Another nanny state manifesto
The telecoms quango Ofcom has released separate Media Literacy audits for adults and children. They confirm that use of ITC is increasing across the population, most rapidly among the higher socio-economic groups and, within them, among the younger cohorts.
“The promotion of media literacy is a responsibility placed on Ofcom by Section 11 of the Communications Act 2003,” say the reports. Media literacy is defined as “the ability to access, understand and create communications in a variety of contexts”.
The accompanying chart for adults based on a sample of 2905 individuals contains nothing likely to rock anybody’s boat. What contribution, if any, Ofcom has made to rising ITC uptake is not specified, probably because it is statistically insignificant.
However, and as always in these quangasms, the sub-text is self-serving and patronising.
“The extent of media literacy also depends on whether people understand the influences on the content they consume, whether they evaluate what they see and hear, and whether they are concerned about any aspects of the multimedia world in which they live.”
Well no. Those are matters outside Ofcom’s remit. But by making the claim, the quangocrats open the door to the following:
“Our research findings in this area suggest that younger people’s enthusiastic take-up of new media and their technical skills are not necessarily complemented by a good understanding of the ways in which media content is funded and regulated.” We propose a supplementary survey:
· Are you happy that forty percent of government spending is administered by quangos?
· Do you think that people who are privileged above the rest of the population and insulated from the effects of their decisions are likely to make correct choices for the rest of us?
· Are you sick and tired of being patronised by holier-than-thou bureaucratic mediocrities?
Nanny Ofcom
Ah, but think of the children – they always play that card.
“Some children are seeing or hearing things say that they see or hear things on TV that make them sad, frightened or embarrassed (19 percent of 8-11s and 12 percent of 12-15s) or that they consider are too old for them (11 percent of 8-11s and 7 percent of 12-15s).”
Is that all? I bet a survey of adults would find considerably higher percentages of users saddened, frightened or embarrassed by quite a lot of TV content. And bored by even more.
“It is worth nothing that the content children say they dislike is not necessarily content they should be shielded from,” says Nanny Ofcom. “For example, seeing footage of poverty or animal cruelty may be sad or frightening, but highlights issues that, arguably, children should be aware of.”
By the same token children should also be made visually aware that religious fanatics saw people’s heads off and stone women to death. We shield our children from these things because they lack the emotional maturity to handle them.
Ofcom and the like think we are all children, to be fed only politically correct pap. If we are not, what need have we of all these supercilious watch-dogs?
