Well, you can’t please everybody.
Following the heated controversy of MTV’s “Skins,” the American answer to the British show of the same name about teenagers exploring life, love, and recreational drug use, more advertisers are pulling out their commercials from the taboo show.
After Wrigley’s withdrew their commercials, companies like H&R Block and General Motors are taking out their content. The Parents Television Council has been on the warpath against the show, as it finds so much graphic content (42 depictions of illegal drugs and illicit sexual mentions in 41 minutes of the pilot) disturbing to MTV’s younger viewers. Melissa Henson, the Director of Communication and Public Education for the PTC, says that a large part has to do with the age of the actors involved.
“The key difference between “Skins” and a program like “Gossip Girl” is that [“Skins”] actually uses a very young cast, between the ages of 15 and 19," said Henson. "They have these high school kids in highly eroticized, highly sexualized positions."
The concern isn’t that kids watching the show will automatically begin partying to the nth degree, but rather that they absorb the behaviors they see on TV subconsciously. “Just by putting it on television makes it typical, makes it expected,” Henson said. “That’s not to say it factors into their decision-making process.”
Henson pointed out that older WB shows like “Buffy the Vampire Slayer” and “Dawson’s Creek” got a lot of publicity in their heyday, but it was more wholesome shows like “7th Heaven” that drew in stronger, more consistent ratings.
The PTC said in a statement on Saturday that they are encouraging more sponsors to take out their advertisements—among them, L’Oreal, Foot Locker, and Schick Hydro.
The end result, ultimately, is for parents to be aware of what their teens are watching. “It’s important that parents know what’s out there,” Henson said. “Beyond that, I hope that MTV gets the message that they’ve gone too far in this series.
"We also are hopeful that advertisers will get the message that they will be held responsible by the content that was made possible by their ad dollars.”
Showing posts with label MTV. Show all posts
Showing posts with label MTV. Show all posts
Monday, January 24, 2011
Friday, January 21, 2011
Kim Kardashian Upset With MTV's "Teen Mom"
TV fans, prepare yourselves — Kim Kardashian is upset!
The reality vixen, who stars in E!'s "Keeping Up with the Kardashians," took to her blog to bemoan the dangers of another reality show, MTV's "Teen Mom."
"While I was at the 'Today' show this morning I saw a story about a Memphis high school where 90 young female students were either pregnant or have given birth this year!" Kim wrote in a blog posted on her personal website on Wednesday. "I just couldn't believe this and I find it so sad and disturbing."
The 30-year-old bombshell, who found her own celebrity thanks largely to a leaked sex tape filmed while she was in her early 20s, doesn't believe pregnant teens should be "celebrities."
"It seems that shows like 'Teen Mom' are all of a sudden making teen pregnancy seem cool in the eyes of young girls," she continued. "The kids from these shows are all over the news, even on the covers of magazines, and have been become almost like celebrities, but girls, these are not people you should idolize!
"…Girls, please, think very carefully before you make these kind of decisions," Kim pleaded. "Talk to your family, friends, teachers, and most of all, be careful."
The reality vixen, who stars in E!'s "Keeping Up with the Kardashians," took to her blog to bemoan the dangers of another reality show, MTV's "Teen Mom."
"While I was at the 'Today' show this morning I saw a story about a Memphis high school where 90 young female students were either pregnant or have given birth this year!" Kim wrote in a blog posted on her personal website on Wednesday. "I just couldn't believe this and I find it so sad and disturbing."
The 30-year-old bombshell, who found her own celebrity thanks largely to a leaked sex tape filmed while she was in her early 20s, doesn't believe pregnant teens should be "celebrities."
"It seems that shows like 'Teen Mom' are all of a sudden making teen pregnancy seem cool in the eyes of young girls," she continued. "The kids from these shows are all over the news, even on the covers of magazines, and have been become almost like celebrities, but girls, these are not people you should idolize!
"…Girls, please, think very carefully before you make these kind of decisions," Kim pleaded. "Talk to your family, friends, teachers, and most of all, be careful."
MTV's "Skins" Game
The network that gave us Snooki now features a teen sex show that may have too much to bare...
It's hard to write this without sounding like an ancient prude or an echo of the overheated, we're-in-danger-of-losing-our-mortal-souls! bombast of the often-reactionary Parents Television Council.
But let's step back for a moment, take a deep (not heavy) breath and make a humble suggestion to MTV executives: When your hot new show might be in danger of running afoul of child pornography laws, perhaps it’s time for a larger reassessment of your mission.
The New York Times reports that MTV has directed the producers of "Skins," the new scripted show portraying teenagers run amok, to tone things down because of fears of breaking federal law. The paper cited a scene in an upcoming episode showing a 17-year-old boy naked from behind as among the concern-raising content.
The show, based on the British program of the same name, actually employs age-appropriate actors (the youngest is 15) – unlike TV's biggest high school-set show, "Glee," where some of the performers are old enough to have graduated medical school.
While "Glee" has plenty of hormonally charged raciness, it's couched in camp. "Skins" offers a far more stark and explicit portrayal of sex, drugs and lots of other things parents of teens wish didn’t exist. Last week's premiere featured an exhibitionist MILF and a girl with an unfortunate nickname, which – like some of the dialogue – isn’t repeatable here.
We're willing to accept that elements of the show are realistic, even if "Skins" isn't necessarily appropriate viewing for young teens (who, of course, are among the 3.3 million who saw last week's premiere episode and the many others watching online. The Times noted that the program set a debut-show record for viewership in MTV’s prime 12 to 34 demographic).
“Skins,” though, feels like it belongs on some other network – say, Cinemax. Unfortunately, the show marks another example of MTV’s growing cynicism toward a youth culture that it once celebrated.
"Jersey Shore" seems to have been just the start of a headfirst dive (or Snooki ball drop) into a programming strategy largely based upon young people acting foolishly. We’ve reached the sad point where the real-life, walking, squawking ethnic stereotypes on "Jersey Shore" come off as more cartoonish than the fictional characters of "Skins."
It's all too easy for those us who remember MTV's debut nearly 30 years ago to romanticize a past where sexist videos in which guys and gals seemed to be in a big-hair competition ruled the day. But MTV was at least a place that offered the latest music videos, pop culture news and a sense that the real world (and even “The Real World,” at least in the early years) wasn’t a bleak place.
We're not calling for an MTV "Up With People" marathon, and aren’t quite ready to declare, like the PTC, that “Skins” is “the most dangerous program that has ever been foisted on your children!” But using this opportunity to think about where MTV should go from here might be nice, along with a restoration of some balance. Perhaps a little more "Rock the Vote"– and a little less rocking of beach houses.
That might be too much to hope for, with Viacom, MTV’s parent company, making big money off nonsense like “Jersey Shore,” and, presumably, “Skins.” But as they face concerns over crossing the line into kiddie porn, the MTV suits may soon have to decide whether "Skins," in the long run, is too much to bare.
It's hard to write this without sounding like an ancient prude or an echo of the overheated, we're-in-danger-of-losing-our-mortal-souls! bombast of the often-reactionary Parents Television Council.
But let's step back for a moment, take a deep (not heavy) breath and make a humble suggestion to MTV executives: When your hot new show might be in danger of running afoul of child pornography laws, perhaps it’s time for a larger reassessment of your mission.
The New York Times reports that MTV has directed the producers of "Skins," the new scripted show portraying teenagers run amok, to tone things down because of fears of breaking federal law. The paper cited a scene in an upcoming episode showing a 17-year-old boy naked from behind as among the concern-raising content.
The show, based on the British program of the same name, actually employs age-appropriate actors (the youngest is 15) – unlike TV's biggest high school-set show, "Glee," where some of the performers are old enough to have graduated medical school.
While "Glee" has plenty of hormonally charged raciness, it's couched in camp. "Skins" offers a far more stark and explicit portrayal of sex, drugs and lots of other things parents of teens wish didn’t exist. Last week's premiere featured an exhibitionist MILF and a girl with an unfortunate nickname, which – like some of the dialogue – isn’t repeatable here.
We're willing to accept that elements of the show are realistic, even if "Skins" isn't necessarily appropriate viewing for young teens (who, of course, are among the 3.3 million who saw last week's premiere episode and the many others watching online. The Times noted that the program set a debut-show record for viewership in MTV’s prime 12 to 34 demographic).
“Skins,” though, feels like it belongs on some other network – say, Cinemax. Unfortunately, the show marks another example of MTV’s growing cynicism toward a youth culture that it once celebrated.
"Jersey Shore" seems to have been just the start of a headfirst dive (or Snooki ball drop) into a programming strategy largely based upon young people acting foolishly. We’ve reached the sad point where the real-life, walking, squawking ethnic stereotypes on "Jersey Shore" come off as more cartoonish than the fictional characters of "Skins."
It's all too easy for those us who remember MTV's debut nearly 30 years ago to romanticize a past where sexist videos in which guys and gals seemed to be in a big-hair competition ruled the day. But MTV was at least a place that offered the latest music videos, pop culture news and a sense that the real world (and even “The Real World,” at least in the early years) wasn’t a bleak place.
We're not calling for an MTV "Up With People" marathon, and aren’t quite ready to declare, like the PTC, that “Skins” is “the most dangerous program that has ever been foisted on your children!” But using this opportunity to think about where MTV should go from here might be nice, along with a restoration of some balance. Perhaps a little more "Rock the Vote"– and a little less rocking of beach houses.
That might be too much to hope for, with Viacom, MTV’s parent company, making big money off nonsense like “Jersey Shore,” and, presumably, “Skins.” But as they face concerns over crossing the line into kiddie porn, the MTV suits may soon have to decide whether "Skins," in the long run, is too much to bare.
Monday, January 17, 2011
MTV's 'Skins' Lays It Bare: Teenagers Can Be Very Scary
Imagine 'Gossip Girl' without the money and glamor, 'Degrassi' without the PG rating, 'Risky Business' as a TV series, or 'Fast Times at Ridgemont High' for the Facebook era, and you'll have an idea of what to expect from 'Skins,' which debuted last night on MTV.
The show is an adaptation of a very controversial and successful British series with the same name. Set in Baltimore, 'Skins' follows a motley crew of high schoolers, who, on the surface, seem like unlikely friends. In typical form for these kinds of shows, each member of the group is so different -- the crazy dopehead girl, the cheerleading lesbian, the socially awkward geek, the reluctant Muslim -- that usually you'd be hard-pressed to believe such divergent personalities would be able to converse in the same language, let alone pal around. But somehow 'Skins' convinces us that these kids care about each other. Watch a 'Skins' character video of after the jump [warning: sexual tones and strong language]:.
'Skins' is essentially a classic sex romp -- the characters pursue a good time with reckless abandon. They want sex, parties and drugs and they'll climb out windows, make wagers involving public nudity and steal cars to get them. Despite the familiarity of the John Hughesian plot elements, there is a freshness in the re-telling that comes from the lack of explanation about why these kids do what they do.
That's not to say there isn't plenty of backstory. Mental illness, death, and broken homes are all on the slate, but instead of being treated with the usual OMFG drama, these elements are fairly sedately revealed.
They are as inevitable as the weather (which also turns up in this show. It's not always a sunny day, and it's amazing how much of an impression a few snowflakes in the first scene make. You suddenly realize how rarely shows set in the north ever suffer through winter.) If anything, we learn less about the characters from the scenes of their home life than we do from the way they go after pleasure, and this is definitely not an after-school special. It's more like 'Kids.' Imagine watching 'Kids' once a week.
The show is an adaptation of a very controversial and successful British series with the same name. Set in Baltimore, 'Skins' follows a motley crew of high schoolers, who, on the surface, seem like unlikely friends. In typical form for these kinds of shows, each member of the group is so different -- the crazy dopehead girl, the cheerleading lesbian, the socially awkward geek, the reluctant Muslim -- that usually you'd be hard-pressed to believe such divergent personalities would be able to converse in the same language, let alone pal around. But somehow 'Skins' convinces us that these kids care about each other. Watch a 'Skins' character video of after the jump [warning: sexual tones and strong language]:.
'Skins' is essentially a classic sex romp -- the characters pursue a good time with reckless abandon. They want sex, parties and drugs and they'll climb out windows, make wagers involving public nudity and steal cars to get them. Despite the familiarity of the John Hughesian plot elements, there is a freshness in the re-telling that comes from the lack of explanation about why these kids do what they do.
That's not to say there isn't plenty of backstory. Mental illness, death, and broken homes are all on the slate, but instead of being treated with the usual OMFG drama, these elements are fairly sedately revealed.
They are as inevitable as the weather (which also turns up in this show. It's not always a sunny day, and it's amazing how much of an impression a few snowflakes in the first scene make. You suddenly realize how rarely shows set in the north ever suffer through winter.) If anything, we learn less about the characters from the scenes of their home life than we do from the way they go after pleasure, and this is definitely not an after-school special. It's more like 'Kids.' Imagine watching 'Kids' once a week.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)