Frakie Boyle Vs. Rebecca Adlington (Comedy Censorship)
After the ‘Sachsgate’ scandal, BBC’s comedy has come under massive scrutiny in terms of what is deemed offensive and acceptable for broadcast. However, after the initial overreaction and mass panic, it has become divided into two sides. Those outraged with offensive comedy content, and others believing the BBC are bowing down to a minority of hyper-sensitive members of the public. Frankie Boyle has recently quit Mock the Week because he believes the BBC have become scared of causing offense to someone, after his comments about Olympic swimming medallist Rebecca Adlington, were edited from the show. Boyle has done something similar before, quitting a newspaper column due to some of jokes being deemed too offensive to print.
Here’s the joke that has caused so much controversy:
“She looks like someone who's looking at themselves in the back of a spoon… Did you see her boyfriend? He was really attractive.... So from that I have deduced that Rebecca Adlington is very dirty – I mean if you just take into account how long she can hold her breath…”
Mock the Week, and Frankie Boyle, in particular has become renowned for its ‘close-to-the-bone’ humour, and is shown on a later slot on BBC 2, all of which support the fact that its content is less-mainstream, and more ‘adult’ than other topical shows. Also, the show has been running for – series, and has become one of the channels highest rating comedy shows. Because of this, its potentially offensive content should be of no real surprise to viewers, and may indeed be why many of the viewers tune in.
Rebecca Adlington has said that Frankie Boyle has not been punished enough for his gags, but can anyone in the public eye stop anyone making a joke about them, especially when it doesn’t contain any libel or real defamation? In my opinion, people should be questioning why in our society Rebecca Adlington is considered a ‘national hero’ when she is still so young, and has only completed in a single Olympics. Boyle has defended his comments by stressing the un-importance of Adlington within topical shows, saying:
“We’re fighting two wars, there’s swine flu and the global economy is going down the toilet. People expect you to talk about this - and what do the production team send us? A picture of Rebecca Adlington.”
Adlington has commented that Frankie Boyle is using this incident as “a chance to keep his face in the papers and get his name out there”, which to me seems like a peculiar claim, considering Frankie Boyle is already one of the biggest comedians working today, with his debut DVD one of the fastest selling last Christmas, and sell-out UK tours. Yet Rebecca Adlington’s agent also told the Sunday Telegraph: ‘Frankie Boyle has made it very clear that he doesn't care what the BBC Trust says or does.’ This contradicts the previous comment, as Boyle is clearly putting himself in a position that will minimise his airtime on the BBC, already reduced majorly by quitting the high-rating Mock the Week. If anything, Boyle is taking a fantastically brave stance for the freedom of comedy, free from thinking about the effects it will have on his career. Boyle has also widely stated that he intends to quite comedy at 40, so his actions seem like a genuinely passionate defiance against rising control on what is said in comedy, and as a comedian and writer myself, I think this is an admirable thing.
I think the sudden rise of offense is directly linked to the scandal and outrage after the ‘Sachsgate’ incident, and much of it, I feel, is entirely see through in its weakness. For example, a Frankie Boyle joke was complained about by a large number of people on an earlier episode of Mock the Week, only for it to turn out the episode was a repeat, in which the original episode received no complaints at all. It was a similar case in ‘Sachsgate’, where the number of complaints exceeded the average viewing figures for the show, meaning people had been “offended” hearing about the show, or had heard about the incident, watched the show knowing what was going to happen, ad then got “offended”. The complaints system also doesn’t take into account the fact that the number of complaints (say 140 for example – which is a very large number of complaints) only represents a tiny minority of the viewing figures for the shows. Also, quite simply, if you are not offended by the content of the show, you don’t feel the need to call the BBC and let them know, ‘that was fine’.
The BBC has already edited a number of jokes out of programmes, and has taken programmes that received complaints because of jokes off BBC iplayer, so that they can no longer be viewed. There are also talks to implement more ‘bleeping’ in programmes for offensive language, even though we arguably live in a society that has become steadily de-sensitised to ‘offensive’ (or what was once deemed offensive) language. The minority of viewers who have found an aspect of a programme offensive seem to be controlling its content instead of the majority of people who watch, and enjoy them, on a regular basis.
I feel that the problem would simply be resolved if the BBC, and other broadcasters, would place a short warning message before shows which may contain offensive material, and shortly describe the nature of it. Therefore audiences would be fully aware of what the programme will contain, and have the choice to turn off, or switch sides. As many people have said before, the audience have the remote, and they have the power to turn off. I don’t think the complaints of extremely minority groups should effect the production of cutting edge, dark, alternative, or indeed any type of comedy, and in the current climate there is a serious chance of that happening.
Comments
No comments yet. Use the form above to have your say.
