In all Fairness to Golden Rivet, I think it was reasonable to launch the Thread in Current Affairs when the fuss first kicked off. I think she may have assumed we were all aware of or concerned for the wider ramifications. I think she watches it as an interested observer of the dross of our Society; and possibly no bad thing for a small "l" liberal. I gladly acknowledge that she's only been here a Dog Watch (just shortly after me!) but I think she has made valuable contributions in that time.
The programme (OK, I'm being kind over a simple "show") really is the epitome of low cost, low value low expectation television for the, generally, chavoid masses. Out of all proportion to its place in our often shallow Society, it has stirred thought and responses at Channel 4 Boardroom, Foreign Government and, consequently, Ministerial levels. Again agreeing with G R, of course the Indians have latched on to this for their own domestic political ends. I suspect that her intended debate was, what should a free society do about such programmes? In the main, it's harmless piffle for the great unthinkers but, nevertheless, is a reflection of that faction. Do we censor and edit the footage to sanitise it, having given the participants strict rules on what and what not they can think and say? Interestingly, that latter point would make it more aligned to Orwell's version. Well, the intention seems that it is to be a "reality" record of people living what, for them, is their normal lives. We can insist all we want that they should censor themselves and act out of character but, as anyone who has run or attended a multi day selection Board knows, people will lapse into being themselves. Of course, stupidity and controversy can themselves be manufactured as that's what attracts the audience.
"Reality" television is with us and we can't put the djin (London, Plymouth or Bombay, no preferrance) back in the bottle. So do we put a stop to it in the National interest or dilute it to something even more meaningless? Either way we've blown a hole in our freedom of thought and speech principles. G R gave us the chance to discuss that but I think she assumed that we would second guess her intentions.
