The Obscurer

Category: Media

Social Commentary

On Saturday, Jacqui Oatley broke through the testosterone ceiling in becoming the first female commentator on Match Of The Day. Big deal. It’s amazing, isn’t it, that a woman has managed to cause a stir by doing something unremarkable, something that only convention has prevented another woman from having done before?

Steve Curry of the Daily Mail for one was particularly opposed to the very idea. Speaking on BBC Breakfast he stated he was against the notion of females shrieking their high-pitched excitable tones through the telly, feeling it would detract from the beautiful game. Contrast, I suppose, such pained feminine warbling with the high art of John Motson, Mike Ingham and Alan Green.

Steve Curry is a bit of a tit; anyone who has ever heard him speak would surely agree. But his arguments deserve some consideration; all the more so because they are so easy to pull apart. One argument voiced has been that as no women has played the game at the highest level they are unqualified to comment on Premiership football; an argument that means everyone I know should also keep schtum, as should most TV commentators (Mark Bright meanwhile is someone who has played the game at Premiership level, but demonstrates that such experience is no bar to talking utter claptrap on a regular basis). The idea that women’s voices themselves are unsuitable seems especially odd. Presumably no woman can ever pass muster, while Joe Pasquale is suitable purely because he is a man? Or perhaps we should only source commentators from the RSC? If football commentary was the sole preserve of the likes of Joss Ackland then I could see how the arrival of some squeaky voiced upstart could alter the status quo, but looking at the current cabal of MOTD commentators I can’t see how a woman would alter the balance that much.

In the event I thought Jacqui acquitted herself just fine while commentating on the Fulham / Blackburn game; afterwards Gary Lineker pondered that their female commentator had done a good job, to which Lee Dixon gave a resounding “yeah” and then swiftly moved on to discuss the match itself. It was the correct, dismissive response; not to the idea that a woman can commentate competently, but to the fact that it is an issue in the first place. And amongst other things, the reason it isn’t an issue is because in essence football itself is fucked so it really doesn’t matter. To the vast majority of football fans MOTD and the rest are just playing out time. There is a very real chance as I write this that the Premiership, FA Cup and European Cup will be fought out between two teams that everyone hates; it is a tribute to Chelsea that we are now in the situation where even I as a Man City fan can’t really choose between them and United. Whatever the talk of this being a golden era for English club football I’m praying for an AC Milan victory in the Champions League as the only respite we may get from the success of these two unlovable clubs (I’m not sure where Liverpool fit into all this, but I must confess I’m not a fan of theirs either).Football has become so boring these days that whoever commentates on the game is irrelevant.

But anyway, just what is this sacred order of commentators that women are in danger of breaking into? Okay, Sky’s commentators are alright in the main, but have you listened to the rabble on the BBC and ITV recently? Apart from the humble old guard of the likes of Tony Gubba and Mike Ingham who just get on with it and can still do a half decent job, we have some ne’er do wells such as John Motson, Clive Tydesley and Alan Green, and then the young(er) ones like Peter Drury, Jonathan Pearce and Guy Mowbray who think their job is to come up with some ever more painful, smart-alec wordplay for every ill-suited occasion, so showing themselves up each time as smug, preening fuckwits. Is anyone telling me that no woman can improve on that shower of arses?

Women have many faults. None of them can read a map without turning it around up to 270 degrees so that it is in line with the way they are facing, and they seem incapable of successfully parallel parking unless they fully employ all the laws of chance. But were you to ask me; are we saying that a female cannot commentate every bit as poorly as a juggins* such as Jon Champion? Well, then I must insist that they can. From my experience I fiercely believe that a woman can be just as inept as any man out there.

*Juggins n. inf. silly fellow. A great word I discovered while looking in the dictionary for a “J” my son could take into nursery for the “letter of the week” (in the end we settled on a carton of apple “juice”).

Double Or Quits

Well, I’d hoped that by now we would know for certain where the nation’s single “supercasino” was to be situated, but last night’s vote in the Lords means this whole malarkey is going to rumble on for a while yet. How very disappointing.

Should there be a supercasino? Should there be more than one? Where should they be placed? I don’t care. I’m more interested in the way my local TV news has tied itself up in knots over the issue.

Normally it would be pretty easy for the BBC’s North West Tonight, or Granada Reports. If it were London challenging Manchester’s award of the casino we would be hearing about the capital’s domination of all things in the country, and how the respected panel that initially chose Manchester had made the correct and legitimate decision. If Leeds had been awarded the casino in the first place then we would have heard nothing but criticism of both the Leeds bid and the process itself, along with endless propaganda pushing Blackpool’s case. Sadly, for the BBC and Granada, as both Blackpool and Manchester are in their region, they have had to tread a fine line and actually report fairly, no doubt leaving the Manchester Evening News and Blackpool Gazette to fill the vacuum.

What a pain. It must be one of the joys of working on a local news programme that, when in doubt, you can simply indulge in the purely parochial. Why bother to look into the rights and wrongs of all sorts of issues when you can just bang the drum for the local interest above and beyond any common sense? Who cares if somewhere outside your region has a better claim for government revenue or private investment; they are, by definition, outside your region, and therefore damned.

But my favourite quote on the casino matter came from MP Joan Humble. She was interviewed yesterday on News North West about how she would be voting in the Commons, and was then asked which way she thought the impending vote would go; to the latter question she replied that said she wasn’t sure and wouldn’t like to guess as she’s “not a betting person”. Not a betting person? Yet she thought she had the requisite knowledge on the subject of gambling to go and vote against the bill in the hope of favouring a Blackpool bid?

What was it, I wonder, within or without, that had persuaded her which way to vote? Was there a particularly clinching argument that made Blackpool the clear choice? Was is down to evidence that the panel had been negligent in some aspect when originally awarding Manchester the casino? Or was it simply because Joan Humble is the MP for Blackpool North and Fleetwood? I wouldn’t dream of speculating; but should she ever lose her seat, no doubt a career in local journalism beckons.

PostScript: Incidentally, I know you needn’t be a gambler to have have an opinion about if or where the casino should be built, and in favouring her local area Joan Humble only did that any MP would do. This isn’t really about her but about mindless local bias in general, in both the media and in politics. But to say you’re “not a betting person” in this context seemed a particularly unfortunate thing to say, and it caught my ear. Hence this post.

Rebellion (Lies)

I’ve said before that I think Harry Hill’s TV Burp is just about the only thing worth watching on ITV these days. Do you watch it? Only wondering, you see, because it seems that the advertising agencies of the nation can’t think anyone does. Over the weekend the ad-break for TV Burp consisted entirely of promotions for other ITV programmes; plenty of Dancing On Ice and Jane Austen, even Elton John’s Birthday Party FFS, but nothing about soap powder or even tea bags. I find it bizarre; when even the lamest programme at any hour on Ftn seems able to fill its breaks with proper adverts I can’t figure out why the best programme on the most popular commercial channel can’t pay its way. Whether it is down to ITV, the advertising agencies, or the lumpen skulls of the great British public I cannot tell.

Presumably Harry Hill has hitherto been subsidised by other areas of ITV’s programming, such as the profits from ITV Play; in which case I think I have found the only reason to lament the station’s demise following the recent scandals over faked phone-ins on TV. If the removal of the channel does coincide with TV Burp’s demise then I may have to rethink my attitude to crap like The Mint.

It is a strange business this whole palaver over the phone-in competitions. I don’t actually see much of a problem with the ITV Play / Quiz Call type of phone-in; calling in for such shows seems such a transparent waste of money that with perhaps a tweak or two I don’t see why they can’t continue to offer a service to those people with more money than sense who really should know better but apparently don’t. On the other hand the Richard & Judy / Saturday Kitchen type incidents, where people were asked to phone in for quizzes they had no chance of winning, is a different matter altogether; words fail, although a word called “fraud” will probably do.

The Blue Peter incident, I think, is especially telling. In that instance, when faced with a technical fault on the competition’s phone lines, the producer continued to allow calls to be accepted and charged for and roped in a child who was on a studio visit to pretend to phone in and so “win” the prize, maintaining the appearance of a genuine phone-in. Astonishing behaviour indeed; you or I, if put in the producer’s shoes, would no doubt just apologise for the fault and cancel the phone-in. That the real life TV producers didn’t do this, and that they seemingly didn’t consider there to be anything wrong and/or illegal in taking the action they took, I think shows how so much of television is artifice in the first place; that producers and programme makers so routinely twist and bend the dull truth into a convenient and palatable reality that it didn’t occur to them that they were overstepping the line on this occasion.

But I think the real shocker here is that this is not the first of Blue Peter’s deceptions. On a news story last week it was revealed that in the ‘sixties the original pet dog Petra died after a few days and was secretly replaced with another puppy without informing the viewers. This came as a body blow to me. I remember that when Petra (or should that be the replacement Petra) died Blue Peter informed viewers that they could send off for a free colour photograph of the dog, and for some reason my parents insisted I write in. Eventually we received our photo, only it was in black and white, not colour, and with a note attached apologising and explaining that they had run out of colour prints. Run out? How odd it seems in this day and age; when digital photos can be printed on demand it sounds a poor excuse to say you just “ran out” of colour photos. But even at the time; what happened to the original colour negative? Did someone stand on it? Did they just print a load off and chuck the negative in the bin? Surely they could have gone down to SupaSnaps and got a few more printed off, even in the ‘seventies? But apparently not.

Anyway, I can now clearly see that the upshot of the whole tawdry affair is that I ended up with a substandard photo of an impostor I didn’t even care for in the first place. I liked Shep.

A Word From Our Sponsors

Antony Worrall Thompson today hit out at those who have recently questioned the integrity of his ITV1 programme Saturday Cooks Live, and its spin offs, Daily Cooks and Christmas Cooks, following the criticism that for a show that pretends to be about promoting innovative and inventive culinary ideas, being sponsored by McCain Oven Chips makes it look a little bit silly.

Speaking from his home in Oxfordshire, Worrall Thompson retorted

We have nothing to apologise for. McCain insist on using only the finest quality Maris Piper potatoes in their Oven Chips. They are low in salt, sugar and saturated fat – a boon in these health conscious times – and are the perfect accompaniment to Chicken Dippers and Pizza Fingers. Or why not try them in a sliced pain rustique along with just a light sprinkling of Cayman Island sea salt and a splash of 15-year-old balsamico di Modena?

Once we had stopped our tape recorder, Mr Worrall Thompson continued

What the fuck was that all about, eh? Why is it always me you get stuck into? You never go after Gordon Ramsay do you? Oh no, because he’s a “real chef”, while I’m just a “celebrity chef”. Oh really. For Christ’s sake he’s on telly more often than I am! You’ve not had a pop at him for advertising Thresher have you? No, it’s always Wozzer that gets it in the neck. I mean; Thresher, for fucks sake. Talk about falling between two stools, stuck in no-man’s land between Oddbins and Bargain Booze, with Tesco doing the same only better and cheaper and open 24 hours a day. “Wines you can swear by”. Oh that’s clever isn’t it? Well I can swear too. Damn right I can. Cockflaps! There you go, that’s a swear word I’ve just invented. Cockflaps! It’s pathetic. I know the media are always going to be more interested in megastars like that blogger Guido Fawkes or whatever his name is, but on the quiet lesser celebrities like Gordon Ramsay are just as big hypocrites but get a free pass from you lot because they’re not as famous. I tell you, he gets away with murder.

It is believed that McCain fought off stiff competition from both Bachelor’s Super Noodles and Campbell’s Meatballs for the deal to sponsor Saturday Cooks Live. Rumours that Bernard Matthews was interested in using the sponsorship to relaunch their Turkey Twizzler brand could not be confirmed. We did try to contact them but their phone line was continually engaged and does not accept BT RingBack.

This is the second sponsorship row ITV has been involved with in recent weeks. Their genealogy programme “You Don’t Know You’re Born” was criticised as being little more than a piss-poor rip off of the rival BBC show “Who Do You Think You Are?” and simply a sorry excuse to publicise Genes Reunited, the programme’s sponsor and a division of Friends Reunited which ITV recently bought for £120m. On that occasion ITV defended itself robustly, stating that before the show was broadcast their lawyers had assured them that the format, credits and music for the show, while being almost identical to the BBC version, where technically different enough to be “just this side of legal”, so that although it was “as plain as day” what they were up to, the chance of being sued for a copyright infringement was “really quite slim”.

MeTube

A good few months ago I wrote about YouTube, imagining that I was in the vanguard in spreading the word about a fantastic new service on t’web. Today, of course, there can’t be anyone out there who doesn’t know about and use YouTube, whether to share their own home videos, to view illegal content, or to publicise their latest happy-slap.

I do enjoy making my own videos and sharing them with my friends, but I think it is the illegal content bit I like the most; nothing especially dodgy, just stuff like old music videos and the like. I was amazed when I saw people posting about archive Howlin’ Wolf performances hosted on YouTube, and if they can find a home there then it makes me wonder where it will all end. As with Wikipedia, where it appears there is no subject too obscure for someone, somewhere to have created an entry, so in the fullness of time could just about every notable event ever filmed end up on YouTube (albeit buried alongside all manner of crap; but that is the way of the web)? Perhaps one day someone will post the moment on Children In Need in (I think) 1990 when my college mate Simon is supposed to have burst on stage and hugged Terry Wogan just as he was about to announce the final total. I’ve never seen the clip – that is if it happened and Simon wasn’t bullshitting, which he did have a habit of doing – and I’d love to.

With the deluge of content on YouTube, however, there is a definite benefit in having a minority taste. If you are a fan of Madonna, for example, you are buggered; 9242 clips to trawl through at the last count in the hope of finding a gem. A preference for Throwing Muses, however, means you just have 91 videos to weed out; and I have, watching loads of old promos and interviews I missed first time around.

Which reminds me; a few years back a mate and I were chatting about what we would like to do other than our current jobs. I mentioned running a bookshop, or perhaps a record shop; at which point Paul spat out his beer and creased up laughing.

“What? A record shop devoted exclusively to Throwing Muses and The Boo Radleys,” he said, those being my two favourite bands at the time (and still two of my favourites today), “I can’t see that being a commercial success”.

Perhaps not, but that doesn’t make the concept in itself wrong. So just in case I am made Music Dictator anytime soon, here is what you need to be prepared for. Don’t worry though; they are both very short tracks.

Throwing Muses: Juno

https://youtube.com/watch?v=GUvxOvkkfmQ%26rel%3D1

The Boo Radleys: Lazy Day

https://youtube.com/watch?v=0BVpUAMOStc%26rel%3D1