“The Sickest Television Show Ever:” Paedogeddon and the British Press

Abstract

This paper explores the controversy caused by Paedogeddon, a one-off special of the Channel 4 series Brass Eye broadcast on July 26, 2001. Although the program sought to satirize inconsistencies in the way the British media treats and sensationalizes child sex offenders and their crimes (Clark, 2001), it offended many viewers and caused considerable controversy. More than 900 complaints were made to the Independent Television Commission, almost 250 complaints to the Broadcasting Standards Commission, and 2,000 complaints to Channel 4, “officially” making Paedogeddon the most complained-about television program in British television history at that time. This paper examines the nature of the objections to Paedogeddon as played out on the pages of the British national press and contributes to debates about morally acceptable television. Three themes are identified in the press objections to the mock-documentary: aesthetic arguments; moral and ethical implications; and consequences of ministerial intervention. The nature of these press objections served to prevent an engagement with Paedogeddon's critique of the media. Further, the analysis illustrates how media discourses and scripts can fix and limit debates surrounding controversial television programming.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The authors would like to thank Vincent Campbell and Peter Wilkin for their useful comments on an earlier draft of the paper. Also grateful thanks to the two reviewers for their stimulating and supportive comments.

Notes

¹ Paedogeddon was repeated on Saturday, July 28, 2001, at 12:05 a.m.

² Nichols (1991, 1994) identifies five documentary modes of representation: expositional, observational, interactive, reflexive, and performative. Mock-documentaries play with the expositional, observational, and interactive modes of representation (Roscoe & Hight, 2001). Documentaries using the expositional modes formulate the text around a social problem and then seek solutions or answers to the problem. Audiences are directly addressed and producers, writers and presenters are objectively conveyed as value-free, unbiased, and balanced, while adhering to a specific line of argument. Interactive modes center on the interaction between the documentary maker and documentary subject. It utilizes the “talking head” expert or witness and may function as an oral history to reconstruct the past. The documentary maker may appear in this mode of commentary through comments and asking questions. Interactions with various social actors form the basis of this type of documentary, and the viewing audience is positioned as a “secondary witness” (Roscoe & Hight, 2001).

³A “nonce” is UK slang for a convicted sex offender.

⁴ Paedogeddon was nominated for two British Academy Television Awards (Baftas) in April 2002 for best comedy and for the most innovative show.

⁵When Media Editor of The Times, Raymond Snoddy observed, “Irate members of the public are a start, but you can't have a program row of historic proportions without ministerial intervention, preferably one who hasn't seen the program” (Snoddy, 2001, p. 20).

⁶It has been noted, for example, by Gray (2005) that different types of objections toward media texts (such as moral or aesthetic objections), are often used in combination. However, for the purpose of the paper, critical newspaper items were coded according to the theme that was most dominant (as identified by the content of the headline, the subheading, and the principle stance taken in the main text).

⁷It is interesting to note that Nicholas Owen had earlier appeared in the “Science” episode of Brass Eye warning viewers about the (fictitious) effects of “heavy electricity.” Owen explained how “Geeta is 15 years old, and now because of heavy electricity she is only eight inches tall. Now just imagine that. She can't speak, but she must feel quite dreadful.”

⁸The pretransmission warning read: “Now on 4, a Brass Eye special which takes an uncompromising look at the subject of paedophilia. This program contains some scenes which viewers might find disturbing.”

⁹An apology was broadcast on Channel 4 at 10:00 pm on September 20, 2001: “The Independent Television Commission has instructed Channel 4 to apologize for offense to viewers by the Brass Eye Special, broadcast at 10:35 pm on Thursday July 26 and repeated after midnight the following night. Channel 4 has a remit to make challenging programs, and the ITC accepted that a satire on public and media attitudes to paedophilia fell within that remit. However, the ITC felt the warning before the program did not give enough information on what to expect, and needless offense was caused to viewers caught unawares. Channel 4 took care to ensure no harm was caused by children who took part, but this was not apparent to viewers, some of whom found children's participation particularly shocking. Channel 4 apologizes to viewers who are offended” (ITC 2001, p. 2). The Broadcasting Standards Council agreed in part with ITC's ruling as it deemed the pretransmission warning clear and adequate (BSC, 2001).