countrygrl
King
A day after concerns emerged that MTV's sexually charged teenage drama "Skins" may violate child pornography laws, a major advertiser has pulled its ads from the show.
The New York Times reported Friday that Taco Bell decided the racy show was "not fit for our brand." That bomb fell after the paper reported that MTV's executives had asked producers to tone down the show's most explicit content.
The execs were particularly concerned with an episode scheduled to air Jan. 31, in which a naked 17-year-old actor is depicted (from behind) running down a street. The teen's erection is an ongoing joke in the episode.
The show, a mimic of the British hit of the same name, is purposely edgy, with candid scenes of teenage drugs and sex. But the paper reported that most reality shows involve adult actors, while the Skins actors are all teenagers, with the youngest at 15. Reported the NY Times:
Child pornography is defined by the United States as any visual depiction of a minor engaged in sexually explicit conduct. In some cases, "a picture of a naked child may constitute illegal child pornography if it is sufficiently sexually suggestive," according to the Justice Department's legal guidance. Anyone younger than 18 is considered to be a minor.
The furor has also prompted conservative TV watchdog group, the Parents Television Council, to call for a federal investigation child porn and exploitation laws.
The group has called the show the most dangerous show ever for children.
http://blog.seattlepi.com/thebigblog/archives/236538.asp
So, where to begin with this. I guess the crux of the debate should center around whether this is child porn or not. Are parental groups out of line here? Is the show appropriate? The original New York Times article (that is no longer available without a subscription) indicates that it is targeted for 12-17 year olds. Is it really kosher for MTV to be targeting kids so young with such a racy show? Does the burden of responsibility fall onto the parents? Are US child pornography laws "too stingy" and go beyond reason?