Добавил:
Upload Опубликованный материал нарушает ваши авторские права? Сообщите нам.
Вуз: Предмет: Файл:
Posobie_yapo_UD.doc
Скачиваний:
151
Добавлен:
28.03.2016
Размер:
1.15 Mб
Скачать

Reading two bbc Chiefs Order Tough Curb on tv Sex and Violence

The BBC today announced a tough new curb on TV sleaze, ordering program-makers to cut back on explicit scenes of sex, violence and bad language.

In a new code of practice for producers described as “the most comprehensive code of ethics in broadcasting”, chairman Sir Christopher Bland has signaled he will no longer tolerate casual inclusions of swearing before the watershed, or explicit depictions of sex on TV.

Sir Christopher has also told producers that sex scenes after 9 p.m. must not be gratuitous in any way. The new handbook says: “For each of us sexual activity happens after moral decisions have been made: its portrayal, therefore, should not be separated from recognition of the moral process”.

The guidelines will bee seen as a direct response to Heritage Secretary Virginia Bottomley’s recent concerns about sex and violence on screen. Director-general John Birt said: “the BBC aims to set the highest editorial and ethical standards in program-making”.

The expanded guidelines on taste and decency acknowledge that the British public has become more relaxed about TV sex, but warn producers this does not give them the same license to increase its incidence on screen. Excessive violence has also been ruled out-of-bounds, with the guidelines warning it should be avoided altogether. News producers must take great care not to linger on bloody consequences of an accident or terrorist attack.

Magazine For a Change, 2001

Language focus

  1. Explain the following:

  • to cut back on explicit things;

  • the most comprehensive code;

  • watershed;

  • Heritage Secretary;

  • out-of-bounds;

  • to linger on bloody consequences.

  1. Guess the words from their definitions:

  • to place tough restraints on smth;

  • smth of low moral standards;

  • using bad language;

  • unnecessary in a particular situation, harmful or upsetting;

  • rate of occurrence or action.

  1. Give antonyms to the following words and phrases:

  • explicit;

  • to linger;

  • to relax (censorship);

  • recognition;

  • to curb a misbehaving child;

  • to curb an aggressor.

Speech activities

  1. Answer the following questions. Exchange your views on these issues.

  1. Is it really possible to draw up “the ultimately comprehensive code of ethics in broadcasting”? What are the pitfalls?

  2. Is broadcasting watershed observed in our country? Is it only notional?

  3. What is more harmful on TV: sex or violence?

  4. Who/what is to blame for the decline in program quality on Belarusian TV: the program-makers? The low taste of the viewers? The relaxed censorship?

  1. Discuss the following points.

  • TV is responsible for many ills in our society and therefore should be strictly censored.

  • TV viewers are willing to go on being fed the pap our mass media dispense so readily, that’s why there’s no need in censoring such programs.

  • Those who are responsible for TV output in this country should set higher ethical standards in program-making.

Reading three

Is Film Censorship Necessary?

When classifying a film many aspects have to be put into consideration, the use of violence, sex and bad language can change the certification dramatically. British Board of Film Classification (BBFC) is a private body, which has considerable power over the showing of films. The BBFC has developed a system of certification for films that provides guidance on the public acceptability of the film. Distributors pay a certification fee, and the Director of Public Prosecutions will not prosecute films that have been granted certificates. The Video Recordings Act 1984 gives the BBFC statutory recognition as the regulator of licensing of videos charged with monitoring material that is “suitable for home viewing”.

Censorship bodies have written the rules about what is prohibited in films, and these have been subject to change over time, depending partly on the expressed concern of the public, but mainly on what the government and the main church of the country wants. In more recent times, such censorship bodies have surrendered to their power, particularly in the US, where censorship has returned to the local level, and the central body only classifies films with respect to their content as suitable for various age groups.

Although letting the public watch such films as Child’s Play, the Exorcist and the Texas Chainsaw Massacre it has been proven that these types of films provoke violence. There has been a large amount of research trying to identify the effects of the media on the public, especially in relation to violence. In practice, broadcasters were able to circumvent the ban by dubbing the voices of actors over the voices of the banned speakers. British films are now classified “U” when considered suitable for the whole population. “PG” (Parental Guidance) when they contain scenes that may be unsuitable for young children, “12” as suitable for children over the age of 12, “15” when suitable for people over 15 years, and “18” when suitable for people over 18 years.

However, the age guidance should not tell you if you are or are not allowed to watch the film, it should be your choice, and if you are considering an “18 film”, at that age you should be old enough to make the decision yourself. I feel the age boundaries should not stop the public from watching the film; it should just be a warning to the viewer that they are about to watch a film, which more than likely will contain scenes of violence and/or bad language, it is then up to them if they want to view such material.

Magazine for a Change, 2001

Language focus

  1. Provide your explanation to the following words and expressions, use them in context:

  • certification;

  • to prosecute films;

  • licensing;

  • acceptability;

  • to circumvent the ban;

  • dubbing.

Соседние файлы в предмете [НЕСОРТИРОВАННОЕ]