’

Rivalry: Bono labelled Chris a ‘w**ker’ live on Radio 1

Bono joked: ‘I’m a reformed character, I don’t do that any more.’ Whiley retorted: ‘You’re not showing any signs of being reformed.’

The Irish singer then attempted to play down his comments, but ended up insulting the Coldplay singer again.

He said: ‘He’s [Martin] obviously a completely dysfunctional character and a cretin but he happens to be a great melodist and up there with Ray Davis, Noel Gallagher and Paul McCartney.’

An embarrassed Whiley was then forced to make an apology herself and added: ‘I’m sorry if anyone is listening at the moment who were offended by the words that Bono said. I will apologise on his behalf.’

Bono then added: ‘I’m sorry, it’s early.’

He later backtracked on his comments in the interview saying: ‘I think they [Coldplay] are a great band and actually, it turns out he’s a great soul as well.

‘Sorry about that. I was just joking entirely.’

However, there appeared to be no animosity between Bono and Chris Martin when they shared a stage in west London last week at a charity concert after the Brit Awards.

U2’s comeback has been touted in the music press as an attempt to win back their ‘biggest band in the world’ tag. Coldplay’s last album Viva La Vida has sold seven million copies world-wide.

U2’s new album No Line On The Horizon will be released on March 2.

Defying the cold: The fans packed in to watch the free performance

 

There are several appearances and shows across BBC1, BBC2, Radio 1, Radio 2 and Radio 4 featuring or about U2.

This included the ‘Live Lounge’ session on Jo Whiley’s Radio 1 show and an interview on Chris Evans’s Radio 2 show.

There was also a special of BBC2’s The Culture Show tonight dedicated to the band and a performance on Jonathan Ross’s BBC1 chat show.

The group also appeared on Zane Lowe’s Radio 1 show this week and will also appear on Radio 4 arts programme Front Row.

On a similarly high note Bono told Jonathan Ross last night the meaning behind new single Get On Your Boots was east African slang for ‘use a condom’.

Bird’s eye view: U2 took inspiration from the Beatles’ famous rooftop performance

 

The BBC said they had received six complaints from listeners after the outburst.

Tory MP and broadcaster Ann Widdecombe also hit out at the BBC for failing to learn from past mistakes, including the Andrew Sachs fiasco.

She told the Daily Mail: ‘If the BBC are really serious about trying to clean up their act then this not the way to go about doing it.

‘It just shows complete contempt for the public.’

John Beyer, director of Mediawatch UK, waded into the row and accused the corporation of failing to warn its guests about the use of bad language. 

He said: ‘They should have edited the interview they put online. This type of language is not acceptable. The public opinion on this is clear and most people do not want to hear it.

‘The BBC need to be able to properly advise the interviewees about the use of  bad language and make sure it is not offensive on-air. If the artists can’t accept this they should not be invited back again.’

A BBC spokesman said of the radio gaffe: ‘An on-air apology was made immediately for the language used during this live broadcast. We apologise for any offence caused.’

The spokesman said all the shows had to conform to editorial guidelines on justification and undue prominence.

Not only is this another chance for the Daily Mail crowd to have a pop at the BBC about swearing but it’s also a chance to accuse them of giving a pop star free publicity.

The Daily Mail says it themselves…Beyer wades in.He always wades in when he gets a sniff of self promotion and a chance to promote his ailing pressure group.

 ”They should have edited the interview they put online. This type of language is not acceptable. The public opinion on this is clear and most people do not want to hear it.”

But nobody knows whether the complaints were made after it went out on air or after people saw it online.

Most people? Just six people complained Johnny Boy!

“Tory MP and broadcaster Ann Widdecombe also hit out at the BBC for failing to learn from past mistakes, including the Andrew Sachs fiasco.”

The Daily Mail trying to revive the political carer of Ann Widecombe again we see!

‘It just shows complete contempt for the public.’

Or contempt for Tory voters and middle England.

Lol!

“‘An on-air apology was made immediately for the language used during this live broadcast. We apologise for any offence caused.”

Not enough! We need public floggings and heads on the gallows! The Daily Mail and their readers demand it!

Six people complained.

The BBC apologised.

It’s just the Daily Mail trying to kick up a fuss and Beyer jumping on a bandwagon for his own ends yet again!

Parents “concerned” about video game content says BBFC survey

But it does not reveal that parents want certain games banned.

From the Telegraph courtesy of the Melon Farmers:

Survey reveals parents `concerned’ about content of video games

Almost three quarters of British parents are concerned about the
content of video games, and want to see the industry independently
regulated, according to new research from the British Board of Film
Classification (BBFC).

By Claudine Beaumont

Almost three quarters of British parents are concerned about the
content of video games, and want to see the industry independently
regulated, according to new research.

Nearly 80 per cent of those surveyed said they believed video games
could affect the behaviour of some children, while 77 per cent said
that game ratings should reflect the concerns of British parents.

The survey, which was carried out by YouGov on behalf of the British
Board of Film Classification (BBFC), the body responsible for
granting age certificates to films and some video games, questioned
2,143 adults.

It comes as the Government considers the findings of the Byron
Review, a paper written by parenting expert and psychologist, Tanya
Byron, into the steps that need to be taken to safeguard children in
the digital age.

Many MPs and family groups have warned that violent video games can
have a detrimental impact on child development and behaviour. In
2007, the British Board of Film Classification failed in its efforts
to ban Manhunt 2, a game in which players must escape an asylum
using whatever weapons they can find. Following repeated appeals by
the game’s publishers, Manhunt 2 was eventually granted an 18 age
certificate.

The study also found that 82 per cent of parents believed it would
be helpful if video games used the same age ratings systems as films
and DVDs. At present, there are two systems of game rating in
Britain: the compulsory one run by the British Board of Film
Classification and the voluntary one run by the Pan European Games
Information body, known as PEGI.

Under current legislation, all video games are exempt from
classification except for those that contain gross violence, sexual
activity, or material that could be useful in the commission of a
crime. If a game breaches any of these criteria, it must be granted
an age certificate by the BBFC before it can be released.

PEGI’s ratings are designed primarily to educate parents about the
content of a game. It has its own age recommendations (3+, 7+, 12+,
16+ and 18+) as well as a series of symbols to depict certain
features of a game, such as violence, drug abuse, discrimination,
gambling, or sexual behaviour.

The BBFC has a panel that plays each game before giving it an age
certificate; the PEGI system relies on a questionnaire answered by
the game’s publisher.

The Byron Review recommends that video games designed for people
aged 12 and over, regardless of content, should be reviewed by the
BBFC for classification prior to release.

“This poll clearly shows parents support a regulatory system for
games that is independent of the industry and UK based, reflecting
UK sensibilities and sensitivities,” said David Cooke, director of
the BBFC said. “The BBFC has been classifying games for over 20
years and our decisions reflect the views of the public. Our
classification systems and symbols are known and trusted by the
public and in a converging media world they want to know what their
children are playing as well as watching.”

But publishers claim the PEGI system, backed by all the major games
makers, provides a better insight into the precise content of a game
than a simple age certificate. “The BBFC is set up to rate films,
and it takes that approach for games when a different approach is
required,” said Matt Lambert, director of corporate affairs at
Microsoft. “[PEGI] is more sensible, and it also has a European
aspect to it.”

Professor Byron said that one possible compromise could be to
introduce PEGI-style advisory symbols alongside the more familiar
age certificates used by the BBFC.

Mike Rawlinson, director-general of Elspa, the body that represents
the video games industry, said he shared the BBFC’s concerns about
protecting children.

“UK parents need a system for videogames age classification that is
built with the protection of the new generation of children in mind,
and as such, delivers a robust system that works as well for games
bought in-store as played online.

“Gamers no longer just play with their mates, they also play online,
and we need a system that reflects this situation and protects their
interests. The independently administered PEGI system is the right
solution for child safety.”
“Many MPs and family groups have warned that violent video games can
have a detrimental impact on child development and behaviour.”

And those MPs and family groups have been lobbying for total bans on
violent video games and not just age ratings.

“Nearly 80 per cent of those surveyed said they believed video games
could affect the behaviour of some children, while 77 per cent said
that game ratings should reflect the concerns of British parents.”

But there is nothing that says parents want regulators to deny
classification to some video games and ban their release altogether.

So the moral guardians can’t get too excited.

Mediasnoops believes in a video game regulatory system where there is a balance between protecting children from inappropriate games and preserving adult games consumers freedom of choice.

Vaz finds a game where players can rape

Mediasnoops challenged to find one when he made his claim a while back that video game players can “rape” women in their sick and violent games.

Maybe he took up that challenge because he’s found one!

From the Melon Farmers:

Simulated Politicians…
 
Keith Vaz bangs on about RapeLay in an EDM

See article from edmi.parliament.uk
 
Games nutter MP Keith Vaz has decided to bang on about the game RapeLay which was withdrawn from US Amazon as soon as they realised it was controversial.

EDM 818 RapeLay Video Game by Keith Vaz

That this House is appalled that a video game that simulates rape has been readily available for sale on the internet; warmly welcomes Amazon’s decision to withdraw the web page for the Japanese video game Rapelay; firmly believes that video games featuring high levels of violence can be detrimental to those playing them; notes that every year an estimated three million women experience rape, domestic violence, stalking or another form of abuse; and calls on the Government to ban such games from sale in the UK, including through online retailers.

Signed by

Lynne Jones, Lee Scott, Andrew Dismore, Peter Bottomley, David Drew, Bob Russell, Joan Humble, David Lepper, Martin Caton, Jeremy Corbyn, Mark Durkan, Mike Hancock, David Taylor, Alan Simpson, Kelvin Hopkins, Colin Breed, Andrew George, Rudi Vis.
“firmly believes that video games featuring high levels of violence can be detrimental to those playing them; notes that every year an estimated three million women experience rape, domestic violence, stalking or another form of abuse; and calls on the Government to ban such games from sale in the UK, including through online retailers.”

Ban all violent video games and not just games where players can “rape” then!

This online game will give anti-violent video games crusaders like Kieth Vaz to further persue their goal of a total ban on all violent games.

Westboro baptist nutters banned from UK

We’ve picked up on this because it comes on the back of the Geert Wilders ban.

Letting these total nutters in to the UK would give gay rights groups the chance to launch a counter protest against them.

It would also give us a chance to laugh at them!

From Mediawatchwatch:

“Westies” are the latest to be banned from UK

February 19th, 2009 by Monitor <!– in censorship –>

The utterly witless Home Secretary Jacqui Smith has once again stepped in to stop “extremists” from entering the UK. This time it is the father and daughter combo from the hateful-but-hilarious Westboro Baptist Church – the homo-sex obsessed clan of Fred Phelps who like to picket funerals of US soldiers killed in action.

How the hell are we supposed to make fun of them if they aren’t allowed into the country?

Fun with Fred Phelps: The best way to deal with the Westboro Baptist Church

 

The Westies had threatened to picket Queen Mary’s College in Basingstoke for staging The Laramie Project, a play about the murder of Matthew Shepard.

An idiot from the Home Office said

Both these individuals have engaged in unacceptable behaviour by inciting hatred against a number of communities.

The government has made it clear it opposes extremism in all its forms.

We will continue to stop those who want to spread extremism, hatred and violent messages in our communities from coming to our country.

The exclusions policy is targeted at all those who seek to stir up tension and provoke others to violence regardless of their origins and beliefs.

The government exposes extremism in all its forms – except for extreme stupidity, apparently. The WBC often threaten to travel abroad with their protests, but never deliver. All the government have succeeded in doing – yet again – is to give idiots a lot of free publicity and feed the persecution complexes which they believe vindicates them.

We’ve reported on the Westboro “God hates fags” Baptist nutters before, when they protested at Heath Ledger’s funeral and about their God Hates Hollywood campaign.

Nobody can or should take them seriously. The wife and mother of the family smiles like the fucking Joker everytime she talks and it looks like she’s joking.

They’ve been in a documentary with Louis Therox and appeared on the Jeremy Kyle Show. A lot of people in this country will be familiar with them and how truley fucked up in the head they are.

Mediasnoops says let them in so they can be subject to the public ridicule they deserve!

 

Beyer all smug as Ofcom fines soar

Ofcom are only slapping broadcasters with huge fines to keep the right-wing Tory tabloid press quiet in the wake of the Ross/Brand/Sachs scandel.

Don’t go assuming they’re suddenly coming round to your way of thinking Johnny Boy!

From Mediawatch UK:

Swearing, sex and phone-in scams see Ofcom fines soar by 1,000 per cent

Figures obtained by the Conservatives show that the level of penalties issued by the broadcasting watchdog since its establishment increased from £452,500 in 2004 to a record £4.7 million last year.  Fines were handed out in to mainstream broadcasters such as the BBC and ITV, as well as cable channels including Television X and MTV.   They were issued for offences such as running fake phone-in competitions and screening sexually explicit material and offensive language before the watershed.  

The revelations come amid growing concern about standards in the wake of the Jonathan Ross scandal and criticism of stars such as Gordon Ramsay, the television chef who is known for his bad language.  Last month, Ofcom received a number of complaints after an episode of one of his programmes, Gordon’s Great British Nightmares, contained 312 swear words in 103 minutes.  

Jeremy Hunt, the shadow culture secretary, who released the figures, said: “These figures suggest either that standards are slipping, or more worryingly that broadcasters are simply ignoring fines and treating them as a cost of being in business.  You don’t have to be Mary Whitehouse to worry about the increase in swearing on TV, but these fines are for a much wider range of offences.  All broadcasters have a duty to act more responsibly and cut down on these serious breaches of the broadcasting code.” 

John Beyer, director of mediawatch-uk, said: “Television channels and programme commissioners are not as fully acquainted with the broadcasting code as they should be and they are are out of touch with the public mood about swearing.  Ofcom should be advising broadcasters about what is acceptable and what is not.  Numerous opinion polls show that people say there is too much violence, bad language and nudity in television programmes.”

Daily Telegraph 18/2/2009

“Ofcom should be advising broadcasters about what is acceptable and what is not.”

Ofcom should be advising broadcasters about what Mediawatch UK and Daily Mail reading Tory voters think is acceptable and what is not.

Yeah right!

“and they are are out of touch with the public mood about swearing.”

And they are out of touch with middle England’s view about swearing.

We know!

Jade “making money out of her own death” bother Beyer

She can do what she likes with her own death! Is Beyer now the self appointed moral guardian of what people should and should not be allowed to do when they die?

News reports that Jade Goody only has weeks to live have made for massive headlines and endless publicity for the former Big Brother contestant.

Beyer’s certainly not shy of using that publicity for his reasons.

From Mediawatch UK:

Is Jade Right to Make Money From Her Own Death?
What is certain is that the passing of 27 year old Jade Goody will be very public.  She has already considered the possibility that her last dying seconds might be filmed.  “I’ve lived in front of the cameras.  And maybe I’ll die in front of them“, she says.  “I know some people don’t like what I’m doing but at this point I really don’t care what other people think.”

John Beyer, director of mediawatch-uk, said: ‘She’s being helped along by Max Clifford and she says this is something she wants to do.  But my feeling is whether that’s something the viewers want to see.  That’s what people will be asking – do we really want to see Jade Goody dying on television? 

Everybody feels very sorry for her, and I am one of those people.  She is in a terrible situation.  But is it really going to be made any different by having it on television?  Is it really going to help her family if her dying is going to made into to some kind of ‘Big Brother’ thing?’ The answer, according to Clifford, is yes.

John Whittingdale, chairman of the Commons culture select committee, said broadcasters would need to handle her cancer battle ‘extremely sensitively’.  But the MP added: ‘There’s a possibility that if it is done in the right way it could increase people’s understanding of cancer and it could be a public benefit.’
Daily Mail 17/2/2009

“She’s being helped along by Max Clifford and she says this is something she wants to do. ”

But no doubt Beyer will be one of the people trying to stop her.

“But my feeling is whether that’s something the viewers want to see. ”

Who knows. Who really gives a fuck?

“That’s what people will be asking – do we really want to see Jade Goody dying on television? ”

We’ll find out Johnny Boy, we’ll find out.

Personally we’d rather see someone deserving of death dying on TV. Someone like Myra Hindley or Ian Huntley!

Women’s rights MEP exploits “sexist” breats surgery ad protest

This protest against breast enlargement ads on London Underground (by a group of feminist protestors who want to get rid of adverts they don’t like) has been jumped on by an MEP to further her own agenda.

From the Daily Mail:

Facebook protest group targets ’sexist’ breast surgery adverts

By Daily Mail Reporter
Last updated at 10:57 AM on 17th February 2009

 

 

Customer: Clare Thornton went from a 34B to a 34DD

Cosmetic surgery adverts are being defaced by campaigners who oppose the ’sexist’ portrayal of women.

Posters on the London Underground featuring Clare Thornton, 27, showing her breast enlargement, have been plastered with abusive stickers over the past two weeks.

The words ’sexist s**t’ were stuck next to a quote from Ms Thornton saying that going from a 34B to a 34DD was “the best decision I ever made!’

A 1,000-strong protest group on Facebook – called Somewhat Strident But Who Cares – features photos of vandalised Harley Medical Group adverts.

Cambridge graduate Nadia Kamil, 24, uploaded a shot of a poster at a London station, featuring a different model, with the words ‘Everyone is beautiful already’ scrawled on it in red.

In the comment section Louise Rae wrote: ‘High fives to the anonymous vandal (not that I condone vandalism, of course – it’s illegal).’

Brendan Dodds, who works at Ernst & Young, added: ‘I’m happy to condone illegal vandalism when the victim is Harley Medical Group. They can go to hell.’

The Facebook group has a link to a website from which slogans can be downloaded. The Strident group administrators say they do not condone vandalism. Ms Thornton, an estate agent from Leeds, paid £4,250 for the operation with Harley Medical Group.

She said: ‘I’ve got a thick skin and I’m proud of my new breasts but I’ve found this upsetting and rude. People should be allowed to choose what they spend their money on provided it’s legal, and what they look like. Others shouldn’t judge them.’

The Harley Medical Group said the stickers were ‘offensive’ and any that are found are removed. Members of the Facebook group would not comment.

But consultant plastic surgeon Douglas McGeorge, a past president of the British Association of Aesthetic Plastic Surgeons, said the ads risked ‘trivialising’ major surgery and ’should not prey on people’s worries about body image’.

 

London MEP Mary Honeyball, who is on the European Parliament’s women’s rights committee, criticised Transport for London for allowing ads that ’seek to undermine women’s confidence in their natural bodies. I am disgusted a government body is taking money to put up them up in view of vulnerable children and teenagers’.

The Advertising Standards Authority says communications should be ‘prepared with a sense of responsibility to consumers and to society’ and should encourage customers to take independent medical advice.

Transport for London did not comment on the criticism but said its contractor made ‘every effort to ensure stickers are removed’.

 

“London MEP Mary Honeyball, who is on the European Parliament’s women’s rights committee, criticised Transport for London for allowing ads that ’seek to undermine women’s confidence in their natural bodies.”

Undermine women’s confidence in their natural bodies….That’s a matter of personal opinion. Women should be able to make up their own minds about what these adverts say to them. This MEP clearly thinks she knows what is and is not good for women and that these ads should be outlawed for their own good.

“I am disgusted a government body is taking money to put up them up in view of vulnerable children and teenagers’. “

Why? These ads do not contain any sexual imagery or references or anything that could damage children and teenagers. 

Ms Honeyball probably believes it may cause teenage girls to want to have cosmetic surgery. But there is no evidence of that, that’s just her own view.

We’ve been on the Facebook site “Somewhat Strident But Who Cares” and there is talk of lobbying the Advertising Standards Authority, Transport For London and the office of the Mayor Of London obviously with the intention of getting those organisations to ban “sexist” adverts.

It’s clear they object to adverts for cosmetic surgery and ads which they believe to be presenting a “negative” image of women.

They are entitled to object and protest but they cannot expect the advertising regulatory bodies to ban these adverts or stop cosmetic surgery companies from advertising just because they disagree.

“Fouliest ever comedy” gets plug by Beyer

And it helps him plug his no swearing petition. Everyone’s a winner again!

From The Sunday Express:

IS THIS THE FOULEST ‘COMEDY’ EVER?

  

BLUNT SPEAKERS: Agents Sharon Horgan, Stephen Mangan and Anthony Head

Sunday February 15,2009

By David Stephenson and Neil Hughes

TV watchdog Ofcom is preparing for a wave of complaints this week over the shocking language used in a Channel 4 sitcom.

The c-word featured three times in the new comedy, Free Agents, first aired last Friday.

Actor Anthony Head plays the head of a talent agency in the six-part series, written by Chris Niel and described as a caustic romantic comedy.

Head, who became famous in the cult show Buffy The Vampire Slayer, said: “Free Agents is a very adult show but it is very ­funny, and I get to say words I’ve never said on ­television before. It’s very ­liberating.”

In the first few minutes, Head’s character Stephen Cauldwell said: “Good morning, my dear c***s.” The f-word also featured 22 times in the half-hour episode.

Mediawatch spokesman John Beyer said: “The obscene language in this programme is appalling by any standard. It shows a disregard of public concern that is completely unacceptable from a public service broadcaster.

“We invite readers to sign our Stop Swearing on TV online petition to the Prime Minister and we call again on the regulator, ­Ofcom, to rewrite the terms of its Broadcasting Code so that offensive language of this sort and ­intensity attracts substantial fin­ancial penalties.”

 An Ofcom spokesman said: “All TV stations must abide by our Broadcasting Code.”

The content of the show is bound to ­offend viewers, with the ­female lead played by Sharon Horgan, the sister of Irish rugby star Shane Horgan, “celebrating” the anniversary of her boyfriend’s death by sleeping with her colleague Alex (Stephen ­Mangan).

ITV has also recently received complaints about the drama Trial And Retribution, where the f-word was used frequently throughout an episode just two weeks ago ­despite boss Michael Grade’s ­attack on the “indiscriminate” use of bad language on the channel.

An ITV spokesman said: “We constantly keep public concerns about language under review and are mindful of the regulatory requirements to observe generally accepted standards. Language is always given careful consideration in terms of editorial context.”

“The obscene language in this programme is appalling by any standard. It shows a disregard of public concern that is completely unacceptable from a public service broadcaster.”

Or rather it shows a disregard of Mediawatch UK’s concern.

Yes we know.

 
“The content of the show is bound to ­offend viewers, with the ­female lead played by Sharon Horgan, the sister of Irish rugby star Shane Horgan, “celebrating” the anniversary of her boyfriend’s death by sleeping with her colleague Alex (Stephen ­Mangan).”

 

Which viewers is it bound to offend? Certainly not it’s target audience but definetly those viewers who seek to be offended.

 

Offended viewers can now be offended by this comedy even before it’s been aired.

 

 

 

 

Social workers seek Boys and Girls Alone ban

WOAHHHH there! If they were concerned about the children involved
being subjected to “psychological abuse” then they should have steped
in when the show was being made.
They can’t try and stop people from seeing it now!

From the Melon Farmers:

Social Censors…

Social Services consider legal action to ban Boys and Girls Alone

Based on article from dailymail.co.uk

Social services are considering legal action to stop the final two
parts of the Channel 4 documentary Boys And Girls Alone being aired.

The four-part series involves a group of children aged from eight to
11 who are left to their own devices in isolated cottages in Cornwall.

Two episodes of the programme have so far been broadcast and include
scenes of children fighting and crying.

Now Cornwall County Council’s assistant director for social care and
family services has written to both Channel 4 and Ofcom calling for
the final two programmes to be axed due to serious concerns of
emotional and psychological abuse.

Ruby Parry said her department would have intervened to safeguard the
children had they been made aware of their circumstances at the time
it was recorded. She also said the programme makers breached
performance licensing legislation as one of the children involved is
from Cornwall but a performing licence was not obtained from the
county council. Parry said as any application for a licence would
have resulted in detailed enquiries about the nature of the programme
she ‘can only surmise that this was a deliberate omission’.

Andrew Mackenzie, head of Factual Entertainment at Channel 4, denied
they had breached performance licensing legislation as the children
are not performing but are being observed.

Mackenzie said that Channel 4 regards children’s welfare ‘as our
first priority when filming’ and all programmes are made in
consultation with the relevant Ofcom guidelines. He said: All the
children were carefully chosen and screened by appropriately
qualified experts, including a clinical psychologist, to make sure
they could cope well with the experience of being in the series. The
response from the parents and children to the series has been a very
positive one. The mums and dads have learnt a huge amount about their
children from having the opportunity to see them in this way.
Furthermore many parents report more confident and able children
following this stimulating and happy experience.’

It’s obvious Cornwall County Council is trying to stop the show
airing to make it look as if they are doing something in order to
placate the outraged tabloid press.

Wilders banned from Britain

Geert Wilders’ views on Islam are certainly intolerant and xenophobic.

He is a right-wing politician who seeks to stoke up fear and paranoia over one religion for his own ends.

But his views should be debated and challenged, not simply banned.

From The Independent:

Banned from Britain, Dutch campaigner against Islam

By Ben Russell and Vanessa Mock

Wednesday, 11 February 2009

A far-right Dutch MP whose film linking Islamic texts with the terror attacks on New York sparked protests around the Muslim world was last night banned from entering Britain.

Geert Wilders, who leads the small Dutch Freedom Party, was due to show his controversial 17-minute film at an event in the House of Lords tomorrow, but was informed yesterday by British officials that he would not be allowed to enter the country. The decision sparked an immediate diplomatic row after the Dutch Government pressed Britain to reverse the ban.

The film Fitna, which criticises the Koran as a “fascist book”, sparked violent protests around the Muslim world last year. The film, which has been posted on the internet, juxtaposes images of the Koran with footage of the 9/11 twin tower attacks and other terrorist atrocities. Mr Wilders had been invited to show the film at an event in Westminster hosted by Lord Pearson of Rannoch, the former Conservative, who is now a UK Independence Party member of the House of Lords.

The film starts with an image of the hugely controversial cartoon of the Prophet Mohamed with a bomb as a turban that sparked global protests after it was printed in a Danish newspaper. The film then shows images of the 9/11 aircraft flying into the World Trade Centre, with quotes from calls to the emergency services from people inside the buildings.

It also contains images of bloodstained corpses following the 2004 Madrid rail bombings before showing gruesome images of beheadings and attacks. The film then shows statistics indicating a growing Muslim population in the Netherlands .

Last night, the Home Office refused to comment on Mr Wilders’ case. But a spokesman said: “The Government opposes extremism in all forms. It will stop those who want to spread extremism, hatred and violent messages in our communities from coming to our country. That was the driving force behind tighter rules on exclusions for unacceptable behaviour that the Home Secretary announced in October last year.”

Mr Wilders, who lives with round-the-clock security after receiving death threats, said a letter from the British embassy informed him he was being refused entry because his views “threaten community harmony and therefore public security” in the UK.

He condemned the British Government’s decision as “cowardly”.

“This is something you’d expect from Saudia Arabia, not Great Britain,” Mr Wilders told a parliamentary session. But he signalled that he might make the journey to London on Thursday despite the ban.

“I am seriously considering just trying it out and just getting on the plane,” he said. “Then I’ll see what happens. Let them handcuff me,” he was quoted as telling Dutch newspaper NRC.

The Dutch Foreign Minister Maxime Verhagen said his government would continue to press Britain to reverse the ban. He said he “deeply regretted” that a Dutch lawmaker had been barred entry to the UK.

Mr Verhagen said he had first contacted the British ambassador in The Hague. Having failed, Mr Verhagen then telephoned his British counterpart David Miliband. “It is highly regrettable that a Dutch parliamentarian is refused entry to another EU country,” he said in a statement.

Mr Wilders, whose Freedom Party holds nine of the 120 seats in the Dutch Parliament, said he was shocked by the travel ban. He said: “We are talking here about a European Union country, one of the oldest democracies in the Western world.”

Lord Pearson, who invited Wilders to show Fitna at the House of Lords, said he was “very surprised” at the news and was looking into what had happened to the Dutch MP.
“Mr Wilders, who lives with round-the-clock security after receiving death threats, said a letter from the British embassy informed him he was being refused entry because his views “threaten community harmony and therefore public security” in the UK.”
This is because the British government believes Muslims in Britain would go nuts if Wilders was allowed entry to the United Kingdom.

Of course a few nutters would go ape shit and start burning some flags and shouting death to this and death to that but there are hardly going to be riots in the street.

It’s a shame the government fears those who cannot express their opinions without preaching violence.

Mediasnoops shares the disagreement with the views expressed by Wilders. But we do not believe that banning him will help challenge those views.

The same way we do not believe that banning Muslim religious extremists will not stop them preaching hatred towards non-believers.