Time to strengthen the law against
pornography
By
John C Beyer, Director of mediawatch-uk.
The
following article was faxed over to the Features department of the Daily Mail
on Monday morning 17/12/2001. Whilst Melanie Phillips' article is an excellent
expose of the Pornography racket her concluding remarks needed a response. The
paper did not publish this reply.
|
T |
he answer to Melanie Phillips' final question, in her brilliant expose,
15/12/2001, is that there are organisations ready and willing to fight against
the powerful international sex industry. The truth is, however, that we have
been let down by political indifference and a judicial system which seems to
give in to the demands of the pornographers.
Ms Phillips rightly points to the weak and ineffective Obscene
Publications Act. As long ago as 1972 the late Lord Denning recognised that
this Act had "misfired". He said much that is obscene "has
escaped the reach of the law". Roy Jenkins, who argued in Abingdon, in
1963, that a better name for the permissive society is the civilised society,
introduced this Act into Parliament as a ten-minute-rule Bill. What a disaster
this permissiveness has been! And the prestigious Williams Committee declared,
in 1979, that the law in this area "is a mess".
Not only has this Act failed in its intention to "strengthen the
law on pornography" - and everybody knows it has failed - since the 1960s
succeeding Home Secretaries and Prime Ministers have told us that there is "not
sufficient consensus" in Parliament to strengthen the law. The Rt Hon Jack
Straw MP said, in a letter that came into our hands in March, that whilst he
shared the "distaste" about pornography he had to "take a
properly considered view of the extent to which, in a democratic society, it is
right to prevent adults from having access to material which does not itself
breach the criminal law". It is difficult not to conclude that our
politicians, in the main, have remained impervious to the mounting evidence of
harm as well as to the petitions and other expressions of public concern and
have paid too much attention to the ideological arguments advanced by the
pornographers.
|
A |
ll other legislation in this field depends on this Act for its efficacy.
The "Video Nasties" phenomenon of the 1980s, which led to the
enactment of the Video Recordings Act in 1984, could be dealt with until the
legal interpretation of "obscene" was further relaxed by the Courts.
Sexually explicit videos are now classified as a matter of course by the
British Board of Film Classification and in 2000 nearly 200 titles were
classified 'R18' and, so far this year, a further 584 have been approved.
Prosecutions against pornography can only proceed with the consent of the
Director of Public Prosecutions if it is thought that there is sufficient
evidence to secure a conviction.
Following the Judgement of Mr Justice Hooper in May 2000 the Home Office
issued a public consultation paper in July 2000 on "regulation of 'R18'
Videos". More than a year after the closing date the Government still has
not published the results of this consultation although a White Paper is
expected at some point in the future. More delay tactics! One wonders what
point this will serve given that so many hard core 'R18' Videos are already
classified and in circulation? And let us not forget that the BBFC, far from
representing the public interest, was set up and is funded, through the
classification procedures, by the film industry. The availability of hard-core
videos has led to a growth across the country of sex shops, which are moving
out of seedy back streets into brightly-lit high street locations. Once
established, these premises are practically impossible to close down.
|
H |
ard core material is available on satellite and cable TV networks too.
Specialist magazines regularly advertise smart cards for a range of tastes
including explicit gay and lesbian channels. The Independent Television
Commission has licensed a number of so-called "soft" pornography
channels, which it says it has no discretion to refuse so long as they observe
the Programme Code. Significantly, the Code's requirement to present sex and
nudity with "tact and discretion" was removed last year. To its
credit the ITC has taken the limited action it can over "hard core"
channels originating from abroad. The Broadcasting Act gives power to the ITC
to recommend Proscription Orders against channels which regularly breach UK
taste and decency rules. The Orders, however, do not outlaw these channels but
merely stop them advertising in Britain and prohibit British investment in
them.
In September 2000 the ITC recommended that a Proscription Order be
issued against the Satisfaction Channel. Fifteen months on we understand that
the Secretary of State, after repeated badgering and questions from MPs, is
only now "considering" whether or not to follow the ITC 's
recommendation. This delay has given the Channel ample time to establish a
healthy subscriber base in the UK. We are bound to wonder how much the
Government receives in revenue from the many faceted pornography industry.
And now we come to the Internet. No one can doubt the many benefits that
have come from this marvellous invention. However, it has proved in its short
history to have become the most lucrative growth area for the pornographers
because accessing the material can be easily done in private. It is true that
the industry, with the co-operation of the police, has set up a scheme of self
regulation but only illegal material can be stopped and only if it is hosted in
the UK. Sites hosted abroad cannot be stopped and of course, much that is
obscene is not illegal.
We applaud attempts to establish an international code of practice and
we are thankful that decisive action around the world can be taken against
child pornography but this leaves available volumes of adult obscenity of every
conceivable kind. Channel 5 TV, in a recent series, helpfully surveyed fetish
and voyeur web sites on the Internet for would be enthusiasts.
|
T |
he truth is that without the political will to effectively strengthen
the law the pornographers cannot be stopped. Britain has a "special
relationship" with the USA where much of the pornography flooding the
world originates. In the past we have urged Mr Blair not only to talk to
members of his own government but also to President Bush and the US Senate as
well. Sadly, he was not convinced by the evidence or the case for action we
made to him. In the run up to the 1997 General Election he called for a
"decent society" but little has been done to achieve it.
Everybody who is concerned and wants something done must talk to their
own local and national politicians telling them that their seats are in peril
if they continue to do nothing about the worsening situation. The corruption of
children should make us all angry but so should the corruption of adults who
destroy children and their innocence to satisfy lust inflamed by pornography.
If we are to avoid another Sarah Payne tragedy keeping silent about this issue
is no longer an option.
Next year the Government plans to bring forward a Communications Bill
that will regulate the media for the foreseeable future. We must all work to
secure that good taste and decency are restored to the airwaves.
For archive of published work visit: www.melaniephillips.com
|
A |
n article published in the Sunday Times 27/10/2002 examined
the controversy surrounding the alleged rape of Ulrika Jonsson. The sub heading
of the article 'When No means no'! said: "In a culture where pornography has crossed into the
mainstream…is it any wonder that courtship can degenerate into crude
misunderstanding - or, at worst, rape". The article included the
following:
|
I |
n today's post-girl-power society, rules about what constitutes
acceptable sexual behaviour are increasingly blurred. Sex screams at us
everywhere. The Face magazine recently featured simulated oral sex as
part of a fashion shoot. A once distinguished newspaper, The Observer is
now reduced to attempting to boost circulation with the tabloid gimmick of a
64-page sex supplement. In the television series Sex and the City, the
four heroines think nothing of chatting in the back of a cab about their
experience of anal sex. Rape has become part of the entertainment
industry. An uncut version of the film Straw
Dogs in which a character played by Susan George is raped by two men, was
released on DVD this month after being banned in Britain for more than 20
years. Irreversible, a French film with a nine-minute rape scene, was
granted an 18 certificate. Tania Kindersley, 35, a "click lit"
novelist, believes such images throw out potentially dangerous messages to
women. "We are surrounded on an almost daily basis by images of soft porn
- from the lads' mags on newsagents' shelves to pretty young things wearing
T-shirts saying 'Porn Star in Training', to glossy magazines telling us
lap-dancing clubs like Spearmint Rhino aren't sleazy, they're cool" she
said. "The result is a cult of availability, where all women are supposed
to be gagging for it. A lot of young women get into situations where they would
like to stop at the bedroom door, but carry on for fear of being thought
prudish".
The Sunday
Times 27/10/2002
|
M |
ore than three years ago the Independent Television
Commission recommended that a Proscription Order be issued by the Government
against the ‘Satisfaction Channel’, a
pornographic satellite TV service.
We have taken this up with successive
Secretaries and Ministers of State and have learned from Lord McIntosh, (right)
appointed Minister of State in June this year, that the matter is still under
consideration by Culture Secretary, Tessa Jowell MP.
Also three years ago, in July 2000, the Home Office
issued a Consultation Paper on the Regulation of Pornographic ‘R18’
Videos. Responsibility for this passed
to the Culture Department after the General Election in 2001 since when it has
sunk without trace.
Since the Labour Government was elected in 1997 the
number of high street sex establishments across the country has increased
significantly - to the dismay of local communities. The availability of hard-core pornography in videos and DVDs has grown
exponentially and mainstream television has stepped up its promotion of the sex
industry in programmes about stripping, pole dancing, sex toys, pornography,
prostitution and the appalling material that is accessible on the Internet.
mediawatch-uk was encouraged by remarks made by
Tessa Jowell in May 2002 about pornography when it was disclosed that the
Labour Party had received £100,000 from a
publisher of several pornographic titles. She said that it “demeans and belittles women”. So far as we know her department has stood
aside while the ITC has licensed numerous satellite and cable channels that
transmit pornographic programming - and unilaterally relaxed its Code to
accommodate them. Indeed, we have
recently learned that a Government official involved in discussions in Brussels
to amend the Television Without Frontiers Directive refused to “countenance action that would mean a total ban on
pornographic satellite channels”.
This benevolent approach is a very far cry indeed from the remarks made
by Jack Straw MP when, writing in The Times
in May 1989, he called for “controls on the invidious spread of soft porn”!
Our friends at Morality In Media, in America, tell us that
their Justice Department is again “targeting commercial distributors of
hardcore pornography” and all Americans are being called to renew their
commitment to enforcing obscenity laws.
We hope that Britain will follow this lead!
Another
General Election is on the horizon and we ask all members and supporters to
make the corruption of our culture a serious political question.
Click here
for Make Internet Pornography an election issue
Click here for mediawatch-uk’s
response to the Liberal Democrat consultation on Pornography
Click here for Pornography:
The Harm
Click here for Norway
restricts TV pornography
Mobile phones that offer a hotline to porn
|
A |
ction
was demanded yesterday to stop children being able to access pornographic video
clips on the latest mobile phones. The phones
connect to the Internet allowing youngsters to trawl for pornography while away
from parental control. While the mobile
industry will not speculate, sex industry insiders claim European revenues
could be worth £2.5billion a year by 2006.
One British company is already selling ten-second clips of extreme
footage - which would be banned by the British Board of Film Classification -
at £3.00 each.
Daily Mail 4/3/2003
Art? This is nothing more than
porn
|
A |
shocking
stage play which appears to show live sex acts has been greeted with
outrage. Some of the audience walked
out and there were demonstrations outside the west London fringe theatre where
the production, entitled XXX, is taking place. The play is based on an 18th century Marquis de Sade
book about a naïve 18-year-old girl, Eugenie, and her introduction to sex. There are scenes of lesbianism, bestiality,
and rape, while footage of sexual torture and mutilation are projected on a
giant screen at the back of the stage.
The play ends with Eugenie arranging the gang rape and sexual mutilation
of her own mother.
mediawatch-uk
director, John Beyer, said: 'This is another example of our degenerate
culture. The theatre is an area which
seems to be pushing standards outward all the time'.
Scotland
Yard said officers had seen the performance and were satisfied that it did not
break the law. They will take no
further action unless there is a complaint.
Daily Mail 24/4/2003
The Sunday Express 27/4/2003 included a review of XXX comparing it to other
boundary pushing productions and stated: "The late Mary Whitehouse, then
president of the self appointed guardian of public morality, the National
Viewers' and Listeners' Association, objected to a scene in which an actor
playing a Roman soldier simulated the rape of another, and brought a
prosecution she then dropped before the trial was complete".
John
Beyer wrote to correct this erroneous account:
Sir, Your "self appointed" stage reviewer
Mark Shenton is wrong to state that Mary Whitehouse "dropped" the
prosecution of 'Romans In Britain' (27/4/2003 p.50 & 51)
In her autobiography 'A Most dangerous Woman'
Mrs Whitehouse sets out the truth of what happened. The judge, she said: "stated that our claim that the theatre
could be covered by the Sexual Offences Act was entirely correct. He then went on to deal with what he termed
the 'wholly improper' situation that had arisen as a result of Michael
Bogdanov, the director, having been informed by Counsel that the case against
him was being withdrawn and that he would be discharged. Such an initiative had, the judge said,
pre-empted his function as a judge.
This had created an unprecedented situation in which the Attorney
General's advice had been sought. The
judge made it abundantly clear that if events had taken their proper course he
would not have allowed the case to be withdrawn." The Attorney General intervened and
nullified the prosecution.
It is a pity that Mr Shenton failed to check his
facts before repeating the errors that circulated at the time of trial.
The Sunday Times of the same date made a similar error in its News Review and a letter
was sent to the editor.
Click here for 'Beware TV's Red Light
Districts'
Hundreds of child porn suspects may be let off
|
H |
undreds of
suspected paedophiles may escape prosecution because police have been deluged
with cases. Guidelines have been issued
to officers suggesting swifter ways of dealing with offenders. These include handing out cautions or
letting someone off with a formal warning instead of taking him to court. The initiative, drawn up by Scotland Yard
after consultation with Crown Prosecution Service lawyers, has been introduced
because of the number of suspects brought in by Operation Ore - the UK end of a
US investigation into a pay-per-view child pornography website based in
Texas.
A Michele
Elliott, of Kidscape, a child protection charity, said she was angry that the
police had been forced into this position because of lack of resources. "What kind of message does this
send?" she said, "Each of those people has looked at an image of an
abused child. Are we really saying that
it is OK to offend a little bit?
Daily Mail
3/5/2003
Click here for 'Innocence
vs Corruption'
For news and information visit: www.kidscape.org.uk
Ann Summers shows all in Carlton doc
|
A |
nn Summers, the
erotic shop chain that recently went to the High Court to get the right to
advertise in job centres, is to be the subject of a series for Carlton's London
region. Flame TV has been commissioned
to make Ann Summers Uncovered a 7 x 30-minute series looking at all
aspects of the business. Filming is
taking place in London and the south-east and transmission is expected this
September. Flame has also been
commissioned to make the 30-minute Rude London which looks at the
capital's rudest people.
Broadcast
30/5/2003
John Beyer,
Director of mediawatch-uk, said today: "This is yet another example of
mainstream television promoting and normalising the sex industry. This seems to receive a disproportionate
amount of attention in pseudo documentaries and it seems a most unsuitable subject
for ITV1 considering it is bound by the statutory requirements not to offend
good taste or decency or offend public feeling. This commissioning adds to the impression that some people in the
television industry are obsessed with pushing the boundaries on sex and
pornography regardless of any harm or offence it is likely to cause."
Rapes soar by a quarter as violent crime figures rise
|
R |
apes of women rose by more
than a quarter to more than 10,000 annually for the first time in history of
police-recorded crime, according to figures published today. Other serious sexual assaults on men and
women also rose amid an overall increase in violent offences. The rise in female rape was 27 per cent and
indecent assault on women rose by 14 per cent.
Female rapes rose from 8,990 to 11,441, the biggest annual increase, and
indecent assault on women from 21,700 to 24,800. Police-recorded rapes of women have increased 82 per cent since
Labour came to power.
The Times 17/7/2003
Alarm at free porn TV
|
M |
edia mogul and porn
magnate David Sullivan has launched the UK's first free-view sex channel on
satellite television. Free Sex TV gives
viewers unrestricted access to unencrypted adult entertainment. Unlike other existing 18-plus satellite
channels, Free Sex TV will appear without the need to register. Viewers will be incited to make telephone or
text calls to the models and the revenue from the calls will fund the
channel. mediawatch-uk chairman, John Milton Whatmore, hit out
yesterday saying "We think this erodes public morals and doesn't give the
right sort of pointers to the accreditation of public decency."
Western Mail 17/7/2003
Education video is porn, say parents
|
P |
arents have forced an infants
school not to show a sex education videotape that they claim is
pornographic. Vivid references to the
female genitalia feature in the 15-minute Channel 4 tape issued by the
Department for Education as part of its Key Stage 1 programme for infants aged
five to seven. The video has been
dropped after a large majority of parents who attended a preview said it was
unsuitable for such young children.
The Times 18/7/2003
It is reported that the
Children's Minister, Margaret Hodge MP, will be viewing the video and Robert
Whelan, Director of Family and Youth Concern said: "We have had lots of
complaints about these Channel 4 videos.
It is totally inappropriate to be giving any sort of sex education at
that age. It is a violation of
childhood and people who promote these things have very weird ideas about young
people.
Daily Mail 18/7/2003
Friendly TV in ITC porn probe
|
I |
nteractive entertainment
channel Friendly TV is being investigated by the Independent Television
Commission after viewers complained it was screening unencrypted
pornography. Friendly TV's compliance
officer admitted that the show contained unsuitable material and asked the
producer to tone down the material or risk having the programme pulled. Tapes are being sent to the ITC as part of
the investigation.
Broadcast 18/7/2003
Alarm at free porn TV
|
M |
edia mogul and porn
magnate David Sullivan has launched the UK's first free-view sex channel on
satellite television. Free Sex TV gives
viewers unrestricted access to unencrypted adult entertainment. Unlike other existing 18-plus satellite
channels, Free Sex TV will appear without the need to register. Viewers will be incited to make telephone or
text calls to the models and the revenue from the calls will fund the
channel. mediawatch-uk chairman, John Milton Whatmore, hit out
yesterday saying "We think this erodes public morals and doesn't give the
right sort of pointers to the accreditation of public decency."
Education video is porn, say parents
|
P |
arents have forced an
infants school not to show a sex education videotape that they claim is
pornographic. Vivid references to the
female genitalia feature in the 15-minute Channel 4 tape issued by the
Department for Education as part of its Key Stage 1 programme for infants aged
five to seven. The video has been
dropped after a large majority of parents who attended a preview said it was
unsuitable for such young children.
It is reported that the
Children's Minister, Margaret Hodge MP, will be viewing the video and Robert
Whelan, Director of Family and Youth Concern said: "We have had lots of
complaints about these Channel 4 videos.
It is totally inappropriate to be giving any sort of sex education at
that age. It is a violation of
childhood and people who promote these things have very weird ideas about young
people.
Daily Mail 18/7/2003
|
T |
he
Independent Television Commission has upheld complaints about an unencrypted a pornographic
television channel. From mid-July 2003 Friendly
TV began broadcasting a nightly programme called Free Sex TV between
23.00 and 03.00. Viewers complained
that the programme was too sexually explicit for transmission on a free to air
channel, even so late in the evening.
The programme featured female presenters who were reacting to callers on
an adult chat line. The text messages
displayed on air contained very explicit sexual references and extreme bad
language. The presenters also responded
to ‘requests’ through text messages to perform simulated sex acts both singly
and together.
Friendly TV agreed with the ITC that the output was unsuitable for an unencrypted
entertainment channel and gave assurances that the breaches in the Programme Code
would not be repeated. The ITC ruled
that Free Sex TV was in breach of the general requirement on taste and
decency, in breach of the Advertising Code for promoting premium rate sex
telephone lines and for promoting a commercial website. The ITC also held that Friendly TV
had failed in its obligation to ensure proper compliance of material
transmitted under its licence.
The
ITC regards the breaches of the Programme and Advertising Codes as so serious
that Friendly TV has been warned as to its future conduct, and advised
that any further breaches are likely to incur sanctions.
John Beyer, mediawatch-uk director,
welcomed the unusually robust attitude of the ITC but was disappointed that
such a comprehensively damning finding did not warrant sanctions. He said that the channel, which should
already have given an undertaking to comply with the Codes as a condition of
its licence, should have had it withdrawn immediately. He hoped that any further breaches of the
Codes would result in the channel being closed down permanently.
In five years, we
switch on to twice as much sex
|
T |
he
amount of sex shown on British television has more than doubled in the last
five years, according to research. A report
by the Independent Television Commission also shows that one in five programmes
depicts some form of sexual activity or nudity, with channels 4 and Five the
worst offenders. The commission
compiled the report after a survey published earlier this year showed that 44
per cent of the public believed there was too much sex on television. It analysed the five terrestrial channels
over a two week period in 2002 and compared its findings to a similar period in
1997. John Beyer, of quality TV campaign group mediawatch-uk
said: ‘I am glad the ITC has done a report about this but they should be more
concerned about regulating it. There is
too much pornography masquerading as documentaries and the public don’t like it.” He went on: “The presence of sexual
conduct on television is a result of regulatory failure to ensure that
programmes comply with the statutory requirement not to offend against good
taste or decency.”
|
S |
ex
scenes on television have more than tripled over the last five years according
to new research. The number of scenes
involving depictions of sexual intercourse on terrestrial television has risen
from 26 in 1997 to 80 last year, according to a joint study published by the BBC,
the BSC and the ITC. Programmes
including sex scenes accounted for 14% of the 800 shows monitored in the study,
an increase from 6% five years earlier.
BSC director, Paul Bolt said viewers could be confident that the
watershed remained an effective tool for weeding out material unsuitable for
family viewing. The study came as BSC
chairman, Lord Dubs, told delegates at the Edinburgh Television Festival on
Saturday that film of a male erection could soon be screened on terrestrial
television without opposition from watchdogs. (mediawatch-uk
emphasis)
|
A |
graphic
documentary about the sex industry provoked fury when it was screened last
night. ‘Pornography: the musical’
shocked viewers with its explicit scenes, which included depictions of sex
acts, stripping and fetish films. The
Channel 4 documentary features six women who work in the sex industry … despite
being shown well after the watershed, with warnings … many viewers branded it
too shocking for broadcast at any time … containing some of the sickest scenes
yet shown on television. Tory culture
spokesman John Whittingdale said the documentary went beyond what most people
would consider acceptable for terrestrial television. Miranda Suit of mediamarch, which campaigns for quality
television, said: ‘Even though it was shown well after the watershed, nearly
half of British children have a television in their bedroom and it is difficult
for parents to control their viewing.
Another worry is that graphic descriptions of potentially dangerous or
unhygienic sex acts could encourage behaviour that raises serious health
concerns.’ Channel 4 said: ‘We have
always promoted this as a very hard-hitting documentary which reflects the
visceral and unpleasant aspects of the porn industry’.
|
T |
he
TV critic Peter Paterson commented that Channel 4 was up to its old tricks
again … trying to extend the boundaries of what is widely recognised as
acceptable on TV. What can’t be right
is for Channel 4 … to become a place where the sleaziest type of pornography is
available. Mr Paterson expressed a
preference that, without prompting, the Independent Television Commission
’would come down hard on Channel 4 with a hefty fine for exhibiting gross
indecency … They must also warn Mark Thompson that if he tries anything like
this again both his job, and that of chairman Vanni Treves, will be on the
line.’
Desmond sees his
profits flop at TV porn channels
|
R |
ichard
Desmond, owner of the Daily Express newspaper, has reported a big decline in
profits from his television sex channels.
Desmond’s latest company account reveal that profits at his broadcasting
division – which includes Television X and the Fantasy Channel –
fell from £15.7m in 2001 to £8.9m last year.
A spokesman for Northern & Shell Network, Desmond’s company, said
that accountancy changes had caused a dip in earnings and that the television
business was still one of the group’s most profitable. Some industry watchers have speculated that
the rise of the Internet, which has already hit sales of top-shelf magazines
could also be affecting the television business.
3 brings adult videos to your
mobile phone
|
T |
he
mobile phone operator 3 is promising customers instant gratification from
today, with a new video download service built around adult entertainment,
music and news. The company predicts
that adult services will fuel sales of video-capable handsets over Christmas
and during the next year.
Government
proscribes Satellite Porn Channel
|
T |
he Government is to take steps to restrict access
to violent pornographic broadcasts by the satellite TV channel Extasi TV,
Broadcasting Minister Andrew McIntosh announced today. An Order has been laid to proscribe the
service in the United Kingdom under Section 177 pf the Broadcasting Act
2003. Activities that will be banned
include the supply of dedicated equipment such as decoding cards or programme
material. The restrictions come into
effect on the 21 February if no objections from Parliament are received. Andrew McIntosh said: ‘I was notified by
Ofcom that the content of satellite channel Extasi TV is unacceptable and
should be the subject of a proscription order.
Under the requirements of the Act, I have viewed the material from the
channel and consider that a proscription order would be in the public interest,
in particular to ensure that children are not exposed to such potentially
harmful material.”
DCMS News Release 8/2/2005
This news
release can be seen at: www.culture.gov.uk/global/press_notices/archive_2005/dcms017_05.htm