the morality maze

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/8112630.stm

'mistakes were made over the treatment of Susan Boyle' - tell us something that we don't know Mr Cowell. Is it not a case that if you play with fire then eventually you are going to get burnt?


For years we have watched as show such as 'Britain's Got Talent' and 'X Factor' have churned out an array of acts that have been laughed at for 'believing' that they have some talent. Should these talent shows take more responsibility for the effects caused to these people that are arguably very vulnerable?


Arguably there is a huge difference between giving criticism to some aspiring stars who turn up for an audition and what is currently taking place on the so called reality television in this country.


The main case in point in the press at the moment is, of course, Susan Boyle. This is a woman who has been a semi recluse for years and clearly has difficulties with social interaction that could suggest for her to be placed on the autistic spectrum. Questionably, the show exploited this vulnerability to make the show interesting - shocking the audience with the image of an unattractive person who, shock alert, can actually sing (because anybody who knows anything about modern pop music can tell you that only the beautiful people have good voices).


This was bad enough and of course has made a lot of press, but a character that put this exploitation of the public in context for me was a young man who came on and attempted to do Keepy-Uppies on stage. Now this kid was obviously not the brightest, he wasn't very good at keepy uppies, but for some reason he thought that he was. Now, surely the honest thing to do would be to send this kid on his merry way and tell him to keep practising. Not for the 'BGT' producers who decided to let this boy go on stage in front of hundreds of people, not to mention the millions at home, and make a fool of himself. Something that has surely led to a great deal of teasing and bullying when the lad got back to school.

The question is should shows be allowed to take advantage of people who wrongly believe that they have a talent in this way? Do we need to put a stop to the shows? bring in rules on responsibility and limits on what they can do? Or is everything fair game in the name of entertainment?

the digital britain report

So the Government is waking up to the idea that you can't just ignore the digital revolution, but what do they propose to do?

The main issues that have stood out to me:

Firstly, Broadband internet is to be made accessable to all at a minimum speed (hurray). A retro Labour socialist ideology in the digital age? Gordon Brown actually likened the need for internet to that of electricity, water and gas. Does this mean you will be able to keep downloading movies when you go bankrupt because it is a staple resource that can't be cut off?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/8093054.stm

Secondly, Due to the fact that the ability to download/ watch programmes online has affected the profits of commercial companies there is a suggestion that the licence fee should be shared by the BBC with other broadcasters. So, ITV has made cut backs to local news coverage due to a lack of funds - should they be given licence fee money to fund these programmes?

ITV spends a lot of its budget on reality shows, sports and soaps that are arguably lowest common denominator broadcasting, which makes them a lot of money in advertising sales. Would ITV not just decide that they can put more money into this type of programme and allow the license fee to take care of shows that they feel do not have as much commercial value? Would this lower the quality of television produced?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/8102179.stm