The latest survey (see blog 20 May 2008) of feedback to Newsround's website included data in response to the question: How do YOU feel about Sats tests. There was a great deal of feedback - 281 responses posted to the website, five of which were from school classes, leaving 276 individual replies. About 40% of the feedback on this topic is from 11 year-olds, but somewhat surprisingly, only 3.6% of responses were from children aged 14, many of whom had taken SATs only a week earlier.
It seemed with such a large amount of feedback on SATs, the overall results were unduly weighted by this topic. So I've revised the May 08 data set using every fourth response to the SATs question and plotted the resultant bar chart.
Monday, May 26, 2008
Saturday, May 24, 2008
John Noakes
Anne Robinson and The Weakest Link have been mentioned in the news today. Previously Anne has been criticised by some experts who believe that her programme promotes a bullying culture. Emma-Jane Cross from the Beatbullying charity believes that society is not adequately preventing bullying behaviour. Instead, she says, "we celebrate it on television programmes like The Apprentice and the awful Weakest Link and The F Word."
In 2002 Ms Robinson was asked by a reader of The Independent: "Do we need to tackle bullying in our schools, or encourage it as a vital skill for later life?" To which Anne replied: "Bullying is horrid, but learning to joust verbally is invaluable. Interestingly, bullies understand 'no' and 'don't dare' faster than anyone. So in schools we need to teach more practical life skills for coping with horrid people without allowing them to ruin our lives...."
Telly tyrant Anne Robinson made Blue Peter legend John Noakes weep over his beloved dog Shep, says The Sun. Noakes broke down after Ms Robinson asked him: "Where’s Shep?, What happened to Shep? Did he die or just run away?"
From Blue Peter: The Inside Story (page 142) - When Go With Noakes came to an end after five successful series, the problem of Shep had finally to be faced. The dog, like all Blue Peter animals, was owned by the BBC, and the presenter with whom the animal lived was paid an allowance for food and maintenance. The problems arose when the presenter left. In Petra's case this had been solved very happily by the next presenter, Peter Purves, taking her over. In John's case, the rapport between man and dog was so strong that it seemed unkind to part them. A meeting took place at Television Centre when Shep was offered to John, and was accepted.
Later, Biddy Baxter decided to ask John Noakes to sign an agreement that Shep must not be allowed to appear in any commercials. This upset John because he felt entitled to use Shep in this way, considering all the work he had done for the BBC.
In an interview with Mark Lawson last year Biddy Baxter said: John Noakes was probably the best ever Blue Peter presenter - he was absolutely brilliant and the audience adored him. He - this is true of all the presenters - he didn't have to stay on the programme year after year after year. He did afterwards grumble about money, but he had an agent. The agent negotiated the fee. If the fee wasn't right, why sign up to it? Why sign the contract?
Anne Robinson and The Weakest Link have been mentioned in the news today. Previously Anne has been criticised by some experts who believe that her programme promotes a bullying culture. Emma-Jane Cross from the Beatbullying charity believes that society is not adequately preventing bullying behaviour. Instead, she says, "we celebrate it on television programmes like The Apprentice and the awful Weakest Link and The F Word."
In 2002 Ms Robinson was asked by a reader of The Independent: "Do we need to tackle bullying in our schools, or encourage it as a vital skill for later life?" To which Anne replied: "Bullying is horrid, but learning to joust verbally is invaluable. Interestingly, bullies understand 'no' and 'don't dare' faster than anyone. So in schools we need to teach more practical life skills for coping with horrid people without allowing them to ruin our lives...."
Telly tyrant Anne Robinson made Blue Peter legend John Noakes weep over his beloved dog Shep, says The Sun. Noakes broke down after Ms Robinson asked him: "Where’s Shep?, What happened to Shep? Did he die or just run away?"
From Blue Peter: The Inside Story (page 142) - When Go With Noakes came to an end after five successful series, the problem of Shep had finally to be faced. The dog, like all Blue Peter animals, was owned by the BBC, and the presenter with whom the animal lived was paid an allowance for food and maintenance. The problems arose when the presenter left. In Petra's case this had been solved very happily by the next presenter, Peter Purves, taking her over. In John's case, the rapport between man and dog was so strong that it seemed unkind to part them. A meeting took place at Television Centre when Shep was offered to John, and was accepted.
Later, Biddy Baxter decided to ask John Noakes to sign an agreement that Shep must not be allowed to appear in any commercials. This upset John because he felt entitled to use Shep in this way, considering all the work he had done for the BBC.
In an interview with Mark Lawson last year Biddy Baxter said: John Noakes was probably the best ever Blue Peter presenter - he was absolutely brilliant and the audience adored him. He - this is true of all the presenters - he didn't have to stay on the programme year after year after year. He did afterwards grumble about money, but he had an agent. The agent negotiated the fee. If the fee wasn't right, why sign up to it? Why sign the contract?
Thursday, May 22, 2008
Bullying was in the news again today, thanks to an initiative by Beatbullying, called The Big Stand. Press Packer Azaan was bullied at primary school, where he endured insults about being fat as well as racist comments and behaviour. He told Newsround viewers:
The bullying started when I was five years old in primary school. It usually used to be a comment about how fat I am or things like that, and it would just be really bad and they would always say really mean names and push me about for it ..... There's always someone that you can tell.....that's all you need to do, just speak out and you'll be listened to.
Azaan's story was also reported by The Sun under a heading of Racist Bullying. But in The Sun he says: I was bullied in primary school because of my race, as well as my weight and my looks. As an Asian Muslim I have brown skin, and on various occasions I was called a ‘fat Paki’. Another time I was in the playground and a boy grabbed a religious chain I wore around my neck, threw it down and stamped on it. The experience left me traumatised because the bullying grew and grew until several people were involved....
Although the racist aspect of Azaan's bullying is touched upon in the press pack webpage report, racism wasn't mentioned at all on the Newsround programme itself. And just as it's a silly being "tough on crime" but not "tough on the causes of crime," the same applies to bullying.
At one time BBC children's programmes were prepared to tackle prejudice - often the cause of bullying. Now though, CBBC only appears willing to advise kids what to do after the bullying has started. Grange Hill used to face topics like racism head on. What we have now is programmes like M.I. High; fantasy with little or no relevance to real life problems and issues encountered by kids today.
The bullying started when I was five years old in primary school. It usually used to be a comment about how fat I am or things like that, and it would just be really bad and they would always say really mean names and push me about for it ..... There's always someone that you can tell.....that's all you need to do, just speak out and you'll be listened to.
Azaan's story was also reported by The Sun under a heading of Racist Bullying. But in The Sun he says: I was bullied in primary school because of my race, as well as my weight and my looks. As an Asian Muslim I have brown skin, and on various occasions I was called a ‘fat Paki’. Another time I was in the playground and a boy grabbed a religious chain I wore around my neck, threw it down and stamped on it. The experience left me traumatised because the bullying grew and grew until several people were involved....
Although the racist aspect of Azaan's bullying is touched upon in the press pack webpage report, racism wasn't mentioned at all on the Newsround programme itself. And just as it's a silly being "tough on crime" but not "tough on the causes of crime," the same applies to bullying.
At one time BBC children's programmes were prepared to tackle prejudice - often the cause of bullying. Now though, CBBC only appears willing to advise kids what to do after the bullying has started. Grange Hill used to face topics like racism head on. What we have now is programmes like M.I. High; fantasy with little or no relevance to real life problems and issues encountered by kids today.
Wednesday, May 21, 2008
Can the BBC Trust be trusted?
The BBC appeared to come clean on 9 May when they reported that £106,031 had mistakenly been withheld from charities. The BBC's press release pointed journalists to the positive aspects of reports by PricewaterhouseCoopers and Ronald Neil (see blog 10 May 2008). But there are now questions about the reasons for money not being paid to the charities. These doubts arise because of the relatively small turnover of Audiocall, which is a commercial subsidiary company owned by the BBC.
It seems that the BBC Trust, whose chairman has a background in accountancy, and BBC management went so far as to remove pertinent details from PricewaterhouseCoopers' report (pdf), which those clued up could use to put two and two together and suss out a possible motive for the telephone money being withheld. The proportion of Audiocall's profit represented by the £106,031 was redacted, as was the company's turnover. Furthermore a report from the law firm Baker & McKenzie wasn't made public, ostensibly because of the possibility of disciplinary proceedings at BBC Worldwide.
The relevant telephone calls were made "outside of the window in which votes were counted in a number of shows over a two year period, ending in August 2007" (BBC press release 9 May 2008) As the Trust puts it: It was the practice of Audiocall to retain revenue that could have been due to charity from calls received outside the voting window. PwC advised that this could be perceived as improper conduct. In PricewaterhouseCoopers' findings, as released by the Trust, the BBC's redactions are marked with scissors; there are 230 lines with cuts in the redacted findings, including in the Key Findings section.
The BBC Trust published Editorial Controls & Compliance (pdf) on the same day, which has barely a harsh word to say against BBC management. Despite early signs of independence, it increasingly looks like the BBC Trust is prepared to side with management in order to minimise the fallout from cheating and deception. There is now reason to doubt the Trust's independence and impartiality.
A year ago when Sir Michael Lyons started his work as head of the Trust he said that its foremost responsibility is to speak for the public, for those people who pay their licence fee, and not to immediately defend actions taken by the BBC staff. But the Trust is now being tested on these issues, and how well it copes and achieves the right balance will be the measure of its worth. The question now is whether the Trust can be trusted.
The BBC appeared to come clean on 9 May when they reported that £106,031 had mistakenly been withheld from charities. The BBC's press release pointed journalists to the positive aspects of reports by PricewaterhouseCoopers and Ronald Neil (see blog 10 May 2008). But there are now questions about the reasons for money not being paid to the charities. These doubts arise because of the relatively small turnover of Audiocall, which is a commercial subsidiary company owned by the BBC.
It seems that the BBC Trust, whose chairman has a background in accountancy, and BBC management went so far as to remove pertinent details from PricewaterhouseCoopers' report (pdf), which those clued up could use to put two and two together and suss out a possible motive for the telephone money being withheld. The proportion of Audiocall's profit represented by the £106,031 was redacted, as was the company's turnover. Furthermore a report from the law firm Baker & McKenzie wasn't made public, ostensibly because of the possibility of disciplinary proceedings at BBC Worldwide.
The relevant telephone calls were made "outside of the window in which votes were counted in a number of shows over a two year period, ending in August 2007" (BBC press release 9 May 2008) As the Trust puts it: It was the practice of Audiocall to retain revenue that could have been due to charity from calls received outside the voting window. PwC advised that this could be perceived as improper conduct. In PricewaterhouseCoopers' findings, as released by the Trust, the BBC's redactions are marked with scissors; there are 230 lines with cuts in the redacted findings, including in the Key Findings section.
The BBC Trust published Editorial Controls & Compliance (pdf) on the same day, which has barely a harsh word to say against BBC management. Despite early signs of independence, it increasingly looks like the BBC Trust is prepared to side with management in order to minimise the fallout from cheating and deception. There is now reason to doubt the Trust's independence and impartiality.
A year ago when Sir Michael Lyons started his work as head of the Trust he said that its foremost responsibility is to speak for the public, for those people who pay their licence fee, and not to immediately defend actions taken by the BBC staff. But the Trust is now being tested on these issues, and how well it copes and achieves the right balance will be the measure of its worth. The question now is whether the Trust can be trusted.
Tuesday, May 20, 2008
The latest survey of feedback to Newsround indicates a marked decline in teens' responses when compared to results in March/April two years ago (see blog 13 December 2006). The current survey data was taken between 1st to 15th May 2008. 15 year-olds dropped from 13.5% to 0.5%, 14 year-olds from 17.1% to 4.4%, and 13 year-olds went down from 26.0% to 13.1%.
May 2008 survey
The percentage of responses from 14 and 15 year-old kids is slightly lower now than in the January 2008 survey.
The percentage of responses from 14 and 15 year-old kids is slightly lower now than in the January 2008 survey.
Saturday, May 10, 2008
The day after disclosures about ITV wrongdoing at the 2005 British Comedy Awards, further irregularities were reported, this time at the BBC. As Jake put it on BBC1's Newsround: "Today we found out that the BBC accidentally kept cash raised through phone calls that should have gone to charity."
£106,00 from phone voting which should have gone to charity had been retained by Audiocall. Separately, in one programme last year a large volume of calls came in when the lines were not open. The sums due to charity have now been repaid with interest, and the BBC said it "would like to apologise to viewers and to the charities for this serious error." The timing of this disclosure and apology, coming as it does in the wake of ITV's rebuke by Ofcom, may not be a coincidence. Similar perhaps to the timing of ITV's own disclosure of the 2005 Comedy Awards cheating, announced as it was the same day as Ofcom's rebuke.
The press release on Friday points to reports by Pricewaterhouse Coopers and Ronald Neil, which, the BBC says, both "praise the BBC for the tough steps it has taken in this area since last summer." The BBC goes on to refer to its "unprecedented" Safeguarding Trust course which, it says, has been completed by 19,500* staff, and its new Code of Conduct for the use of premium rate telephony. However I'm still not clear where the BBC stands when it comes down to cheating the public on free or standard rate telephony, as opposed to premium rate telephony. I mean what about the fourteen and fifteen year old kids who had their feedback to Newsround discarded just on account of their age? And what about those kids who wish to discuss LGBT issues, but have their views discarded because of pure and simple prejudice?
The BBC says "throughout our response to the discovery that some BBC programmes had fallen short of our high standards we have consistently disclosed all instances and outlined to the public the action we are taking to put things right." In fact the BBC has not acknowledged that it was at fault when it discriminated against 14 and 15 year old children.
"We do not take that trust for granted," says the BBC, "the public can be reassured that all BBC staff are working very hard indeed to be vigilant and to aspire to the highest standards in our industry."
The Director-General's office has still not answered my questions about the falsehood put out by Anne Gilchrist relating to feedback on the axing of Grange Hill.
-----
*Note - Previously the BBC said 16,500 programmes and content staff will attend a new mandatory training programme, Safeguarding Trust.
£106,00 from phone voting which should have gone to charity had been retained by Audiocall. Separately, in one programme last year a large volume of calls came in when the lines were not open. The sums due to charity have now been repaid with interest, and the BBC said it "would like to apologise to viewers and to the charities for this serious error." The timing of this disclosure and apology, coming as it does in the wake of ITV's rebuke by Ofcom, may not be a coincidence. Similar perhaps to the timing of ITV's own disclosure of the 2005 Comedy Awards cheating, announced as it was the same day as Ofcom's rebuke.
The press release on Friday points to reports by Pricewaterhouse Coopers and Ronald Neil, which, the BBC says, both "praise the BBC for the tough steps it has taken in this area since last summer." The BBC goes on to refer to its "unprecedented" Safeguarding Trust course which, it says, has been completed by 19,500* staff, and its new Code of Conduct for the use of premium rate telephony. However I'm still not clear where the BBC stands when it comes down to cheating the public on free or standard rate telephony, as opposed to premium rate telephony. I mean what about the fourteen and fifteen year old kids who had their feedback to Newsround discarded just on account of their age? And what about those kids who wish to discuss LGBT issues, but have their views discarded because of pure and simple prejudice?
The BBC says "throughout our response to the discovery that some BBC programmes had fallen short of our high standards we have consistently disclosed all instances and outlined to the public the action we are taking to put things right." In fact the BBC has not acknowledged that it was at fault when it discriminated against 14 and 15 year old children.
"We do not take that trust for granted," says the BBC, "the public can be reassured that all BBC staff are working very hard indeed to be vigilant and to aspire to the highest standards in our industry."
The Director-General's office has still not answered my questions about the falsehood put out by Anne Gilchrist relating to feedback on the axing of Grange Hill.
*Note - Previously the BBC said 16,500 programmes and content staff will attend a new mandatory training programme, Safeguarding Trust.
Friday, May 09, 2008
Some people were surprised last year when ITV announced that the British Comedy Awards would not be broadcast. At the time it was reported the reason was that there were suspicions of wrongdoing at the 2005 Awards.
Newsround web report
Newsround's TV report on BBC1 at 5pm yesterday explained the situation quite well:-
Jake: So this afternoon the big news is the top telly award wrongly given to Ant & Dec. The duo were given the prize after a public vote, but it turns out TV Bosses actually faked the result. Well Sonali's been following the story for Newsround all afternoon. Sonali, what can you tell us?
Sonali: Well Jake, Ant and Dec are probably TV's most popular double act. They've won lots of awards, and in 2005 one of them was a British Comedy Award. It's voted for by the public but it turns out that Ant and Dec didn't get the most votes. Catherine Tate, who we know from Dr Who, did.
Jake: Okay, so Catherine Tate should have won the award but she didn't get her prize. What on earth happened?
Sonali: Well first of all Ant and Dec didn't know that this competition was unfair. But this is where it all gets a bit complicated. ITV bosses wanted Robbie Williams to appear at the awards show. He's friends with Ant and Dec and said he'd be happy to give them a prize. And it's thought that bosses at ITV were so keen on Robbie Williams appearing that they guaranteed that Ant and Dec would get a prize. The problem with this is the only prize they could have won was the people's choice, and in the end they didn't get the most votes. Robbie knew nothing about this, was told his mates won, and Catherine Tate went home empty-handed.
Jake: Okay well this story's just come out this afternoon, what's the reaction been since then?
Sonali: Ant and Dec say they're completely appalled by what's happened and they're now planning to send back their award. Ofcom - that's the organisation that checks up on TV companies and how they're run - they're going to investigate this. And we can't forget the people that have spent money phoning in to vote. Their votes didn't count. They're going to be pretty upset by this.
Jake: I imagine so. Sonali, thank you very much.
Newsround web report
Newsround's TV report on BBC1 at 5pm yesterday explained the situation quite well:-
Jake: So this afternoon the big news is the top telly award wrongly given to Ant & Dec. The duo were given the prize after a public vote, but it turns out TV Bosses actually faked the result. Well Sonali's been following the story for Newsround all afternoon. Sonali, what can you tell us?
Sonali: Well Jake, Ant and Dec are probably TV's most popular double act. They've won lots of awards, and in 2005 one of them was a British Comedy Award. It's voted for by the public but it turns out that Ant and Dec didn't get the most votes. Catherine Tate, who we know from Dr Who, did.
Jake: Okay, so Catherine Tate should have won the award but she didn't get her prize. What on earth happened?
Sonali: Well first of all Ant and Dec didn't know that this competition was unfair. But this is where it all gets a bit complicated. ITV bosses wanted Robbie Williams to appear at the awards show. He's friends with Ant and Dec and said he'd be happy to give them a prize. And it's thought that bosses at ITV were so keen on Robbie Williams appearing that they guaranteed that Ant and Dec would get a prize. The problem with this is the only prize they could have won was the people's choice, and in the end they didn't get the most votes. Robbie knew nothing about this, was told his mates won, and Catherine Tate went home empty-handed.
Jake: Okay well this story's just come out this afternoon, what's the reaction been since then?
Sonali: Ant and Dec say they're completely appalled by what's happened and they're now planning to send back their award. Ofcom - that's the organisation that checks up on TV companies and how they're run - they're going to investigate this. And we can't forget the people that have spent money phoning in to vote. Their votes didn't count. They're going to be pretty upset by this.
Jake: I imagine so. Sonali, thank you very much.
Thursday, May 08, 2008
In my 16 July 2007 blog entry, I referred to the Creative Future tighter audience targets for CBBC as being a foolish idea from the start, because all people develop at different rates. I said that it was misguided to further narrow the target age limits for children's television.
Now a leading academic, Professor David Hargreaves, has said pigeonholing children by age is "an extremely crude measure". He was referring to year grouping in schools, but there is a distinction to be made between schools and TV audiences. As John Dunford of The Association of School and College Leaders (ASCL) said: "..schools are dealing with teenage children who are much more conscious of their age in relation to that of their peers."
Historically BBC kids' TV seems to have been aimed at younger kids. For example 'Blue Peter - The Inside Story' (at page 11) mentions the 'entire age range' as being 'from five to twelve-year-olds,' although paradoxically Appendix 1 (at page 231) makes clear that, for audience research purposes as measured by the Broadcasters' Audience Research Board owned jointly then by the BBC and ITA, children were regarded as being from age four up to fifteen years old. In the past these boundaries seem to have been regarded merely as guide age limits, since as we saw in an earlier blog entry 1980s programmes such as 'The Lowdown' and 'Newsround' weren't afraid to tackle issues relevant to older kids.
In a leading article, The Indepependent said Hargreaves has got it mostly right. The paper was commenting on the idea that the different phases of education – primary and secondary – would cease to exist as more institutions capable of delivering an all-through education from age three to 19 were created, so that the brightest pupils could be more stretched because they would be allowed to move up the system at a faster rate than less able children of the same age group.
For children's TV even more so, there needs to be a fresh approach. The present narrowly targeted programming cannot withstand scrutiny.
Now a leading academic, Professor David Hargreaves, has said pigeonholing children by age is "an extremely crude measure". He was referring to year grouping in schools, but there is a distinction to be made between schools and TV audiences. As John Dunford of The Association of School and College Leaders (ASCL) said: "..schools are dealing with teenage children who are much more conscious of their age in relation to that of their peers."
Historically BBC kids' TV seems to have been aimed at younger kids. For example 'Blue Peter - The Inside Story' (at page 11) mentions the 'entire age range' as being 'from five to twelve-year-olds,' although paradoxically Appendix 1 (at page 231) makes clear that, for audience research purposes as measured by the Broadcasters' Audience Research Board owned jointly then by the BBC and ITA, children were regarded as being from age four up to fifteen years old. In the past these boundaries seem to have been regarded merely as guide age limits, since as we saw in an earlier blog entry 1980s programmes such as 'The Lowdown' and 'Newsround' weren't afraid to tackle issues relevant to older kids.
In a leading article, The Indepependent said Hargreaves has got it mostly right. The paper was commenting on the idea that the different phases of education – primary and secondary – would cease to exist as more institutions capable of delivering an all-through education from age three to 19 were created, so that the brightest pupils could be more stretched because they would be allowed to move up the system at a faster rate than less able children of the same age group.
For children's TV even more so, there needs to be a fresh approach. The present narrowly targeted programming cannot withstand scrutiny.
Thursday, May 01, 2008
All this week Newsround has covered issues which kids worry about. CBBC's agony uncle says that a certain degree of worry can be a good thing, provided we direct worries into a motivational force to get things done.
That's what young people in the UK Youth Parliament are doing. Tomorrow in the chamber of the House of Lords six topics (see blog 9 April 2008) will be whittled down to three. These three will become the Youth Parliament campaigns for 2008. The debate will be covered on a live blog starting 9.45am
That's what young people in the UK Youth Parliament are doing. Tomorrow in the chamber of the House of Lords six topics (see blog 9 April 2008) will be whittled down to three. These three will become the Youth Parliament campaigns for 2008. The debate will be covered on a live blog starting 9.45am
Tuesday, April 29, 2008
Recently Newsround carried out a web survey to find out what kids worry about. An opinion poll published by the Children's Society indicated that the UK is failing to meet children's mental health and well-being needs.
Yesterday, as part of a week of Newsround items about children's worries, Jake presented a rather upbeat report into the way kids from Risedale Community College are trying to tackle the problem of bullying.
Yesterday, as part of a week of Newsround items about children's worries, Jake presented a rather upbeat report into the way kids from Risedale Community College are trying to tackle the problem of bullying.
Saturday, April 26, 2008
Transgender children
Should teachers be doing more for transgender pupils? That was the question posed in an Independent article on Thursday. The piece began with a description of the life of Lauren, a trans kid who was severely bullied at school. The Independent says Lauren had been insisting from the age of three that she had "a girl brain in a boy's body" - quote marks are The Independent's.
Lauren's life, says her mother, had become a living nightmare. She faced daily taunts and bullying, including being spat at, abusive language from the mother of another child, and an ambush in which older boys tried to remove her skirt. Lauren's story reflects the quandaries experienced by schools when faced with a pupil who does not fit neatly in to the "boy" or "girl" box.
Sometimes, when schools are more thoughtful, experiences can be more positive for trans kids. The pupils at Tim's school were told what to expect when Tim came back as Becky after the holidays. The school made it clear that bullying would not be tolerated. None was reported when Becky returned with long hair and female clothes, though curious pupils did want to ask Becky questions.
In the coming week, Newsround will be investigating what worries or stresses out kids. One of the programmes will be about bullying. Other topics will be terrorism and climate change.
Should teachers be doing more for transgender pupils? That was the question posed in an Independent article on Thursday. The piece began with a description of the life of Lauren, a trans kid who was severely bullied at school. The Independent says Lauren had been insisting from the age of three that she had "a girl brain in a boy's body" - quote marks are The Independent's.
Lauren's life, says her mother, had become a living nightmare. She faced daily taunts and bullying, including being spat at, abusive language from the mother of another child, and an ambush in which older boys tried to remove her skirt. Lauren's story reflects the quandaries experienced by schools when faced with a pupil who does not fit neatly in to the "boy" or "girl" box.
Sometimes, when schools are more thoughtful, experiences can be more positive for trans kids. The pupils at Tim's school were told what to expect when Tim came back as Becky after the holidays. The school made it clear that bullying would not be tolerated. None was reported when Becky returned with long hair and female clothes, though curious pupils did want to ask Becky questions.
In the coming week, Newsround will be investigating what worries or stresses out kids. One of the programmes will be about bullying. Other topics will be terrorism and climate change.
Thursday, April 24, 2008
A BBC 'debate' on the future role of public service broadcasting (PSB) has begun with the launch of a special website. This debate follows publication of Phase One of Ofcom’s second review of public service broadcasting on 10 April 2008. It is described by the BBC as "a wide-ranging debate with the public and the creative communities to garner views on public service broadcasting."
Sir David Attenborough, Stephen Fry and Will Hutton have been invited by the BBC to present their views in lectures which will be broadcast and available online later. Additionally, according to the BBC, there will be in-depth research with the UK's creative community and the wider audience on their attitudes to public service broadcasting.
Mark Thompson, Director-General of the BBC, said: "I am pleased that the Ofcom report reaffirms the audiences' view that the BBC is the cornerstone of public service broadcasting in Britain. As part of our engagement with the review, I want to focus on what our audiences want from us in the future. .... I'm looking forward to hearing from the public and the creative industries what they want from the BBC as we move to a digital society."
Newsround blog intends to contribute fully to the debate. Unfortunately, at the moment, Mark Thompson is refusing to converse on the matters which I have put to him. I did however receive an email three weeks ago from a BBC Divisional Advisor attempting to explain why the main BBC children's television channels have become more narrowly age focussed. I had previously understood, from an email posted to a now defunct Grange Hill message board, that the decision was "based on extensive audience research." However it now seems that the decision was not in fact based on audience research, but rather "seemed sensible and obvious." I was also informed that "the launch of BBC switch has proven a great success," but so far my request for more details about this success has been met with silence, despite two reminders.
More soon.
Sir David Attenborough, Stephen Fry and Will Hutton have been invited by the BBC to present their views in lectures which will be broadcast and available online later. Additionally, according to the BBC, there will be in-depth research with the UK's creative community and the wider audience on their attitudes to public service broadcasting.
Mark Thompson, Director-General of the BBC, said: "I am pleased that the Ofcom report reaffirms the audiences' view that the BBC is the cornerstone of public service broadcasting in Britain. As part of our engagement with the review, I want to focus on what our audiences want from us in the future. .... I'm looking forward to hearing from the public and the creative industries what they want from the BBC as we move to a digital society."
Newsround blog intends to contribute fully to the debate. Unfortunately, at the moment, Mark Thompson is refusing to converse on the matters which I have put to him. I did however receive an email three weeks ago from a BBC Divisional Advisor attempting to explain why the main BBC children's television channels have become more narrowly age focussed. I had previously understood, from an email posted to a now defunct Grange Hill message board, that the decision was "based on extensive audience research." However it now seems that the decision was not in fact based on audience research, but rather "seemed sensible and obvious." I was also informed that "the launch of BBC switch has proven a great success," but so far my request for more details about this success has been met with silence, despite two reminders.
More soon.
Tuesday, April 22, 2008
Reports abound in newspapers and on the net that magician Derren Brown is gay and has a boyfriend. Derren said “You have to be open and up front – or you end up turning it into a dark secret in your mind.”
It's still very difficult for kids to 'come out' at school without risking vicious prejudice. Thankfully Newsround's website has started to recognise the issue of homophobic bullying.
My last blog talked about CBBC and sexuality, using Eliot Kid as an example. The new series of Grange Hill began last week. Here are some snippets from the first episode, New Beginnings:-
(01'05")
Alex: I've been thinking. I'm gonna take charge of my life this year. Be more pro-active. It's like with the Humphries brothers gone last year, without them hounding me I can get on with being me! You know what I mean - it's like if you fancy somebody, you should just go up and tell 'em .. like ask 'em out......
================
(02'35")
Tigger: He's right though isn't he? About being pro-active. I've been thinking the same thing about Alison.
Ed: What about her?
Tigger: Today's her lucky day. Today I'm gonna ask her out. Proper.
Ed: But she might not wanna go out with you.
Tigger: She was all over me like a rash last year.
Ed: When?
Tigger: She was.
Ed: Er, when?
Tigger: She was giving me all the signs
Ed: Er, when?
Tigger: Ed - this is the difference between me and you. I understand these things.
Ed: So why didn't you make your move then?
Tigger: Alex! He had a thing for her didn't he. I didn't wanna make him feel bad by steppin' in then.
Ed: So what's different now?
Tigger: Well he obviously fancies someone else now
Ed: Well how did you work that one out?
Tigger: Well he didn't tell us the name of who he fancies. If it was Alison he wouldn't have been able to help himself, right? It's Sammy!
Ed: Sammy?
Tigger: Yeah, she's a geek. She'll see the big man's intellectual side.
================
(04'50")
Togger: (kisses a scantily dressed Tanya) Is that legal?
Tanya: I'm in the sixth form. I can wear what I want.
Togger: No, I mean like anywhere?!
================
(07'42")
Tigger: You could've introduced me
Ed: Yeah I know, Anyway you've missed her now.
Tigger: Thanks mate(!)
Ed: Look I'm just saying, as a mate, think about it because she might not fancy you.
Tigger: (laughs)
Ed: What if she fancies Alex? (Tigger looks incredulous) Alright then what if she fancies someone else?
Tigger: Well then I'll take my chances. Like the coach is always saying - You don't score if you don't shoot....
================
(08'08")
(Togger and Tanya still kissing in school corridor - Jenny sees and looks disgusted. Mrs Rawlinson bumps into her.)
Mrs Rawlinson: Really child you must be more .. whatever is the matter?
(Jenny gestures her towards Togger and Tanya snogging)
Mrs Rawlinson: Oh dear. Hurry along - it's only a practical demonstration of homo sapiens' characteristic desire for pre-mating ritual in public.
================
etc. etc. throughout rest of the programme.
During Derren Brown's stage act he sometimes joked that he could get any girl he liked to go out with him. But now Derren says sorry for disappointing any girls who fancied him.
It's still very difficult for kids to 'come out' at school without risking vicious prejudice. Thankfully Newsround's website has started to recognise the issue of homophobic bullying.
My last blog talked about CBBC and sexuality, using Eliot Kid as an example. The new series of Grange Hill began last week. Here are some snippets from the first episode, New Beginnings:-
(01'05")
Alex: I've been thinking. I'm gonna take charge of my life this year. Be more pro-active. It's like with the Humphries brothers gone last year, without them hounding me I can get on with being me! You know what I mean - it's like if you fancy somebody, you should just go up and tell 'em .. like ask 'em out......
(02'35")
Tigger: He's right though isn't he? About being pro-active. I've been thinking the same thing about Alison.
Ed: What about her?
Tigger: Today's her lucky day. Today I'm gonna ask her out. Proper.
Ed: But she might not wanna go out with you.
Tigger: She was all over me like a rash last year.
Ed: When?
Tigger: She was.
Ed: Er, when?
Tigger: She was giving me all the signs
Ed: Er, when?
Tigger: Ed - this is the difference between me and you. I understand these things.
Ed: So why didn't you make your move then?
Tigger: Alex! He had a thing for her didn't he. I didn't wanna make him feel bad by steppin' in then.
Ed: So what's different now?
Tigger: Well he obviously fancies someone else now
Ed: Well how did you work that one out?
Tigger: Well he didn't tell us the name of who he fancies. If it was Alison he wouldn't have been able to help himself, right? It's Sammy!
Ed: Sammy?
Tigger: Yeah, she's a geek. She'll see the big man's intellectual side.
(04'50")
Togger: (kisses a scantily dressed Tanya) Is that legal?
Tanya: I'm in the sixth form. I can wear what I want.
Togger: No, I mean like anywhere?!
(07'42")
Tigger: You could've introduced me
Ed: Yeah I know, Anyway you've missed her now.
Tigger: Thanks mate(!)
Ed: Look I'm just saying, as a mate, think about it because she might not fancy you.
Tigger: (laughs)
Ed: What if she fancies Alex? (Tigger looks incredulous) Alright then what if she fancies someone else?
Tigger: Well then I'll take my chances. Like the coach is always saying - You don't score if you don't shoot....
(08'08")
(Togger and Tanya still kissing in school corridor - Jenny sees and looks disgusted. Mrs Rawlinson bumps into her.)
Mrs Rawlinson: Really child you must be more .. whatever is the matter?
(Jenny gestures her towards Togger and Tanya snogging)
Mrs Rawlinson: Oh dear. Hurry along - it's only a practical demonstration of homo sapiens' characteristic desire for pre-mating ritual in public.
etc. etc. throughout rest of the programme.
During Derren Brown's stage act he sometimes joked that he could get any girl he liked to go out with him. But now Derren says sorry for disappointing any girls who fancied him.
Saturday, April 19, 2008
Eliot in Love
How many children in Britain know the story of Cinderella? Quite a lot I should think. And few parents would object to it being read to their children at school. But change the events slightly to a tale about a prince falling in love with another prince and ... well that's another story! Bristol City Council have withdrawn books called 'King and King' and 'And Tango Makes Three' from two primary schools after complaints, mainly from Muslim parents.
Books like these are intended to help children understand that people are different. Experts believe that understanding differences at an early age is one of the most effective ways of tackling prejudice. So if young children realise that boys don't necessarily fancy girls (and vice versa) that is a sensible way to deal with the problem of homophobia and resultant homophobic bullying. As a bonus these books could also help some children who might otherwise be somewhat unhappy about their own feelings.
Regrettably the BBC seems to have a similar attitude as the parents who complained.
Over the last year or two CBBC has insisted that all its output should be suitable for six to twelve year olds. One of its newish acquisitions is a cartoon called Eliot Kid. It features an imaginative intelligent six year old boy called Eliot. Like many new cartoons Eliot Kid incorporates some modern ideas about diversity - a good selling point these days. So one of Eliot's two closest friends, Kaytoo, is black. His other best friend, Mimi, is a largish girl who wears glasses.
What about sexuality, though? Well, of course, CBBC says it doesn't deal with sexuality of any kind. But right from the start, in the episode called Wedding Impossible, there's a hint that six year old Eliot is attracted to the opposite sex. And we're not left in much doubt when, in an episode called Eliot in Love, we see Eliot totally besotted with classmate Loretta. Incidentally this was the episode referred to in my blog on 12 April 2008
When CBBC say they don't do sexuality, what they really mean is we don't do anything other than heterosexual feelings. It's true that Eliot never says anything such as "I'm straight", but that's only because he doesn't need to say it.
In the words of Mark Thompson "I thought this was clear before, but absolutely make it clear now" - the BBC is deceiving the public when it claims not to do sexuality of any kind for children.
If you're still not convinced, take a quick look at current posts to the Your Life message board and then read my blog on 28 March 2008.
Latest 'love' advice from Aaron, CBBC's Agony Uncle
How many children in Britain know the story of Cinderella? Quite a lot I should think. And few parents would object to it being read to their children at school. But change the events slightly to a tale about a prince falling in love with another prince and ... well that's another story! Bristol City Council have withdrawn books called 'King and King' and 'And Tango Makes Three' from two primary schools after complaints, mainly from Muslim parents.
Books like these are intended to help children understand that people are different. Experts believe that understanding differences at an early age is one of the most effective ways of tackling prejudice. So if young children realise that boys don't necessarily fancy girls (and vice versa) that is a sensible way to deal with the problem of homophobia and resultant homophobic bullying. As a bonus these books could also help some children who might otherwise be somewhat unhappy about their own feelings.
Regrettably the BBC seems to have a similar attitude as the parents who complained.
Over the last year or two CBBC has insisted that all its output should be suitable for six to twelve year olds. One of its newish acquisitions is a cartoon called Eliot Kid. It features an imaginative intelligent six year old boy called Eliot. Like many new cartoons Eliot Kid incorporates some modern ideas about diversity - a good selling point these days. So one of Eliot's two closest friends, Kaytoo, is black. His other best friend, Mimi, is a largish girl who wears glasses.
What about sexuality, though? Well, of course, CBBC says it doesn't deal with sexuality of any kind. But right from the start, in the episode called Wedding Impossible, there's a hint that six year old Eliot is attracted to the opposite sex. And we're not left in much doubt when, in an episode called Eliot in Love, we see Eliot totally besotted with classmate Loretta. Incidentally this was the episode referred to in my blog on 12 April 2008
When CBBC say they don't do sexuality, what they really mean is we don't do anything other than heterosexual feelings. It's true that Eliot never says anything such as "I'm straight", but that's only because he doesn't need to say it.
In the words of Mark Thompson "I thought this was clear before, but absolutely make it clear now" - the BBC is deceiving the public when it claims not to do sexuality of any kind for children.
If you're still not convinced, take a quick look at current posts to the Your Life message board and then read my blog on 28 March 2008.
Latest 'love' advice from Aaron, CBBC's Agony Uncle
Wednesday, April 16, 2008
The death of Mark Speight was the first item on Monday's Newsround at 5pm.
Yesterday The Mail reported that children as young as seven had posted tributes to Speight on the Newsround website and revealed how he had inspired them to pursue art at school. The Mail website said "Newsround broke the news of Speight's death in its programme last night, taking extra care to gloss over exactly how he died. There was no mention of suicide and children were simply told that his body had been found and no one else was thought to have been involved."
A Mail report later in the day claimed that some children had been in tears at the news. Some parents were unhappy that it had been covered on Newsround; others defended the BBC's actions claiming youngsters should not be shielded from the truth. The Mail said that some people believed the BBC should have used the death as a chance to drive home to children the dangers of drug abuse.
Laura Sadler, who played Judi Jeffreys in Grange Hill, and went on to play Sandy Harper in Holby City, was also a victim of drug taking when she fell off a balcony in 2003. It emerged that she and her boyfriend had been drinking and taking drugs. The boyfriend, George Calil, who was questioned by police, had played her drug-pushing boyfriend Sean Hunt in Holby City. The fictional character of Sandy Harper was written out of Holby City in a story which involved her winning the lottery and going to Australia.
Yesterday The Mail reported that children as young as seven had posted tributes to Speight on the Newsround website and revealed how he had inspired them to pursue art at school. The Mail website said "Newsround broke the news of Speight's death in its programme last night, taking extra care to gloss over exactly how he died. There was no mention of suicide and children were simply told that his body had been found and no one else was thought to have been involved."
A Mail report later in the day claimed that some children had been in tears at the news. Some parents were unhappy that it had been covered on Newsround; others defended the BBC's actions claiming youngsters should not be shielded from the truth. The Mail said that some people believed the BBC should have used the death as a chance to drive home to children the dangers of drug abuse.
Laura Sadler, who played Judi Jeffreys in Grange Hill, and went on to play Sandy Harper in Holby City, was also a victim of drug taking when she fell off a balcony in 2003. It emerged that she and her boyfriend had been drinking and taking drugs. The boyfriend, George Calil, who was questioned by police, had played her drug-pushing boyfriend Sean Hunt in Holby City. The fictional character of Sandy Harper was written out of Holby City in a story which involved her winning the lottery and going to Australia.
Monday, April 14, 2008
Good Newsround press pack report today about the dangers of BB guns. Presspacker Anthony from Glasgow was concerned about these guns being used near where he goes to school. The guns are a type of air gun and look similar to a real gun. Anthony spoke to a boy called Andrew, who had a tooth shattered by a BB gun whilst on holiday. Andrew's story had made front page news in a local paper, The Arran Banner.
-----
I've noticed that the 'Teachers' section of Newsround's website has now added a page about bullying which also includes homophobic bullying - a good first step, but a long time coming.
I've noticed that the 'Teachers' section of Newsround's website has now added a page about bullying which also includes homophobic bullying - a good first step, but a long time coming.
Saturday, April 12, 2008
The Producers Alliance for Cinema and Television (PACT) has made a short spoof filmclip: Badass Wombles of Central Park to warn of a crisis facing UK children's television. Lack of homegrown children's programmes was also one of the issues raised in Ofcom's PSB report published on 10 April 2008.
The Womble clip asks: "Ever wonder why your kids speak a different language?" The answer, according to PACT, is that children's TV is dominated by imported shows - new UK programmes account for just 1% of all children's television broadcast in the UK. Great Uncle Bulgaria adds "... and I thought I was short-sighted. Tell those Wombles in government we need to start making British programmes for British kids again before it's too late." The filmclip ends with a question - "what is a fanny pack anyway?" (it means a "bum bag" in British English)
In my blog of 24 March 2008 I quoted Jocelyn Hay, from the Voice of the Listener and Viewer, who wants children to grow up to be informed citizens of this country and not of some mid-Atlantic fantasy world.
This morning Jana Bennett, BBC Director of Vision, spoke to Breakfast TV about her reaction to the PACT campaign. She suggested that the BBC may devote more resources to homegrown content, particularly in regard to CBeebies, but her precise intentions were unclear.
In the same blog (24 March) I mentioned how programmes like Grange Hill and Byker Grove have been ruthlessly axed by CBBC. One of CBBC's new imports is the cartoon Eliot Kid, variously described as "Pour les enfants de 4 Ã 8 ans" (TF1) and "Target group 6 - 9" (H,L&T). Apparently not even the dubbing for Eliot Kid is done in this country - language, as with the PACT spoof filmclip, is all American English. For instance, in one episode when their teacher asks Max to work with Mimi in a class presentation about grasshoppers, Max calls Mimi a "slowpoke" (it means "slowcoach" in British English). So much for BBC homegrown content.
Wombles in Da Hood
Wombles warning over TV imports
The Womble clip asks: "Ever wonder why your kids speak a different language?" The answer, according to PACT, is that children's TV is dominated by imported shows - new UK programmes account for just 1% of all children's television broadcast in the UK. Great Uncle Bulgaria adds "... and I thought I was short-sighted. Tell those Wombles in government we need to start making British programmes for British kids again before it's too late." The filmclip ends with a question - "what is a fanny pack anyway?" (it means a "bum bag" in British English)
In my blog of 24 March 2008 I quoted Jocelyn Hay, from the Voice of the Listener and Viewer, who wants children to grow up to be informed citizens of this country and not of some mid-Atlantic fantasy world.
This morning Jana Bennett, BBC Director of Vision, spoke to Breakfast TV about her reaction to the PACT campaign. She suggested that the BBC may devote more resources to homegrown content, particularly in regard to CBeebies, but her precise intentions were unclear.
In the same blog (24 March) I mentioned how programmes like Grange Hill and Byker Grove have been ruthlessly axed by CBBC. One of CBBC's new imports is the cartoon Eliot Kid, variously described as "Pour les enfants de 4 Ã 8 ans" (TF1) and "Target group 6 - 9" (H,L&T). Apparently not even the dubbing for Eliot Kid is done in this country - language, as with the PACT spoof filmclip, is all American English. For instance, in one episode when their teacher asks Max to work with Mimi in a class presentation about grasshoppers, Max calls Mimi a "slowpoke" (it means "slowcoach" in British English). So much for BBC homegrown content.
Wombles in Da Hood
Wombles warning over TV imports
Thursday, April 10, 2008
Public Service Broadcasting (PSB)
PSB purposes, the public purposes:-
Purpose 1: Informing our understanding of the world - To inform ourselves and others and to increase our understanding of the world through news, information and analysis of current events and ideas
Purpose 2: Stimulating knowledge and learning - To stimulate our interest in and knowledge of arts, science, history and other topics, through content that is accessible and can encourage informal learning
Purpose 3: Reflecting UK cultural identity - To reflect and strengthen our cultural identity through original programming at UK, national and regional level, on occasion bringing audiences together for shared experiences
Purpose 4: Representing diversity and alternative viewpoints - To make us aware of different cultures and alternative viewpoints, through programmes that reflect the lives of other people and other communities, both within the UK and elsewhere
Ofcom today launched the first phase of its second review of public service broadcasting. Annex 10 to the review deals with the future delivery of public service content for children. A substantial portion of the review of children's television programming is about the lack of satisfactory content for older children and teens, something that this blog has consistently highlighted.
Ofcom say that "In the context of changing children’s media consumption, older children and young teenagers are particularly dissatisfied with current delivery of public service programming, yet there is no evidence that providing this type of content is a viable commercial option." But, of course, one of the fundamental reasons for maintaining a licence fee based broadcaster is to fund quality programmes which are not necessarily commercially viable, but are in the public interest. By only belatedly catering for teens, and then with such nugatory programming, the BBC has potentially handed their rivals a sharp knife with which to top-slice the BBC licence fee. If, instead, the BBC had served this section of the community satisfactorily, children's television would not be the issue that it has now become.
Ed Richards, Ofcom's CEO told Channel 4 News in a recorded interview:
"The benefits of a wider distribution of the licence fee are clearly that is one among a series of options that would offer a route to supporting a wider mix of public service broadcasting in the future. But the risks associated with it are that, if a wider distribution of the licence fee took place, that in some way you may damage or diminish the BBC. And that is not an outcome that we would want to take place. But we do want to secure a system which is a plural mixed broadcasting system ..."
The BBC has decided to launch a Conversation with the public and selected sectors.
PSB purposes, the public purposes:-
Purpose 1: Informing our understanding of the world - To inform ourselves and others and to increase our understanding of the world through news, information and analysis of current events and ideas
Purpose 2: Stimulating knowledge and learning - To stimulate our interest in and knowledge of arts, science, history and other topics, through content that is accessible and can encourage informal learning
Purpose 3: Reflecting UK cultural identity - To reflect and strengthen our cultural identity through original programming at UK, national and regional level, on occasion bringing audiences together for shared experiences
Purpose 4: Representing diversity and alternative viewpoints - To make us aware of different cultures and alternative viewpoints, through programmes that reflect the lives of other people and other communities, both within the UK and elsewhere
Ofcom today launched the first phase of its second review of public service broadcasting. Annex 10 to the review deals with the future delivery of public service content for children. A substantial portion of the review of children's television programming is about the lack of satisfactory content for older children and teens, something that this blog has consistently highlighted.
Ofcom say that "In the context of changing children’s media consumption, older children and young teenagers are particularly dissatisfied with current delivery of public service programming, yet there is no evidence that providing this type of content is a viable commercial option." But, of course, one of the fundamental reasons for maintaining a licence fee based broadcaster is to fund quality programmes which are not necessarily commercially viable, but are in the public interest. By only belatedly catering for teens, and then with such nugatory programming, the BBC has potentially handed their rivals a sharp knife with which to top-slice the BBC licence fee. If, instead, the BBC had served this section of the community satisfactorily, children's television would not be the issue that it has now become.
Ed Richards, Ofcom's CEO told Channel 4 News in a recorded interview:
"The benefits of a wider distribution of the licence fee are clearly that is one among a series of options that would offer a route to supporting a wider mix of public service broadcasting in the future. But the risks associated with it are that, if a wider distribution of the licence fee took place, that in some way you may damage or diminish the BBC. And that is not an outcome that we would want to take place. But we do want to secure a system which is a plural mixed broadcasting system ..."
The BBC has decided to launch a Conversation with the public and selected sectors.
Wednesday, April 09, 2008
The BBC says it seeks to engage its audiences in dialogue, to learn from them and respond honestly to what they have to say. But I am having great difficulty getting any kind of response about a number of questions.
When I started this blog, my primary concern was the discrimination against LGBT kids which is still continuing on BBC programmes and message boards. But several other questions have arisen.
There was the age discrimination on Newsround's feedback webpages. I wrote to the BBC on 11 September 2007, about this and other diversity issues. Eventually, on 11 October 2007 I received a response from BBC Information which was unsatisfactory (see blog dated 1 November 2007)
A submission to Ofcom last December went into some of these diversity issues, and it seems that the webpage age discrimination policy was subsequently abandoned shortly after Christmas, on 11 January 2008. Try as I might, the BBC have not explained why the policy was implemented, by whom, and whether there will be an apology to 14 and 15 year olds who, for over a year, wasted their time and possibly money emailing or texting Newsround, with the assumption that their contributions would be valued and welcome.
CBBC continues discrimination in other ways - Newsround contributors, including press packers are nearly always under 13 and have their age shown on screen, which is not usually the case for those aged 13 or over. Why does Newsround see the need to display anyone's age? And then there's the question of being inclusive of LGBT issues. Why is that discrimination continuing?
A BBC4 series last year, Children's TV on Trial, discussed kids' programmes from the past 50 years. "80's kids were growing up fast," said the narrator, "and children's television had to keep up."
Eric Rowan, Producer of John Craven's Newsround said: "We felt that the world of children was changing in all sorts of ways and the world of television was changing in all sorts of ways, and we better do something about ourselves and make a few changes in the way we were making programmes. To open things up a little bit; to try and do a few new things in order to provide a service that was useful to kids." Eric was also responsible for The Lowdown, an 80's Panorama-style series dealing with issues relevant to kids, but not treating them in a patronising way. Anna Home, BBC Head of Children's Programmes (1986-1997) said: "The Lowdown was a really important series because it was a proper documentary series for kids which took the subjects and the audience very seriously and explored some really difficult subjects, and I think was of a very high quality."
Just before the 1983 UK General Election Newsround held a mock general election for kids. John Craven said in Children's TV on Trial: "We'd been debating about the fact we needed to do more about politics .... it was a very good way of getting children involved into the political system and becoming, hopefully, responsible voters."
Racism was more overt in the 80's, and Grange Hill tackled the issues head on. For example in one episode a boy is seen ruining a black girl's map that she'd spent ages making. He then tells her not to sit near him. "Monkeys over there," he says pointing to another part of the classroom.
On 6 February 2008, when axing Grange Hill, Anne Gilchrist said that the lives of children have changed a great deal since it began, "and we owe it to our audience to reflect this." But the truth is that, with a few notable exceptions, Ms Gilchrist's programme choices are a poor reflection of children's lives. They are significantly worse choices than those made in the 1980's. As for Ms Gilchrist's comments regarding feedback on her axing of Grange Hill, I still await a response from the BBC Executive. Another BBC channel controller left the corporation when he made an unintentional deception to journalists, but with Anne Gilchrist the deception seems to have been made with her full knowledge of the facts.
An inquiry, commissioned by Mark Thompson and conducted by Will Wyatt, which was published on 5 October 2007, included the following recommendation:
When anyone in the BBC becomes aware that the corporation has put something misleading or untrue into the public domain a correction must be issued at the earliest opportunity. It must be understood that the BBC’s honesty with the public has to be the first concern.
Responding, Mark Thompson said: "I would like to thank Will Wyatt for a thorough investigation and report. I accept his findings and recommendations in full."
---
The top six UK Youth Parliament campaigns to be debated in the HoL chamber at the beginning of May have now been decided. Three will be chosen to become 2008 official campaigns.
Lowering the voting age to 16
Your Future, Your World, Your Fight - recycling / environment campaign
To ensure fair and accurate representation of young people in the media
Abolish university tuition fees
A national public transport concession card for young people under the age of 18
To create one single age at which young people are deemed to become an adult
When I started this blog, my primary concern was the discrimination against LGBT kids which is still continuing on BBC programmes and message boards. But several other questions have arisen.
There was the age discrimination on Newsround's feedback webpages. I wrote to the BBC on 11 September 2007, about this and other diversity issues. Eventually, on 11 October 2007 I received a response from BBC Information which was unsatisfactory (see blog dated 1 November 2007)
A submission to Ofcom last December went into some of these diversity issues, and it seems that the webpage age discrimination policy was subsequently abandoned shortly after Christmas, on 11 January 2008. Try as I might, the BBC have not explained why the policy was implemented, by whom, and whether there will be an apology to 14 and 15 year olds who, for over a year, wasted their time and possibly money emailing or texting Newsround, with the assumption that their contributions would be valued and welcome.
CBBC continues discrimination in other ways - Newsround contributors, including press packers are nearly always under 13 and have their age shown on screen, which is not usually the case for those aged 13 or over. Why does Newsround see the need to display anyone's age? And then there's the question of being inclusive of LGBT issues. Why is that discrimination continuing?
A BBC4 series last year, Children's TV on Trial, discussed kids' programmes from the past 50 years. "80's kids were growing up fast," said the narrator, "and children's television had to keep up."
Eric Rowan, Producer of John Craven's Newsround said: "We felt that the world of children was changing in all sorts of ways and the world of television was changing in all sorts of ways, and we better do something about ourselves and make a few changes in the way we were making programmes. To open things up a little bit; to try and do a few new things in order to provide a service that was useful to kids." Eric was also responsible for The Lowdown, an 80's Panorama-style series dealing with issues relevant to kids, but not treating them in a patronising way. Anna Home, BBC Head of Children's Programmes (1986-1997) said: "The Lowdown was a really important series because it was a proper documentary series for kids which took the subjects and the audience very seriously and explored some really difficult subjects, and I think was of a very high quality."
Just before the 1983 UK General Election Newsround held a mock general election for kids. John Craven said in Children's TV on Trial: "We'd been debating about the fact we needed to do more about politics .... it was a very good way of getting children involved into the political system and becoming, hopefully, responsible voters."
Racism was more overt in the 80's, and Grange Hill tackled the issues head on. For example in one episode a boy is seen ruining a black girl's map that she'd spent ages making. He then tells her not to sit near him. "Monkeys over there," he says pointing to another part of the classroom.
On 6 February 2008, when axing Grange Hill, Anne Gilchrist said that the lives of children have changed a great deal since it began, "and we owe it to our audience to reflect this." But the truth is that, with a few notable exceptions, Ms Gilchrist's programme choices are a poor reflection of children's lives. They are significantly worse choices than those made in the 1980's. As for Ms Gilchrist's comments regarding feedback on her axing of Grange Hill, I still await a response from the BBC Executive. Another BBC channel controller left the corporation when he made an unintentional deception to journalists, but with Anne Gilchrist the deception seems to have been made with her full knowledge of the facts.
An inquiry, commissioned by Mark Thompson and conducted by Will Wyatt, which was published on 5 October 2007, included the following recommendation:
When anyone in the BBC becomes aware that the corporation has put something misleading or untrue into the public domain a correction must be issued at the earliest opportunity. It must be understood that the BBC’s honesty with the public has to be the first concern.
Responding, Mark Thompson said: "I would like to thank Will Wyatt for a thorough investigation and report. I accept his findings and recommendations in full."
The top six UK Youth Parliament campaigns to be debated in the HoL chamber at the beginning of May have now been decided. Three will be chosen to become 2008 official campaigns.
Friday, April 04, 2008
An interesting item appeared in the Washington Blade today. It was about Major Alan Rogers, an American soldier, who was killed in Iraq on 27 January 2008. It seems that the American press tried to hide the fact that he was a gay man. The Washington Post's Executive Editor Len Downie argued there was no proof that Rogers was gay and no clear indication that, if he was, he wanted the information made public. However, it turns out that Major Rogers worked for American Veterans for Equal Rights and had many gay friends who had been interviewed by a Washington Post reporter. His friends, it seems, were outraged at the treatment he received by the press.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)