Mary Whitehouse on the BBC

 

 

This is a picture of the
projection on the BBC’s Broadcasting House. 
Mary Whitehouse was famously blocked from appearing on the BBC during
the 1960s because of her criticism of the corporation’s output which she
believed was potentially harmful. 

Last Tuesday evening, we
projected images of Mary Whitehouse in locations all over London asking people to consider whether or
not she was right all along.  At the same
time we released the results of new research which we commissioned to mark our
anniversary.  We wanted to know what the
British public felt about the state of media, its impact on today’s society and
whether the public feels confident that complaints about disturbing or
unsuitable content are being dealt with effectively.

Our investigation found
that, overwhelmingly, the public think programme makers and schedulers crossed
the line in allowing increasingly inappropriate content to invade our screens.  Everyone surveyed reported viewing
inappropriate content before the watershed, including: violence, sexual
activity, racism and offensive language. 
However, only 26% had actually done anything to express their
dissatisfaction because they do not feel their voices are being heeded when
they complain.

The highest percentage of
complaints was made about sexual activity (47%), followed by offensive language
(38%), violence (36%) and inappropriate adult issues such as drug taking,
gambling etc (34%), all shown before the watershed. More people had complained
about content involving sexual violence (33%) than about racism or other
discriminatory content (21%).   This
would not have come as a surprise to Mary Whitehouse who said of television:
“if it is sometimes a debasing influence, it could equally be a great ennobling
force if we cared enough.”

When respondents were asked
whether inappropriate content might have an effect on people’s behaviour, 94%
believed that it could, citing violent horror, explicit sexual content, music
videos and soap operas as particularly problematic.  With such a high percentage of the public
feeling that this kind of subject matter can be potentially harmful, Mediawatch-UK
believes that broadcasters have a duty to take this more seriously.

Writing in 1977, Mary
Whitehouse said: “What we are is inseparable from the cumulative effect of all
that we have seen, read and experienced.” 
How prescient this seems now.   

39% of those surveyed said they
hadn’t bothered to make a complaint because they either feared that nothing
would be done about it, they didn’t know whom to contact or sometimes they
didn’t want to be seen as a ‘complainer’.  They gave a number of reasons for this:  

Of those that did complain,
either to their media provider, TV station, the programme makers, OFCOM or via
social media, 40% either received no response at all or were dissatisfied with
the outcome.  Many received a computer-generated form which was never
followed up.  Others felt strongly that if the body to which they had
expressed their complaint had simply apologised they may have been satisfied,
but they were denied even that small gesture.

OFCOM’s failure to regulate
adequately in the past has led to what the regulator itself described as being
‘at the very margin of acceptability’ to become mainstream. Is it then any
wonder that people are not making their views known about inappropriate
broadcasts because they don’t think anything will come of complaining.   

Many today would concur with
Mary Whitehouse’s comment on the TV regulator: “Instead of the government
providing a vehicle for the voice of the viewer, it has provided little more
than a convenient means for the broadcasters to deflect criticism of their
programmes.”  It would appear that Mary
Whitehouse was right after all.