Is the government really beating the bullies?

This for me is a quite disturbing advert. I can’t help but think that it is marginally pointless as well.

If you hadn’t guessed already, it is a government run advertising scheme to try and stamp out violence in teenage relationships. Yet I can already see a few major issues with the whole campaign.

For starters, realistically, if you were being subjected to such violence would this initiative really make even the most remote difference to your situation? If you hadn’t already flagged up that there were issues in your relationship or hadn’t reported them, is this advert really going to open your eyes to what is happening?

Now this isn’t for me to say not too try, but I think that adverts such as this only really work on more finely pinpointed topics. For example, I recently watched one of the adverts on checking your fire alarm. Not the sort of thing that would have normally been at the forefront of my thinking, but after seeing a short advert I thought ‘why not?’ and checked mine. Equally, there was a major crack down on Chlamydia recently. Not something aimed at all of the public, but through a combination of adverts and NHS awareness I know of people who went and got tested (who normally wouldn’t have) and as a result they got themselves sorted.

Yet I can’t see this falling into the same category. Much like the ‘look both ways’ campaign a few years back, I feel that the government are just pointing out the obvious by saying that victims of domestic violence should report it. Sure they’ll argue that their highlighting the issue and showing that there is a problem, but in my mind such an advert will prove to be trivial in the long run.

If they had been tougher on the subject and say introduced harsher laws onto the area, then the campaign may have had a greater success rate as it would show that there is a seriousness required when clamping down on the subject. However, they are merely shedding light and ‘raising awareness’. It’s not like people are all of a sudden going to come out in their masses, screaming to the high heavens about their ordeal and then applying for Jeremy Kyle to acquire repentance and rehabilitation.

All of these points are not where my main grievance lies however. My primary issue with these adverts is the double standards shown by the TV standards agency in allowing this advert to be broadcast at all hours. It first came to my attention when watching prime time family TV on Saturday night, only to find this advert in the break. Sure it’s aimed at teens, so they have to account for that, but there is no way that such domestic violence would normally be broadcast pre-watershed. After all young kids may be watching. Infact most likely will be watching.

Might sound like very little worry in the grand scheme of things, but let me bring to your attention something called Bandura’s bobo doll experiment (simply illustrated here);

(For anyone who skipped the watching of the above video, Bandura’s theory was essentially that children do as they see)

Now sceptics of what I’ve said would argue that the advert is condemning the behaviour on show, so surely it would be teaching a good lesson to the children watching? But really, aside from the 2 seconds of illustrative condemning words at the end of the advert it just looks like a couple of mid-teens participating in violent and malevolent behaviour.

Overall I feel that in the long run this campaign could prove to more harm than good. I can see that the government is trying to tackle as many social ‘problems’ as it can, but I feel it would be better off targeting more pressing issues with greater strength and authority and then focussing on changing the minor aspects of society. For me, this campaign is unlikely to change the dynamic of teenage relationships (which for the record I don’t believe are anywhere near violent enough to justify such a campaign in the first place) and as such is a waste of time and much needed resources.

Tiger for Hollywood?

Team Tiger, take a bow.

This was a master-class in false and pre-prepared apologies.

An intimate room full of close friends, a composed but solemn Tiger Woods and a script, sorry and apology, that covered everything from the affair, to golf, to sponsors, to friends – this 12minute show had it all. Infact, such was its depth that I was left wondering if it wasn’t the 2009 entry to a future autobiography entitled ‘Tiger – Woodn’t you like to know where it went wrong?’

Yet despite putting all the ingredients together, this showing lacked any real substance. In broadcasting this showing to the masses, I really do think team Tiger underestimated the fact that the public may have more than a combined 4 brain cells between them, such was the blasé nature of what was on show.

Upon the apologies completion, I couldn’t help but think that it was reminiscent of a poorly written murder mystery. You know, the kind where you watch for 10 weeks despite knowing who the killer was after the first 30 seconds. Furthermore, in Tigers continuous apologies I felt that he had even begun to adopt traits from the George Bush US presidency reign. It wouldn’t surprise me if the next time we see him in public, the first words uttered are ‘To all my fellow Americans...’

All in all the apology was an encapsulation of exactly what Tigers sponsors wanted the world to hear. I personally feel that had Tiger written it himself it may have lacked the articulacy on show, but would have adopted a far more authentic feel. That said, who am I to say who wrote it. After all, Tiger fooled the world for years on end with his family orientated, clean cut public image. So in theory, after a few months out of the public eye in ‘therapy’ (or possibly the Michigan school of acting) I don’t think anyone can be 100% sure as to whether any of Tigers future actions are his own or not...

Next up for Tiger? Well after conquering the hearts of the world with these apologies, I hear he fancies some contemporary dance to express his sorrow?

Brits 2010

After unexpectedly getting the chance to see the Brits (as I was travelling to Loftus Road to watch Watford vs QPR – only to have it called off upon arriving at the stadium), I was greeted with both treats and trials.

If we excuse the international categories that were as good as foregone conclusions and had succumbed to gaga mania

International female – Lady (irony in that itself) Gaga

International male – Jay Z

International album – Lady Gaga ‘The Fame’

International breakthrough artist – Lady Gaga

Then we actually had a very exciting set of awards on offer throughout the show. Combined with the fact that it was the 30th anniversary of the award ceremony, it is little surprise that the show was littered with an assortment of treats.

However, let me begin on a negative. Peter Kay. One of the UK’s best loved comedians and taking on the solo effort of hosting the show, I can’t help but feel Kay buckled under the pressure. At times I felt he was like a hedgehog caught in the headlights, and delivered a series of gags with little of the enthusiasm that normally delights his audiences. That said, anything was an improvement on the Horne, Cordon and Kylie fiasco of the year before, so I suppose I shouldn’t be too harsh.

On to a more positive note – the voters appear to have gotten the majority of the awards pretty spot on. Kasabian winning the best British band award is a long overdue representation of just how successful the band are (and set to be even bigger if rumours of some major festival headlining in the summer are to be believed). Ellie Goulding picking up the critics’ choice is a fair shout. Whilst Marina and the Diamonds have made a slightly bigger impact on the chart with the first song on her new album, I feel Goulding is still a deserved winner.

With regards to the two awards surrounding the ’30 years of Brits’ I also feel there were rightful winners. Oasis picking up best album is an award that few will disagree with (despite the bands recent....drama), and the Spice Girls winning best performance was a rightful award in what was a very very tough category. With the band being a truly authentic and hugely successful British phenomenon, the performance was a reflection of what the band encompassed.

My own personal distain came with the presentation of Best British female and Single of the Year. Lily Allen may have been a consistent performer, but has she really had a better year than Florence, Leona or even Pixie Lott? Questionable. Elsewhere the Best Single going to ‘Beat Again’ by JLS shows the weakness of the musical year that 2009 bought with regards to the singles chart. That said, JLS were in my view deserved recipients of the Best British Newcomer as they look like the first boy band to provide a genuinely credible attempt at reforming the traditional ‘N Sync’ style boy band of the 90’s – something that the music market is missing considerably.

My favourite aspect of this year’s Brits however was the collaboration of Dizzee Rascal and Florence and the Machine. Whoever thought this one up deserves a medal. The mix of Dirty Cash and You’ve got the love was one for the Brit vault and will be remembered for years to come. As a result Dizzee picked up the Best British Male (something I was unsure that would happen, but I believe is completely deserved) and even more impressively Florence picked up the Best British Album for ‘Lungs LP’. Both are refreshingly unbiased, as they are both unique artists who in previous years may have been overlooked.

Finally, Robbie Williams winning the Outstanding Contribution to Music. Anyone with any doubts that he deserved it clearly didn’t see his performance to close the show. Sharp, charming, entertaining – a performance that encompassed all of Robbie’s best traits in a selection of old and new songs that were worked seamlessly into each other. In my view, it was a master class in anybody who wants to leave a lasting legacy; it’s not all about the music, it’s about the performance just as much.

Side note - Anyone else notice the blandness in Cheryl Coles voice, yet still feel compelled to keep watching? What a woman...

To love it, or not too love it. That is the question..

Valentine’s Day.

One of the most harshly contested days of the year. Come 14th February every year you have singletons complaining, men worrying and (well in my opinion anyway) women just sitting back ready to enjoy it. Widely believed to be the marketing world’s greatest creation (closely rivalled by Halloween), Valentines is unavoidable. With shops bombarding us with cards and every media publication under the sun advertising the best gift for your loved one, it is hard not to get roped in.

Believed to hold the central premise of showing your love and affection to your partner, there is little escape for those people in a relationship. Neglect and you will be on the receiving end of a world of pain from your partner, take it too seriously and look like a love-struck psycho.

But really, in the grand scheme of things, what is the point?

Why should on this one day of the year, couples declare extra, unreserved love for each other?

I for one am pretty unsure and believe we would all be better off without it.

That said, this blog is particularly short because I’m off to spend the rest of the day with my girlfriend, so I can’t express too great a distain for the day!

Make a date with saturday night TV

Saturday night TV has been for some time a matter of great contention. Home to some of the finest shows that broadcasting has to offer, it is the pinnacle of the weeks TV. Which is why it is with a great degree of uncertainty that I looked at the listing and seeing new TV dating show ‘Take me out’. A show where the premise is simple – 30 women, 1 man, and the man then gives it his all to win a date... Sounds familiar to a certain older prime time TV dating show, once home to the great Cilla Black doesn’t it? And so, it is with understandable scepticism but an innate intrigue that I first set my eyes on the show 5/6 weeks ago.

Now let me tell you, it is a show that is repetitive, cheap and cringing – but strangely brilliant.

Admittedly, I wouldn’t recommend watching when looking for some real brain taxing stuff, but as far as light hearted and simple entertainment goes, this show has struck a gold mine. A family friendly dating show, that is both funny and has you screaming at the TV. From the moment where the man comes down the lift, to the crunch time when he has to pick his date, you find yourself interacting unintentionally with the show. A chorus of ‘he’s gunna pick her’ or ‘deary me, what a tragic bloke’ often echo around my houses living room mid-show.

Yet the true brilliance of the show lies solely in the hands of comedian/host Paddy McGuinness. A man most notably famed for his role in Phoenix Nights and Max and Paddys Road To Nowhere – his comic assertion on Take Me Out is one not to be missed. Siding predominantly with the men, and inadvertently mocking both the contestant and the women at any given opportunity, Paddy dictates the direction of the show and moves it along with effortless yet catchy phrases such as ‘no likey, no lighty’ that have become ever present in the show.

The other masterstroke is the lack of attention paid on the dates themselves. Despite an equal proportion of new contestants and dates shown, the previous week’s dates are swept along with swift efficiency. Combined with the show sending the dates to local restaurant ‘Fernando’s’ as opposed to the lavish holidays often associated with Blind date a few years back, show that the producers aren’t trying to replicate the structure of the show. It instead shows an indication that they know it’s low-brow, cheap and will have shed loads of critics – but by going through with it regardless the show’s producers are essentially sticking two fingers up at anyone who believes every show has to be of a high end intellectual nature.

So, with great surprise, this is me giving my upmost seal of approval to Take Me Out. A show full of catch phrases, dim-witted contestants and budget dates – quite literally the epitome of the phrase ‘guilty pleasure’.

Whilst some will clearly be sceptics to the show and what I’ve said, my retort is simple. In the words of Paddy McGuinness himself

If you don’t enjoy the show then

“No Likey, No Lighty”

Sorry state of affairs...

Upon picking up today’s papers, I was again greeted by the familiar sight of new scandal revolving around celebrity love wrongdoing. Unsurprisingly, the latest to have committed wrongdoing is love-rat veteran Ashley Cole. His latest crime? Sending naked pictures of himself to a model – claims Ashley has swiftly moved to discredit....well....ish.

On the back of his affair with a local hairdresser last year, Ashley claims the latest set of photos were taken whilst goofing around at an England training camp, not deleted and ‘somehow’ found their way to the model. A solid defence I’m sure you’ll agree.

However these latest sets of allegations are only a drop in the ocean compared to what the past few months has presented us with. Tiger Woods, John Terry, Vernon Kay and even rumours of Brad Pitt have all circulated with great regularity. Seemingly these celebrity men are more intent on the conquests of young beautiful women as opposed to their highly successful careers. Admittedly, I would argue that a large number of the facts strewn across the pages of the daily papers are either severely twisted or distorted to a sizeable extent. But in my eyes, such accusations must have a layer or truth. Either that or the papers will be coughing up hefty sums of money for publishing fabricated stories.

It is my belief that these men partake in such wayward actions not solely because of their high profiles though. The current UK divorce rate is 1 in 2 marriages. This suggests that there is already a wealth of mischievous behaviour taking place among both men and women. As a result, it must be equally considered then that such behaviour would be equally common place among those living the high life?

Admittedly, they are in the public eye and role models for many people all around the world. And as a result, I would hope that they would be smart enough to not participate in such activities - conducting themselves as appropriate and amicable role models. But the truth unfortunately is that because of their high profiles, these people are targeted more than any others. Whilst some of the population inadvertently find themselves having affairs, these elite set of people are the targets of unparalleled numbers of people throwing themselves at them. Whether it be through affection for the person themselves, or just to make a quick few quid, it is irrelevant. These celebrity icons are only people just the same as the rest of us, and as a result a number (and it is only a very small minority) are unable to keep their emotions under wraps and their trousers around their waists – thus leading to the scandals we read about on a daily basis.

The media being the keen and unrelenting vulture that it is, has detected these indignant deeds and in doing so has struck a gold mine for their publications. By acquiring enough information to make such affairs public, they are able to shame and disgrace the perpetrators. This then allows them to clock up page after page of dubious claims, knowing that the readers will adopt what they say as truth. And now, having drummed up such an interest in the personal conquests of these men, it can be considered highly likely that we will not be seeing the end of such stories and speculation anytime soon.

For me, it is a sad sight to see these people plastered all over the front pages each and every day. Not just because I’d like to read about some actual news. But because these individuals are meant to be the most creatively / athletically talented people our world has to offer. I feel that they should know their responsibilities as such and be able to adhere to them. After all, it all comes with the job. But instead, I can see no end ever in sight. There will always be those celebrities who will do the naughty naughty with an attractive young model or the sorts. And equally there will always be an unhealthy thirst for such stories. Such is the unfortunate state of our celebrity obsessed society.

The one where Friends changed homes..

I was and am thoroughly dejected at the news that Channel 4 and E4 are to stop airing Friends from 2011. After 15 years, 236 episodes, Friends will finally cease to be a fixture in the E4 constant repeats calendar. The show has become a mainstay in the daily schedule of many, with the show itself still proving to be relevant, entertaining and as endearing as it ever was. C4 however, disagree. They believe the show which still pulls in 400,000 viewers per episode will be better spent on the scrap heap. Their reasoning behind ridding the show is that they feel the airtime can be better spent with new UK and USA based sitcoms and dramas.

At 11am / 5 or 6pm?

Really?

I can’t see myself sitting down with either a throbbing hangover or after a hard day of work wanting to watch a nice light hearted re-run of Boston Legal or the sorts.

I’m afraid that I feel C4 have taken two steps backward with this move and the uproar that has surrounded the decision is tribute to this. I concur as much as anyone that new shows should be welcomed and given an equal chance, but when one of the best loved shows of the past 20 years is still pulling in such viewing figures it makes little sense to ditch it. The only logic I can see in the move is that C4 have some sure fire shows in the pipeline that they are confident that will draw in higher ratings; if this is the case then touché to the masterminds at the channel – but do they really think they can launch a new hit TV show at the times Friends occupies in the listings? Debatable.

However, Fear not Friends fans. Comedy Central has had the good sense to seize the opportunity and have acquired the rights to the show for the next four years. So Friends will be joining the Scrubs, Two and a half men and South Park line up for years to come.

Yet this is where my problem lies.

Friends isn’t a show that should be surrounded by such contemporary comedies. Friends was the last great sitcom and acted as a reminder of the times when Friday night TV was worth watching. In a line up that included the likes of Will and Grace and Frasier, it was the star attraction in a pool of high quality (pre-reality TV) comedies and should be treated as comedy royalty. The love between Ross and Rachel, the friendship of Joey and Chandler, Phoebe’s quirkiness or Monica’s obsessive nature – all were effortless and even now offer a great insight into the social dynamics of people’s lives. It provided the kind of easy but enjoyable viewing that few shows are able to do, and did so without feeling dated. But now, seemingly on its last legs, Friends is being made to abandon its roots and seek pastures new...

And so come 2011, when C4 show the final scenes of the show and the group decides to go grab one last coffee. Only for Chandler to utter those near immortal words ‘Sure! Where?’ Will we then see Friends change homes from C4 to Comedy Central. But much like Chandlers irony about finding a new coffee shop, it is with great scepticism that I feel Friends is changing channels. Because in my eyes, C4 is to Friends, what Central Perk coffee shop was to the cast – a secure and welcoming residence, where the roots of the show’s success stem from. And now as a result of the move, it is resigned to live out its final days on a satellite TV channel, as opposed to its terrestrial roots.

It really is the end of an era.