I expect simple behaviours here. Friendship, and love. Any advice should be from the perspective of the person asking, not the person giving! We have had to make new membership moderated to combat the huge number of spammers who register
I haven't watched the shows, but they are supposed to be word for word copies of the original BBC series(now in its 5th year) that was broadcast in the US starting last year.
I don't remember any stink being raised when those shows were aired.
(\\__/) And if you don't believe The sun will rise
(='.'=) Stand alone and greet The coming night
(")_(") In the last remaining light. (C. Cornell)
Location: US/Canada
Registered: September 2009
Messages: 733
Well, you can’t please everybody.
Following the heated controversy of MTV’s “Skins,” the American answer to the British show of the same name about teenagers exploring life, love, and recreational drug use, more advertisers are pulling out their commercials from the taboo show.
After Taco Bell & then Wrigley’s withdrew their commercials, companies like H&R Block and General Motors are taking out their content. The Parents Television Council has been on the warpath against the show, as it finds so much graphic content (42 depictions of illegal drugs and illicit sexual mentions in 41 minutes of the pilot) disturbing to MTV’s younger viewers.
Melissa Henson, the Director of Communication and Public Education for the PTC, says that a large part has to do with the age of the actors involved.
“The key difference between “Skins” and a program like “Gossip Girl” is that [“Skins”] actually uses a very young cast, between the ages of 15 and 19," said Henson. "They have these high school kids in highly eroticized, highly sexualized positions."
The concern isn’t that kids watching the show will automatically begin partying to the nth degree, but rather that they absorb the behaviors they see on TV subconsciously. “Just by putting it on television makes it typical, makes it expected,” Henson said. “That’s not to say it factors into their decision-making process.”
Henson pointed out that older WB shows like “Buffy the Vampire Slayer” and “Dawson’s Creek” got a lot of publicity in their heyday, but it was more wholesome shows like “7th Heaven” that drew in stronger, more consistent ratings.
The PTC said in a statement on Saturday that they are encouraging more sponsors to take out their advertisements—among them, L’Oreal, Foot Locker, and Schick Hydro.
The end result, ultimately, is for parents to be aware of what their teens are watching. “It’s important that parents know what’s out there,” Henson said. “Beyond that, I hope that MTV gets the message that they’ve gone too far in this series.
"We also are hopeful that advertisers will get the message that they will be held responsible by the content that was made possible by their ad dollars.”
Location: Canada
Registered: December 2003
Messages: 869
... this, as "Skins" is the second CANADIAN produced television show in a week to be attacked by mainstream U.S.A., Media interests; the other being the mini-series "The Kennedy's".
I do find it interesting that imdb.com in it's list of company credits, while they mention both Company Pictures and Entertainment One (the Canadian production houses responsible for the filming) they only peripherally mention MTV as being the U.S. distributor (not producer) and fail to mention Astral Media, Corus Entertainment, The Movie Network and the Governments of Canada and British Columbia as having been the entities responsible for its' financing, all of which are mentioned, including Canadian Copyright, Title and Ownership on the prints aired in Canada (and I'm supposing elsewhere excepting the U.S., (not MTV), although one would have to have been on another planet to suppose that they were angling for a U.S. buyer when they produced it, and consequently set it in Baltimore.
I would have to assume that neither Company Pictures or Entertainment One have the clout that both Alliance-Atlantic Communications and Lions Gate Entertainment continue to enjoy, both of whom have won successful lawsuits in the U.S.A. against various media combines for removing title and ownership from programmes produced by either of them, and subsequently aired in the U.S. as being American content.
"The Kennedy's" whilst not airing in the U.S. will be aired as originally scheduled come this March in Canada, and likely elsewhere shortly thereafter. "Skins", now in it's second season here in Canada apparently will continue as planned, with little mention being made in the Canadian media about this controversy.
I do remember a similar hailstorm being raised about Queer As Folk 10-years ago, but then again Alliance-Atlantis were then (and continue to be today) large enough to stifle any such controversy. Pity that neither Company Pictures or Entertainment One appear to be.
Warren C. E. Austin
The Gay Deceiver
Toronto, Canada
Location: US/Canada
Registered: September 2009
Messages: 733
Tax prep company H&R Block and food chain Subway are the latest companies to let MTV know they will no longer sponsor the show Skins because of its sexual content.
According to The Hollywood Reporter, Subway's ads will not appear on the second episode of the show, airing Monday. The Parents Television Council launched a campaign last week to get companies to pull their ads from the series, which is adapted from a BBC program. Taco Bell was the first to do so, because the portrayal of teenagers having sex and doing drugs does "not fit for our brand," a spokesman told the Reporter. H&R Block, General Motors, and Wrigley have also asked that their commercials be pulled.
Executives of MTV's parent company, Viacom, met with Skins' producers to discuss toning down show's provocative content because some images may be in violation of child pornography laws, The New York Times reported last week.
Location: Canada
Registered: December 2003
Messages: 869
Apparently it is perfectly OK to air programming that features teenagers behaving in their typical fashion (be that sex and drugs and rock'n'roll or classic jock and cheerleader or nerd or whatever) only so long as the actors portraying those teens are of legal-age (preferably in their twenties) and therefore not bound by quaint American notions of what duly constitutes child pornography.
Isn't that special. Certainly one sure fire way to get around the Law, isn't it?
Is Degrassi going to be next ... no wait that couldn't happen, not now, as all the (child) actors are truly in their twenties, playing characters that have grown into their twenties during the life of the series (what has it been now 15-years or so in Canada and maybe half-a-dozen in America, and maybe more elsewhere?
All this righteousness simply makes me want to vomit.
Warren C. E. Austin
The Gay Deceiver
Toronto, Canada
Location: USA
Registered: September 2003
Messages: 327
Those are scenes from the uk version of skins, season two. Even if the producers of the US version try to follow the story as close as possible, im there will be substancial changes done to appeal to a wide US audience. Different culture, different society.
I downloaded the UK version to see the story how is meant to be seen, nudity and all. so far, i like it.
You don't love someone because they are beautiful, they are beautiful because you love them.
I haven't been here in a while, but it is nice to see it is still here and doing well.
The comments about the show tell me it is typical right wing response to a show that would probably only get a mild look in the rest of the western world and more like it would get in a radical muslim country. We in the USA are so uptight about sexuality it is really amazing.
I hope my country survives long enough so that the younger generation can take it over and remove all the religious zealots and political hacks that are ruining it. I guess that is a real dream to think it could happen.
I recall that when QAF first aired in this country it was met with a lot of the same kind of response. God, cant those people just turn off their tv or turn the channel - it is easy to do now days, you don't have to get up off the couch to do it.
] 
A Place of Safety
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
Re: "New" US version of Skins called child porn 
Re: "New" US version of Skins called child porn 
