Tuesday 28 August 2012

In the Interest of Balance: Royal Flush

IN THE INTEREST OF BALANCE: The Sun must be rebranded a 'special interest' rag. It has been virtually inescapable all week: the nude pictures of Prince Harry getting naked and grinding up against a girl in Vegas that were sold to and published by The Sun newspaper. That's right the most perverse image anyone in the UK has seen since the combination of the words 'The Sun' and 'Newspaper'.

When this story hit the front page, I was heartened by a number of people of my generation all responding the same way in the face of this 'outrage': 'Who gives a shit?!'

Seriously this should not be such a big deal: he's a young man having a wild night out and letting his hair down... and in the process letting his family down. We've all had nights like that. It just isn't photographed by some over-eager celebrity hunting twonk with a phone who then sells it for thousands to a newspaper.

Since the newspaper has been in serious trouble with the press complaints commission, with many people, including royals, complaining that the story is not in the public interest. Here's the thing: virtually none of the stories in The Sun are in the public interest. We need look no further than the appalling coverage of the Hillsborough disaster that lead to the paper not being sold anywhere in Liverpool: a completely fabricated story executed in a most offensive way, exploiting the dead and knowingly insulting their families, their friends and their memory. Therefore, I think it only right to rebrand the paper a special interest paper, since it sure as hell isn't public interest.

However, I think the problem goes deeper than this. The minute the faux-outrage machine tabloid published the story, the irony was clear... and could be found on page 3.

The buck does not stop with the papers in this story. The fact that so many people were apparently outraged by this story, I think, is very telling about this country's attitude to sex, sexuality and nudity. I found myself wondering why we were so uppity pretending to be shocked and asked myself are we such an infantile people that any display of nudity or sexuality is greeted with reactionary disgust and childish tittering. Unfortunately, the answer I found myself reaching is yes we are.

Why were we so 'outraged' at the content of the image? The fact that some wannabe paparazzo snapped the photo on a mobile phone: that should be an outrage. The fact that they then tried to sell it: that should be an outrage. And, yes, the fact that The Sun newspaper bought it and ran it on the front page: that should be an outrage.

I'm going to do the criminal here and compare this nation with France. I know, I know, we like to insult France all the time in this country, because... well, it's fun. But bear with me here. Through the course of history, the European country that has seemed most comfortable with all things sexual has been France. They gave us erotic literature, art, lingereé and told us what to do with our tongues. They've been fine with nude beaches and, in recent years have had elections in which the candidates have been unmarried with children or non exclusive. Even their attitude to gay sex has rightly been way in advance of ours. Our laws criminalising homosexuality were repealed largely between the 70s and 80s. When did France decriminalise homosexuality? 1795!

You know, when I started to look into this, I thought the fact that we seem to be turning into a nation of busybodys was a new thing. But looking at it in this light, I realise this isn't true. It's just a new thing that the media is turning into a bunch of people acting like busybodys: pretending to be outraged just because a royal got his clothes off. Frankly I have no problem with the young Prince's actions, but when attitudes like this explode across the press, we must wonder what we thirst after more: morality or a good scandal we can sink our teeth into.

No comments:

Post a Comment