mediawatchwatch.org.uk

A dull press release today from John Beyer at Mediawatch-UK, calling for Ofcom to “do much more” to reflect what he divines as “the public mood” for less violence and swearwords. He takes the opportunity to display his latest statistics (“In 177 films monitored last year (2004) there were 900 incidents involving firearms and 680 violent assaults”), and singles out Ken Loach’s Sweet Sixteen as an example of “falling standards”.

Some films, such as Ken Loach’s ‘Sweet Sixteen’, premiered on BBC2 last month, include an unremitting stream of ‘f-words’ and ‘c-words’ which are not appropriate for mainstream publicly funded television.

Sweet Sixteen is a warm, humane tragedy set in Greenock, Scotland which tells the moving story of a boy’s desire to live a happy family life with his drug-addicted mother. The truth and humanity to be found in this film must be completely lost on philistine fuck-counters like Beyer and his posse of pious crones, who cannot see past the “inappropriate” vernacular of the dialogue.

Presumably, he’d rather be watching The Black and White Minstrel Show. Beyer informed us in last night’s X-Rated – The TV Shows They Tried to Ban that he had never seen a problem with this “entertaining” music-hall throwback in which white male dancers “blacked up” to sing and dance old-time variety hits with coy Southern Belles.

Good grief.

The Daily Mail carries a story today (no web direct link as yet, but it’s copied at mediawatchuk) complaining about the BBC1 documentary Britain’s Streets of Vice, which was shown yesterday at 9.15 am.

Scenes included “gay porn stars playing twister at an orgy, a heavily overweight 59 year-old dominatrix, and a trawl of Soho sex shops.  Images also featured a woman brandishing a whip and dressed partially in a nun’s costume”.

John Beyer, who wasn’t consulted yesterday by any of the major print newspapers for his opinion on the government’s green paper on the future of the BBC (or, if he was, didn’t say anything worth printing), must have been relieved at the chance to speak out:

People are very angry that they and their children were suddenly confronted with pornography on BBC1 at 9.15 in the morning.  I just don’t know what the BBC were thinking of to schedule this series at this sort of time – or whether it should have been shown at any time.  It was only yesterday that Culture Secretary Tessa Jowell was talking about quality and standards at the BBC and a new system of handling complaints.  Mothers are particularly angry that that the programme has been going out in the morning in a week when many children have been kept off school by the snow.

Where to start? By pointing out that BBC schedulers don’t, as a matter of course, consult the long-term weather forecast? That it wasn’t pornography, but a documentary about pornography? That the BBC has said that the documentary was “carefully filmed and edited to ensure they are appropriate to be transmitted during the day”? That if you are watching TV with your children and a program called “Britains Streets of Vice” comes on, then you probably aren’t switched to CBeebies? That you have the power to turn over or switch off if the sight of a nun with a whip causes you undue distress?

Note that Beyer wasn’t just complaining about the time of transmission. He was seriously suggesting that a documentary investigating the UK vice industry shouldn’t have been shown at all. Apparently the British public should be protected from “distasteful” examinations of reality such as this and The Guantanomo Guidebook.

(Thanks to Dan Factor at Mediasnoops for the heads up.)

From Yahoo news.

As yet, the broadcaster has received no legal papers from the homosexuality-obsessed Christian Institute.

A new religious pressure group has sprung up in the wake of the BBC’s JS:TO controversy. Their website went live yesterday, on the same day that their spokesman made an appearance on Radio 5 Live with Victoria Derbyshire. The Christian Congress of Traditional Values (CCTV – do you see what they’ve done there?) appears to be run by right-wing fundamentalist “Bishop” Michael Reid of the notorious Peniel Pentecostal Church.

CCTV is based on two rather dubious premises. First, it aims

to protest at the corporation’s intention to “push back the boundaries of taste and decency”

Vigilant readers will recognise this catchphrase as one which has been magically following John Beyer around for years – as documented by Manic at Bloggerheads recently. It appears that no one at the BBC has ever actually said this, but that hasn’t detered CCTV from sending a letter to the Director General asking him to withdraw the statement.

The second dubious premise is that because 72% of respondents to the National Census ticked the box marked “Christian”, therefore 72% of the UK’s population are Christian (actually, only about 18% of the population are practising members of an organised religion). In contrast,

A powerful BBC elite which seems to be unaccountable to the people it is required to serve – the licence-payers – has declared its intention to impose its values on society and that means mocking and ridiculing values which are cultural traditions.

You may remember Peniel Pentecostal Church. Values espoused by Michael Reid reportedly include: unemployed Christians should be allowed to starve, homosexuals are “filthy perverts”, Muslims, Hindus and Buddhists are “vile” and “foul heathens”. They have been in trouble with the Advertising Standards Authority over their adverts claiming miracle cures, and even resurrections. Members were accused of infiltrating the local Brentwood and Ongar Conservative Party, prompting Martin Bell to contest the seat in 2001. And legal action has been brought against them by former members for “undue influence”, although accusations that it is a cult are always strenuously denied, so it can’t be a cult. Oh, no, definitely not.

My favourite quote from the site is this Orwellian leap of logic:

We stand for freedom of speech. We don’t use bullying tactics and are fiercely opposed to censorship. Freedom of speech means listening to the 55,000 licence-payers who objected to the Jerry Springer broadcast.

Ladies and gentlemen, please put your hands together and give a warm welcome to The Christian Congress for Traditional Values!

UPDATE: There’s a Times piece about this group today with quotes from its founder Garry Selfridge

UPDATE: Interesting analysis of CCTV by Nick Barlow.

UPDATE: More on Michael Reid at Bartholomew’s Notes on Religion

According to their spokesman, Maggie’s Centres have “more than made up for” the £3,000 they were forced by threats from Christian Voice to turn down. This is excellent news for the charity, but, unfortunately, also for Stephen Green, who predicted that his deity would reward them for their principled stand.

Whether or not the charity could have made even more had they stood up to the bullying is a question which will never be answered. It does seem that their main concern was not for money, but for the welfare of the people who use their centres on a daily basis, and who would have had to face angry demonstrators if the donation had been accepted.

In a statement sent to Mediawatchwatch it was revealed that Maggie’s Centres also came under pressure from The UK Life League, an anti-abortion campaign group.

It also seems that Green’s reluctance to reveal the size of his organisation dissolves when he is making threats. In the phone conversation to MC, which he claimed on Radio 2 not to remember, he allegedly threatened to send an email to CV’s “50,000 members” (although it should be said that MC’s spokesman was unwilling to confirm this figure in a subsequent conversation with Mediawatchwatch).

So, is Green a bully and a liar? Or just a bully? 50,000 is a nice round number, the sort that might easily be plucked out of the air by a fantasist.

It has just been pointed out to me that the fact that the CV website has had only 42,000 visitors does make the 50,000 claim rather doubtful.

In a bizarre refocusing of Christian Voice’s energies, Stephen Green has publicly announced his support for Liberty’s campaign against the government’s proposed legislation to allow detention without trial.

We identify 100% with Liberty’s  Statement for Justice and Security.  This should be a massive issue for Christians. It is a God-given right to be regarded as innocent until proven guilty, and guilt should be determined on evidence brought to court in the open, not decided by politicians or behind closed doors

As there appears to be no biblical support for his “God says you’re innocent until proven guilty” claim, we have to assume that he got this information directly from the deity during one of their private communications.

CV is obsessed with the criminal justice system, especially in the ways it differs from the ancient laws laid out in the Old Testament (or, at least, Green’s interpretation of those laws). But why choose Liberty, an organisation which stands for so many of CV’s bête noirs, such as the Human Rights Act, and equality for all regardless of sexuality and religion? After all, they aren’t the only group campaigning against the government on this issue.

UPDATE (March 2): The press release has been removed from CV’s website. Could it be that Green felt tainted by association with these human rights activists? Probably.