Jeremy Clarkson on Kids' TV

[faceless]

The kids are all right with lousy TV
Jeremy Clarkson

Oh deary me. There was much wailing and gnashing of teeth last week when the most extensive report ever compiled into the state of children’s television found that our kids are being brought up on a diet of American violence, schmaltz and pink fluffy nonsense. The figures were terribly gloomy. Just nine years ago, 22% of shows made by the BBC and ITV were for kids. Now, it’s just 4%. And as a result, fewer than one in five children’s programmes on British television are actually made here.

This produced a torrent of angry missives to the nation’s blogs. Angry middle-aged people from all over Surrey and Sussex raged furiously, saying that children should be made to watch wholesome Enid Blyton stories. And that they must be broadcast mute and with subtitles in Latin. Oh for heaven’s sake. Yes, Enid Blyton was tremendous 40 years ago. I particularly enjoyed the Famous Five series. Especially, although I did not know why at the time, when the smugglers took the tousle-haired Georgina to a cave and tied her up. But times change.

And children change, too. My grandfather was born up a chimney and was only allowed out when it was time for him to be beaten. My father looked forward to the orange and piece of string he was given every year at Christmas. I spent most of my childhood watching television. And my kids pass the time doing anything but. Apart from The Simpsons and Doctor Who, I cannot get them to watch it at all.

The rot set in during an episode of Planet Earth. David Attenborough had just shown us a charming little bird of paradise that danced about in a funny way and my youngest daughter was much taken with it. “I’d like to see that again,” she said, happily. But of course, this being television, she couldn’t. So on to the internet she went, where, hey presto, she found the clip on a BBC website. And then she found lots of other clips as well. Just the good bits with all the talking taken out.

This, to her, was perfect entertainment. And why wouldn’t it be? It’s how we watch porn films. You fast-forward through the bits where the plumber comes up the drive, and the lady in a nightie makes him a cup of tea, and slow it down when the action starts. Now my daughter only really watches YouTube. There’s no plot. No Attenborough explaining stuff. No tedious instructions on how to make a space helmet out of a squeezy bottle. No adverts. Just loads of people falling off their bicycles and catching fire. And when she finds one she likes a lot, she watches it over and over again. For nothing.

How can television possibly compete with that? When I was eight, I watched Marine Boy because on a wet Thursday afternoon in October, there was absolutely nothing else to do. Now, kids have got YouTube, Xbox, MSN, MySpace, text, e-mail, PSP, DVD and Sky+. All the world’s ones and noughts have been harnessed for their edification and you’re not going to drag them back to the box with a bunch of jolly-what-tally-ho Enid kids in big shorts getting into scrapes with smugglers. That was then, and it’s as gone as the ruff and tuberculosis.

Every week (starting tonight incidentally) I make a television programme called Top Gear. But I never watch it. What I do is watch my children watching it. And it’s depressing. Because they only really perk up when someone falls in a lake. Whenever there’s talking, they start to unpick the stitching in the sofa. It isn’t that they have a limited attention span. They haven’t got one at all.

There is no solution to this. Forcing broadcasters to make shows for children is a complete waste of time. Because to make anything they want to see, it would have to be a nonstop orgy of fire, and people getting their heads stuck in lifts. Fearne Cotton would have to be injured every five seconds and then at the end she’d have to explode. And they couldn’t fake it because that’s not allowed any more. She really would have to say: “That’s it for this week kids, and now I’m going to blow up.”

The best thing I can suggest is not to worry. Ofcom says the vast majority of programmes for children are stupid American cartoons. And this is true. But they’re all shown on faraway distant satellite channels. And no one is watching them. If you look behind the hysterical headlines, you’ll discover that the most watched children’s programme on television is Evacuation, a British-made BBC reality show that gives kids a taste of what it was like to be an evacuee in the second world war.

The top 20 is almost all British-made. You’ve got Blue Peter at two, Newsround at three, Jackanory at 10 and so on. The old wholesome favourites are still there. It’s just that in our day, they were watched by 5m and today they are watched by about half a dozen. The rest? The missing hordes? Well they’re doing something else, but we mustn’t worry because honestly the kids are all right.

My big problem is that broadcasters will react to the report by redoubling their efforts to win back an audience that simply isn’t there any more. This will mean there’ll be even fewer programmes for those who really do watch television. People who don’t have a PlayStation or an account with My Book. People who don’t go out on a Saturday night. We’re called adults. The message then is simple. Sod the children. And bring back Minder.

-----------------------

I quite enjoyed reading this - I don't think I hated him once... haha

[nekokate]

I hardly ever watch TV. I sometimes catch the Channel 4 news, and I watch Deal or no Deal, Desperate Housewives and Ugly Betty, but that's about it. The rest is complete bollox.

[faceless]

How can anything be deemed to be bollox while Desperate Housewives gets through the net? I've never seen anything more hormonally biased - not even Jeremy Clarkson on one of his crap rants!

[nekokate]

[faceless]

Vaginal monologues are best in the Powder Room!