More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Tina Wells

Tina Wells

Posted: January 23, 2011 08:19 PM

My last blog on MTV's responsibility to us and our children certainly sparked a great debate that even reached my personal inbox. People asked me how I could defend this show, why I was allowing it on air (I gently reminded them that I did not create, write, or produce the show), and why I didn't provide any positive ideas.

First, let me say that in posting my last blog, I hoped it would spark discussion among all of us about the role parenting should play in raising our children. I don't believe in government regulations raising our children. I believe that the more we turn to the government in this very personal matter, the less power we will eventually have. If Skins is canceled, I want it to happen because we the people decided it wasn't a good show, not because the government got involved and canceled it. I also wrote about this a few months ago when I discussed the government's regulation of McDonald's Happy Meals in San Francisco. I believe parents are smart enough to make decisions about what's best for their kids. And by the time I get around to having them myself, I'd like to know that I will have the right to also make decisions for my children.

But I agree that I could have offered some further insight on what we can do now. So here are a few ideas on what we can do to move forward.

1. Support the people who are creating positive content for our youth. In one of the emails I received personally attacking me, the gentleman told me to spend some time actually doing something good for young people. I gently directed him towards my tween girl property Mackenzie Blue, which I created a few years ago when I realized that girls were being too heavily influenced by negative stereotypes and Mean Girl culture. I'm one of many creatives who personally want to use our creative or marketing power to do something good. But if we're going to succeed, we need support. Even though girls love Mackenzie Blue, the biggest support network for it is actually parents and mom bloggers, who spread the word. I am very grateful to them. There are many other writers creating this type of content, and we need to seek them out and support them. On a side note, to those who think that I'm "in good" with the execs at MTV, let me remind you that they passed on turning Mackenzie Blue into a show on their network because it didn't fit with it's other content (or in layman's terms, "it's too positive for what's happening here right now"). And that is their right and their choice as a network.

2. Don't play the blame game. It seems over the last few years that the blame game has become as American as apple pie. Let's blame our financial troubles on Wall Street (not on our own overspending), let's blame our obesity problem on fast food companies and video games, and let's blame cyberbullying on TV and Facebook. Blame, blame, blame. And I've noticed every time we start to blame someone else, other than taking responsibility ourselves, we open the doors for more regulation. I believe that we need standards, rules, and regulations. I just don't believe they should be a result of our inability to self-regulate. And that also goes for blaming marketers. When I was growing up, my parents used two very powerful phrases often: "no" and "because I said so." I wanted toys and other things as a child, and when it was appropriate (Christmas and my birthday) I got it, and when it wasn't, my parents just said no. Is it now easier to blame networks and marketers than to just say no?

3. Realize that our children will do as we're doing. The tragedy in Tucson gave us all a moment to pause and consider how we interact with each other. I was shocked at the hubris of political influencers (who shall remain nameless) who used this tragedy as an opportunity to defend using negative imagery and words to discuss politics and values. Even worse, they used the toddler defense "he started it!" Seriously? As a marketer, I can tell you that we spend a lot of time deciding what words and images we should use. And we use those words because we want to, and because we know they'll evoke emotion. Our children don't need to turn on Skins to see images of people behaving badly. They only need to turn on any news network midday and watch adults engaging in middle school playground behavior. If we want our children to be better, we have to be better.

4. Create a spiritual awakening. I don't even think this has to be religious in some way, but we need one -- desperately. My dad always told me, "if you don't stand for something, you'll fall for anything." Skins is a work of art, and with all art, it can reflect the best or worst of its subject. Maybe Skins is an example of the worst of what our teens have become. It's not easy to look at the worst of ourselves. But the upside is, we can be better. We have to reexamine our moral fibers and really think about the values we want this next generation to possess. And we have to act now.

5. Please stop promoting Skins if you don't like the show. As a marketer, I can tell you that the PTC has singlehandedly given Skins more promotion than MTV could have hoped for. Is there a marketer over there? If so, they should be fired immediately. I don't understand why they think the best way to get a racy show off the air is to bring so much attention to it, everyone and their mother (and grandmother) will just have to tune in to see what's so bad. Next time, try to be a bit more stealth. How about developing a coalition of every faith-based and non-faith-based youth advocacy group, teachers, educators, and supporters who deem this content inappropriate, and send messaging to them telling them to black out the show -- quietly. Unfortunately, I think we all know that there are 3 million people in this country who want to see Skins, so that's why it's on the air. But maybe if a powerful enough group arises, we can also get good TV on the air. Oh right, that happened in January when Oprah launched OWN. I hope she takes pity on today's youth and launches an inspirational block for young people, and if she does, hopefully we'll support her. And other people like me who believe in positive and inspirational programming for our youth will have another venue to promote that content.

5. Don't trust your kids. Yes, I said it. Why on earth would you trust your kids to not watch this show or any other racy show? Parents are scared of technology, and they need to get with the program -- quickly. Block access to your OnDemand content (or restrict it with a PIN), inspect your cable bill to see what's being watched when you're not there, put filters on your computers, take the username and password for your child's social networking pages, friend them, and review their text messages and instant messages. Make it clear that you won't violate their "privacy" unless they give you a reason to do it. Is it an invasion of privacy? Probably. But my mom routinely told me that it was her job to invade my privacy when I gave her reason to. And when I was a teenager, I can guarantee you there was reason to. Teens will be teens, so parents should in turn be parents.

I read each and every comment on my last blog, and I must say that I was thankful for the support. But for those who wanted to talk about MTV's responsibility and who seemed to resign control of our teens to network TV, I want to say I strongly disagree. We have the power to create the culture we want for our children. And the moment we yield that power to the government or to any media network, we've lost the battle.

 
 
 

Follow Tina Wells on Twitter: www.twitter.com/fashiontw

My last blog on MTV's responsibility to us and our children certainly sparked a great debate that even reached my personal inbox. People asked me how I could defend this show, why I was allowing it on...
My last blog on MTV's responsibility to us and our children certainly sparked a great debate that even reached my personal inbox. People asked me how I could defend this show, why I was allowing it on...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 27
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
06:46 PM on 01/27/2011
a different, well put perspective.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/cathleen-falsani/mtvs-skins-suffer-the-lit_b_814609.html
11:55 AM on 01/26/2011
The worst thing about "Skins" has nothing to do with the actual show.

The original "Skins" was a great show, groundbreaking and honest. The American remake reveals a crisis in American entertainment. Enterainment execs, the ones who greenlight projects, are seemingly terrified of originality. If they loved the orginal UK "Skins" so much, someone like Showtime should have gained the rights and showed it unedited, unlike BBC America's presentation.

Now the excellent UK series, "Being Human" has been remade and is being presented by the SyFy channel as a "new and original" series. Apparently, American accents constitute "new and original" to the suits in charge.

Not only are we remaking inferior versions of everything on UK television, we are making movies out of mediocre TV series that weren't taken seriously when they first aired, and now we are doing remakes of bad films like "Tron" that were bombs the first time around.

The US entertainment industry is creatively bankrupt. It takes a Chris Nolan to get anything original made. Entertainment execs say remakes and "Saw XXIII" is what we want--it's cinematic comfort food, they tell us.

If these brainiacs worked at Apple, we'd still be listening to our cassette Walkmans.
11:55 PM on 01/25/2011
My daughter and I watch MTV together... her dad gets off easy because he's good at video games and plays them with her. I've never had anything but good come of watching these shows with her. She may not be forthright about what her friends are up to, or even what she's up to, but she's perfectly willing to talk about what's on the television.

It's an excellent chance for her to exercise her values and her critical thinking and for me to provide a gentle sounding board. I echo what I'm pleased to hear, lightly question what concerns me, and let go anything in between. Even if I only watched one or two a week with her, I know that she would come out farther ahead than she would be if these shows weren't accessible to her.

In fact, I think that our discussions of these shows--a reflection of her culture--have been a testing ground for her father and I (he comes in to talk sometimes) in which we've been able to earn her trust by showing that we understand her and that we are not rigid in our views. At sixteen, she shares with us a great deal of her life, even intimate details that I would not have even written in my diary when I was a child. Not only does she do so willingly, but she does so with a palpable sense of relief that her parents are still her safe place.
04:02 PM on 01/25/2011
Ok, I signed up so that I could comment on your posts about Skins. I've read both posts, and I must say that the suggestions that you have put forward here are good. When I watch Skins, I look at it (as does everyone, I'm sure) through my own high school experiences. The main complaint that people have of 'oh, it's too risque!' simply doesn't apply. I have been out of high school for nearly 10 years and I assure you that everything that is shown on the show was happening 10 years ago, and it wasn't a select few people partaking of the bad behavior.

I absolutely think that people who don't want to act like this behavior is real are naive at best, and dangerously deluded at worst. Even if teens aren't taking part, they're hearing about it, they know about it, they're seeing it somewhere unless they are on 23 hour lockdown. Teens today know what's going down, even if they never do anything firsthand. I have friends with children in middle and high school that are now asking their moms to watch the show because of the media furor around it. Some are letting them, and some aren't. I say watch it with your teens, they aren't getting any younger. They have eyes, they're curious, and they probably know someone just like one of the kids on the show. It's far better to let your kids know that they can come to you with questions.
05:09 PM on 01/24/2011
So I believe that "Skins" is a dangerous show in that it exhibits extreme behavior as commonplace, acceptable, fun, and largely without consequences. I can see playing "devil's advocate" and calling for adults and parents to assume responsibility but programming that seeks to push the limits of what is acceptable to air on basic cable television in hopes of profiting, in my opinion is beyond defense. I personally believe that a show like "Skins" is unnecessary, but I am not the television police. It should at the very least be on Showtime or HBO and not MTV.
07:26 PM on 01/24/2011
I am currently a grad student and have not watched the U.S. version of Skins, but have bee an avid fan of UK Skins since series 1. We watched it all through college. The show is brilliant! To say that the show "exhibits extreme behavior as commonplac­e, acceptable­, fun, and largely without consequenc­es," is completely false and inaccurate.
Do you know how the show was/is written? I suggest you read about it.
Whether you like it or not this "extreme behavior" was/is commonplace (note: I not saying healthy) in my generation and below. And it was refreshing to find a show that really got to the heart of the issues and portrayed a more accurate depiction of my youth, instead of the full of malarkey 7th Heaven like shows. I would go as far to say that seeing the reckless crazy behavior and situations that young adults are engaging in/experiencing would be rather refreshing. It makes one realize that there are other people out their going through/doing/feeling the same things.

I would like to apologize for my poor grammar and also state that this comment is completely in reference to the E4 show, and it would not shock me if MTV had ruined it.

Finally, I will leave you with an interesting article and recommend you watch series 3 of UK Skins. Episode 6 in particular is absolutely beautiful.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/jan/19/mtv-skins-us-remake-class
05:09 PM on 01/24/2011
5? I agree Kids should have their television, music, and computer use monitored and restricted by their parents. However, that monitoring is limited because we cannot monitor what their peers have access to.

I am a teacher in a high school in California and am saddened on a regular basis by what my students see as acceptable. I have spoken with them about what they seek out for entertainment. Currently it seems to be the reality shows Jersey Shore and the Kardashians. I ask my students if they admire these people, if they see them as role models, or if they want to live like they do. For the most part they say no, but in the same breath they say they would love to have the money and go to the same clubs and essentially live the same lifestyle. They understand that the promiscuity and alcohol abuse exhibited is wrong but see it as acceptable (they most often say it looks like fun) because everyone else is doing it. That is the perception that is perpetuated by the success of programs like these.
05:08 PM on 01/24/2011
3. Politics and cable news networks thrive on disagreement. Don't think that can be changed. As parents we can be involved in our children's lives and teach them to make wise decisions and value personal responsibility.

4. Spiritual awakening without religion?

5. I agree that Skins is getting an inordinate amount of free publicity because "news" shows need controversy in order to survive. These days it seems as though salacious television programming, particularly dramas and reality shows which highlight debauchery and human beings at their worst seem to thrive. Television programming with positive content usually does not garner ratings, advertisers and thus does not stay on the air.
05:07 PM on 01/24/2011
1. How can adults supporting positive content truly be effective? When have teens ever preferred what adults have supported and suggested over something more enticing and seemingly "forbidden"? Teenagers are inclined to rebel, are they not? And as for promoting Mackenzie Blue, well, that's great for you...I guess? But that just seems like a low quality knock-off of Hannah Montana (from what I just gathered from searching the internet) and would accordingly probably not be a profitable venture for any network to support. If you believe that promoting positive content for pre-teens and teens is a remedy for negative and irresponsible content, which I agree with you to an extent, then I believe that the quality of the positive content has to be unique, original, and high quality. Off the top of my head, I can think of Veggie Tales, although targeted to a younger demographic and a Christian program, as a uniquely positive alternative to the crude, violent, and super-hero laden programs marketed to our youth.

2. Not sure about the blame game accusation. It may be a prevalent mentality, however, people like myself are looking at advertisers to be more responsible with their advertising money. By simply letting advertisers know your concerns, via phone or written correspondence, you can influence where they advertise. We are customers and can choose to take our business elsewhere if those companies choose to financially support, by advertising, on programming that we find objectionable.
11:33 AM on 01/24/2011
I would like to start off by saying i have gotten tired of hearing about SKins. The whole reveal actual gossip marketing campaign MTV is using seems creepy, and its insistence on using teen actors even though the original used adult actors just reeks of a publicity stunt.

But yes, i think the most effective method is by supporting positive content. When positive content becomes profitable, business will take notice. Although a show has to be well written also, otherwise people won't watch it. I'm not sure if i agree on your some of the parallels you used for the not blaming point(LIke the wall street thing) but i think people need to realize that just because something is entertaining doesn't mean it should be replicated in real life.

I think talking to your children about this, and educating them on the difference between reality and fantasy is something that has become extremely important. Too many young people can't tell the difference, and make role models out of entertainers and copy what they see on tv or in movies because they assume its cool.

My parents never looked at my text messages or anything like that, and i grew up fine. Not saying that works for all teens, but i don't believe every teen needs that much supervision
02:05 PM on 01/24/2011
The original didn't use adult actors. All the main characters were played by teenagers. Having adults play teenagers doesn't happen much in the UK anyway. It's an American thing.

I don't think TV needs to always be 'positive'. We don't expect that of movies – why would we expect it of television? I agree its important for kids to be able to differentiate between fiction and reality. But that isn't helped by denying them access to anything that isn't relentlessly happy and positive. Why not use Skins (presuming your children are old enough and responsible enough for you to let them watch it) as an opportunity to discuss some of the issues the program raises?

Though preferably, get them the far superior UK original on DVD. ;)
10:11 AM on 01/25/2011
Were the actors in the original skins under 18?
photo
BlackJAC
It's better to be a black king than a white knight
11:19 AM on 01/24/2011
Don't equate chatter with publicity.  Such a mistake was made regarding all the chatter about Snakes On A Plane, too.
05:06 AM on 01/24/2011
This whole 'controversy' is the most ludicrous thing ever.

It's a TV show. It's entertainment. The original (much more explicit) version has already been shown on BBC America, to much love and acclaim from those who watched it. It is already available on Netflix, and is a popular DVD on Amazon. The nation has not – astonishingly enough – fallen apart.

The UK is about to start season five of Skins. Everyone over there seems able to treat it as what it is - a drama, to be criticised or lauded on these terms. Not a babysitter. And not an instruction manual. It is shown there, not on cable, but on a state-owned major network. And yet it can be assessed intelligently. What does it say about this nation – one that proclaims its love of free expression at every turn – that our first response to a creative work with (whether the MTV version is any good or not) impeccable pedigree, is to scream 'CHILD PORN!!!!!!' and demand that it be taken off the air.

Are we really so puritanical? Are we really a nation of philistines, unable to deal with any sort of challenging work without a nannying state to 'protect us'? The real story here should be American prudishness and the corrosive influence of groups like the PTC on American television.
photo
BlackJAC
It's better to be a black king than a white knight
10:38 AM on 01/24/2011
It's not "entertainment," for it doesn't provide any form of escape/distraction from one's real life.  Another one of MTV's many reality shows was NYC Prep, a reality version of Gossip Girl--do you really think the kids who actually live like a Gossip Girl character watches that show when they can go outside and experience it for real?
01:58 PM on 01/24/2011
Who says it doesn't provide any form of escape / distraction from one's real life (if that is all entertainment is - which it isn't)? Clearly it does, otherwise the show wouldn't be watched. And wouldn't have been a big hit in its original incarnation on BBC America, and back in the UK.
11:43 AM on 01/24/2011
I think its worth noting that the only reason the PTC has any claims to call the show child porn is mtvs insistence on using teen actors even though the original used all adult actors. This is why shows with teen characters almost never use teen actors. MTV brought at least part of this controversy on themselves.
01:55 PM on 01/24/2011
The original didn't use adult actors at all. It used all teen actors. (With the exception of the adult characters, obviously).

That was part of the point of the show - it was co-created, written, and acted by people of a similar age to the kids portrayed the in the show. One of the two showrunners was 19 at the time of the first season.

In fact they replace the entire cast every two years on the UK show, and replace them with a new bunch of teenagers (UK season 5 is starting later this week, introducing 'generation 3').
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
12:50 AM on 01/24/2011
"Create a spiritual awakening. I don't even think this has to be religious in some way, but we need one -- desperately"

A spiritual awakening for a shot-by-shot remake of a British TV show ? Seriously? It's just a TV show, not some sort of British cult that's come over the pond to corrupt American youth.
12:21 AM on 01/24/2011
From a college student I agree with you. It is not the governments job to regulate and tell children how to be; whenever they try it usually ends up worse than before. I may not do drugs and alcohol but it is not because it is illegal to do any of that at my age but because the way my parents brought me up. Government is not here to tell us what social norms should be for our children it is there to protect us from physical harm, not to mold the people into their Utopian ideals that ignore all of human nature and are solidly based on nostalgia of a time that never was. Alcoholism, drugs, promiscuity have always been around and have been prevalent with the younger people and it always will be, not allowing it on TV will not reduce how much is there it will just push it underground and exacerbate the problem. Once government bureaucrats and overprotective mothers see that they have no right to tell others what to view, the country and the world will be a better place and these issues can be handled in a reasonable manor without moral condemnation.
10:34 PM on 01/23/2011
The nerfed American version will not fail because of government action, it will fail because network executives mucked with what made it successful in the first place to appease puritanical American mummies.

What the hell is wrong with you people? Seriously, growing up I spent my summers in England and nobody had a problem with it(skins). It's a show written by and for teens/young people, as opposed to horrible American shows that attempt to make us into what our elders would like us to be.

If you must speak out against television shows that send the wrong message, start with teen mom.
photo
HUFFPOST BLOGGER
Tina Wells
cultural anthropologist
10:40 PM on 01/23/2011
I think you should refer to my first blog! My point is, parents should be able to regulate what's appropriate for their kids. They shouldn't depend on networks to do it.
photo
BlackJAC
It's better to be a black king than a white knight
10:30 AM on 01/24/2011
We're not England.  We're a completely different, independently-evolved culture.  For example, the reason why we see Princes Harry & William doing all sorts of humanitarian work and being as humble and grounded as they can is because the British class system instills the upper classes with a measure of guilt over being born wealthy...whereas in the US we only see rich kids doing humanitarian work as image rehab or as an alternative sentence for crimes committed because the US class system instills the upper classes with the mistaken notion that inheriting a fortune is the same as amassing it on your own through hard work in the acid mines like their ancestors did.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
PopeRatzo
My user photo was not photoshopped.
09:49 PM on 01/23/2011
Please chill. It's just a TV show.

I remember when "The Monkees" was considered bad for "the children". The "children" are going to be fine. Worry about the grown-ups.