Crossing the line on TV to achieve a good objective
Can cuss words be used by kids on TV to achieve a good objective? This “good out of bad” argument is an exceedingly hot topic on US TV these days, after an advocacy campaign used little girls to pretend to be outraged grown-ups, spewing “shocking” invectives to make viewers stop, gape, gasp—and listen!
First, the backstory: For years now, disturbing statistics have been released about the exploitation of women that exists to this day in the United States, in various ways: On the financial front, women are still generally paid 25 percent less than men for the same kind of work. And second, five out of 10 women in the United States will be raped or otherwise sexually assaulted at one point in their lives.
Despite the fact that these statistics have been out there for years, most people still haven’t reacted to them strongly enough to provoke real action and redress against them. Hence, an advocacy group bit the bullet and made the intentionally controversial decision to come out with a TV situationer in which girls as young as 6 are made to “act sassy” and swear, to shock viewers and make them think—and act to help mitigate the onerous situation.
As expected, public reaction to the spots has been decidedly heated—and mixed. Some viewers agree that in-your-face tactics are needed to force the viewing public to think and act.
Others, however, think that the people behind the advocacy have gone too far, since little girls mouthing four-letter words, even if for well-intentioned effect, could make other young viewers think it’s OK to follow their “edgy” example. So, which point of view should reign supreme?
Recently, a morning talk show invited the campaign director, a young talent and her mother to shed light on the controversy.
Even the show’s hosts had mixed views on the campaign’s acceptability, but the child talent’s mother, in particular, scored points with viewers in relation to the advocacy’s validity.
Yes, she shared, she was bothered by the fact that her little girl had to swear on-cam, but after the campaign’s goals were explained at length to her, she acceded to allowing her daughter to play the part and say all those “hot” lines.
Why did the campaign elicit her carefully considered consent? This was where the mother broke down, and revealed to viewers that she herself had been “touched” when she was only 4 years old, so she felt it was of utmost importance to help make sure that her daughter, and other vulnerable children like her, wouldn’t have to undergo such a terrible experience!
As if this emotional outburst weren’t “reality TV” enough, her little daughter also broke down at this point, making the show’s hosts belatedly realize that the discussion was too mature for her to have participated in—the interview was abruptly terminated!
All this just goes to show how sensitive and controversial the issue continues to be. But, it really has to be confronted, after making doubly sure that young participants or viewers are shielded and not unduly affected.
The reality of financial and sexual exploitation of women is simply too terrible to be hushed up—and not assertively and even forcibly rectified!
