More

MTV's 'Skins': Will It Break Child Pornography Laws?

Mtv Skins

First Posted: 01/20/11 09:41 AM ET Updated: 05/25/11 07:25 PM ET

MTV's new show 'Skins' is an instant hit -- but is it also breaking laws?

A remake of the British show of the same name, 'Skins' takes youth sexuality to a level never before seen on television, with sex, drugs, drinking and masturbation galore. And though it's tamer than the British original, the NY Times reports that MTV executives are scared it could be deemed child pornography.

The executives ordered the producers to make changes to tone down some of the most explicit content.

They are particularly concerned about the third episode of the series, which is to be broadcast Jan. 31. In an early version, a naked 17-year-old actor is shown from behind as he runs down a street. The actor, Jesse Carere, plays Chris, a high school student whose erection -- assisted by erectile dysfunction pills -- is a punch line throughout the episode.

Child pornography, which the Times reports is defined as "any visual depiction of a minor engaged in sexually explicit conduct" or "a picture of a naked child may constitute illegal child pornography if it is sufficiently sexually suggestive," is a danger for the show, given that some of its cast is as young as fifteen.

The show is littered with sexually suggestive poses and half-exposed breasts, though how exposed they have to be to constitute illegality is up in the air.

Predictably, conservative organizations such as The Parents' Television Council have thrown a fit about the show, calling it "dangerous" and making ominous predictions. MTV has worked to placate and reassure them.

"'Skins' is a show that addresses real-world issues confronting teens in a frank way," MTV said in a statement. "We review all of our shows and work with all of our producers on an ongoing basis to ensure our shows comply with laws and community standards. We are confident that the episodes of 'Skins' will not only comply with all applicable legal requirements, but also with our responsibilities to our viewers."

That said, while some say it isn't as good as the British original (Videogum says that it is neither child pornography nor is it good), the show has drawn record ratings (3.3 million for its premiere) and is getting rave reviews from many, including HuffPost blogger Tina Wells. She reports that there are rumors that they even have teens on the writing staff, to make sure its truthful to its subject matter.

As for the cast themselves, they defend the show -- because it's about the story.

"Things like this certainly happen [in real life]," James Newman, who plays Tony on the show, told MTV.com. "I don't think they necessarily happen with the frequency that it happens on 'Skins,' but it's TV and we want it to be entertaining and it helps from a standpoint on sex and drugs. It doesn't happen as much, but I think as far as relationships the friends have with each other and the emotions, that stuff is dead-on, spot for spot what we went through in high school. ... Anytime you see sex and drugs on 'Skins,' it's about the story. It's never that for the sake of that."

Whether those teens' opinions match up with the FCC and federal prosecutors, however, remains to be seen.

For more, click over to the NY Times.

WATCH:

Quick Poll

Would you let your teenager watch 'Skins'?

Sure -- they're mature

Maybe if I'm there

No way!

FOLLOW HUFFPOST ENTERTAINMENT

MTV's new show 'Skins' is an instant hit -- but is it also breaking laws? A remake of the British show of the same name, 'Skins' takes youth sexuality to a level never before seen on television, with...
MTV's new show 'Skins' is an instant hit -- but is it also breaking laws? A remake of the British show of the same name, 'Skins' takes youth sexuality to a level never before seen on television, with...
Filed by Jordan Zakarin  | 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 1,266
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (27 total)
photo
European1919
I am the Pigmâ’¶n
06:18 AM on 02/16/2011
In most of Europe 16 is the age of consent, so a 17-yr. old shawing his naked bum in a tv show hardly constitutes child pornography. But then again the bigoted puritan USA are very different from the rest of the world.
If the 17-yr. old was shown with his clothes on, holding a gun to someone's head and squeezing the trigger, there would not have been a salacious headline. Sick, sick country.
08:07 AM on 01/30/2011
Huffpo, sometimes I am tempted to just be done with you.

What are you trying to accomplish with this Fox-News sensationalist headline?

Seriously. Publish this please.

I am shocked in waves, and lately the cycle times are way down.
12:52 PM on 01/28/2011
These things happen everywhere whether this show exists or not. I have witnessed classmates on LSD, high off marijuana, or doing coke in the bathrooms. I however never took part of these things because my mother has brought me up way better than that. I think if you don't want your kids watching this show then it is up to the parent to block them from such things but keep in mind where ever your children go that you are not present they will be exposed, whether it's from the TV or from society.
08:12 AM on 01/30/2011
Wow, Lindsey.

"You've been there." Good for you.

Srsly, you might stand to gain the MOST from a psychedelic experience.

You could just read up if you wanted to, first, over at the Erowid Experience Vaults.

There are some really smart people over there, who could answer any questions you might have.

But I agree. Hard drugs are bad. I am an exclusive MJ user; not much, not a lot. No drinking. That hobbles you just to produce the effect. And it hurts the next morning. None of that with cannabis...

Fanned ya!
08:23 AM on 01/30/2011
To clarify, I recommend a psychedelic experience to you specifically because I think this particular experience has the ability to really "round-out" one's humanity.

Choose a safe, comfortable situation (which could be outdoors) with low stress potential, maybe a trip buddy to share with and even a navigator to keep you guys out of trouble.

I used mushrooms the last few times by myself about 14 years ago. This kind of experience is EXTREMELY useful to really get to know yourself.

You come away from it refreshed and filled with a fresh outlook & new resolve, or I did then. Been wondering about it again lately. Maybe this is the reason for my long-winded reply.
08:26 AM on 01/30/2011
Sounds like you may have already been the navigator! :P
10:47 PM on 01/27/2011
Younger folks are often creeped out at the thought of us geezers doing it.

Of course they SO can't imagine that they might be creepy, too. Now I'll take my turn to say - and I quote - EW?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
HollisHoHo
08:02 AM on 01/24/2011
The only problem for these kids are the adults who call this child pornography.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
cwebster
predominantly exasperated
01:53 AM on 01/30/2011
Easy solution...don't let anyone over the age of 19 watch it.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
wilray
50,000 Screaming Fans (Ignore that other number)
10:14 PM on 01/23/2011
Of course, you could just watch Larry Clark's 1995 film "Kids." Of course, after watching it you'll wonder what all the fuss is about. It was nominated for the Golden Palm (Palm D'or) award at Cannes Film Festival. The very disturbing aspects of the film was that it was shot in a very documentary style - this was in 1995 before the barrage of reality shows. Although you may recognize some of the actors now, this was their debut. Those two things made people believe that what was seen on the screen was real life. The very disturbing subject matter, and the use of some very young kids. The really young kids were not actually in sexually risqué scenes, however the juxtaposition allows that to become muddled.

They tried to slam "KIDS" with the kiddie porn label. It didn't work. Both Roger Ebert and the late Gene Siskel praised the film for its gritty realism. Amazingly, the film was written by 19 year old Harmony Korine. Ultmately, I believe the message that the fim was trying to convey was "Wake up parents, this is what your kids are doing."

You can see film clips and Siskel and Ebert review at 03:57
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tDt3VXuEbmw

The controversy regarding "Skins" might not be new. However, I've only seen a clip from the British series. People are saying the American version is subpar. For something that's above par and an American original see "Kids."
10:04 PM on 01/23/2011
One of the strangest reasons people give to justify the continuation of this show is that teenagers actually engage in sex, drug use, and so on, so the show should be on the air. But teenagers engage in child sex and child pornography, too, and illegal drug use is illegal no matter how old you are. It's just really hard to see how anyone could consider the fact that teenagers do stupid and/or illegal things is relevant to whether the show should be on the air.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
topkatnc
Give a stray cat or dog a chance .
09:57 AM on 01/24/2011
I agree 100% ..
12:35 PM on 01/24/2011
Thank you! I think that many comments on this thread really don't speak well on the up and coming generation of kids that they are raising. People seem to forget just because you can do something doesn't mean you should.
10:03 PM on 01/23/2011
Even assuming the skins is either inappropriate or pronographic, there is a bit of inconsistency here. The mainstream fashion industry casting couches and exploits underage models of both genders. But no one is calling for child porn charges against big name designers or fashion houses.
07:01 AM on 01/23/2011
I have two teens living at home and have not heard word-one about this show. I really love my kids.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
wilray
50,000 Screaming Fans (Ignore that other number)
09:33 PM on 01/23/2011
Not surprising, since most kids are not into sharing that much with their parents.
05:23 AM on 01/23/2011
Is this the show after or before the one that glorifies teen pregnancy? Wear a rubber kids, or you'll end up on TV! Wait...
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
wilray
50,000 Screaming Fans (Ignore that other number)
09:22 PM on 01/23/2011
On Dancing With The Stars?
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
05:17 AM on 01/23/2011
The Bible depicts sex between adolcescents [Genesis 19:30-36] is that child porno too?

And what about Lolita by Vladimir Nabokov, Death in Venice by Thomas Mann, Notes on a Scandal by Zoë Heller?
abhorson
Si Si Chiquita. There's a woman worth her ransom
03:36 PM on 01/23/2011
all quite overrated except the Bible sex ... I never once got excited reading Lolita or Death in Venice
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
03:24 AM on 01/24/2011
Were you unmoved by Sue Lyons depiction of Lolita and Cate Blanchett in Notes on a Scandal?
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
baileywick
03:44 PM on 01/23/2011
Ghandi and his wife married at 13 years old. They turned out OK.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Channa
Everyone is entitled to my opinion.
06:52 AM on 01/30/2011
Really? Some people play Russian Roulette and are OK. Also everyone is not Gandhi.
03:56 AM on 01/23/2011
Why can't teenagers remain completely ignorant of sex, be scorchingly ashamed off their bodies, and wide-eyed attentive as their drunken, prozac-addled parents expound on the evils of drugs? Actual sexuality being little more than a grindingly dull repetition compulsion, oppression is the only way to generate truly interesting sexual fantasies.

Besides, in America it's only child pornography if you make a modest profit. If you make a fortune, you're a champion of free market economics.
abhorson
Si Si Chiquita. There's a woman worth her ransom
03:26 PM on 01/23/2011
slap me drunk and happy with a bottle of whiskey and some prozac and oppress me until I "generate" some cool and interesting sexual fantasies ... and if I can make a fortune AND be a champion of free economics I want to sign up now.

but W.F.Buckley used to call long, almost run-on, sentences with hyphenated words and inutile pretentious adjectives "pseudo-intellectual" masturbation. I bet if it was teenage pseudo-intellectual masturbation we would be applauding it.
08:31 AM on 01/30/2011
I am celebrating some COGNITIVE DISSONANCE right here because I agree with you both!

BTW, since you brought it up, there is no comma after "run-on."
01:49 AM on 01/23/2011
Well, MTV has certainly made it a point that they are more about young people having sex, being pregnant, having more sex, hoosier's (most of the people in their reality shows), drinking and doing drugs!
10:54 PM on 01/22/2011
I'm over 60 yrs old and when I tried to run this video, I was told that I'm "too young to watch this video"??? What gives?
When I was in my teens, I could masturbate to just about anything - Life magazine, for instance. Pure sexual stimulation is merely a matter of imagination. I don't see why an explicit video would make a difference. Like the rest of TV, this show probably turns off imagination. Whether or not it replaces adolescent fantasy with more mature narratives is a question I can't answer since you won't give me a little peek (snark, snark). BTW, none of the other comments address the most pressing social question, namely were any underage actors involved? Was anyone actually hurt in the production of this series?? Or is the discussion all about some form of mind control?
abhorson
Si Si Chiquita. There's a woman worth her ransom
03:28 PM on 01/23/2011
Sorry, you DON'T see why "explicit" videos would sexually arouse someone MORE than LIFE magazine ??
10:28 AM on 01/26/2011
If we're talking about a teenage boy, the WIND can be sexually arousing.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
epochme
10:11 PM on 01/22/2011
pay back is coming... in all areas of racial matters