My Big Fat Gypsy Wedding (Channel 4) has just returned for another series drawing in one quarter of the audience share for the 9pm viewing slot and 5.6million viewers, more than BBC1 and ITV. The show continues to explore the world of the lavish weddings and the Gypsy and Traveller communities. But the programme is causing controversy on many fronts and can make for uncomfortable viewing.
To start with: the advertising campaign. Displayed along a variety of images on billboards and double page magazine spreads, is the bold text 'Bigger. Fatter. Gypsier.' The argument has been made that this would not be appropriate for any other ethnic group and is therefore a racist comment against the Gypsy and Traveller community. There is a meaning carried by using the superlative term of 'Gypsy' that is inherently negative. Superlatives extend qualities of a 'thing', making it more than it is. Group identity is not usually given a superlative term because it suggests 'extremes' of cultural behaviour, gross exaggeration and playing to the stereotype perception which already exists. None of these connotations are positive.
Now to the show. Documentary has traditional roots in a highly regarded form. Documentary makers of old have wrestled with 'truth'. Like anthropologists, concern was given to documentary style, whether it was purely observational and thus reflected 'reality' as honestly as possible, or whether it was participatory, accepting that the presence of a camera crew has an effect on the subjects.
MBFGW seems to be neither of these. The show presents the same representation of the Traveller and Gypsy community repeatedly, that of the excessive, exaggerated wedding ceremonies.Julie Bindell in the Guardian wrote an article about her experiences of life for traveller women The Truth about Traveller Life and found stories of poverty, abuse and neglect. There is an idea that you can easily find what you want to report on if you go looking for it, but at least it adds to a more balanced picture of a community. This 'documentary' owes more to the high-entertainment value reality shows than it does anything else. It relies heavily upon spectacle, emotional drama and shock. As viewers, we are sent reeling from one image to another, mouths slightly agape. This is not a fair portrayal of a group of people or, for that matter, their weddings (especially as the programme makers like to pick and choose when to focus on a wedding).
It could be argued that the community welcomes Channel 4 into their lives and positively enjoy the spotlight. However, they are not the producers or the decision makers. They do not select or edit footage or construct the subtle, distanced, at times mocking voiceover narration. This is a time when many Gypsy and Traveller groups are caught up in regular clashes with establishment institutions. They have been embroiled in a land ownership battle, suffering a print media backlash. Their Big Brother TV star has been in and out of the news with accusations of criminal behaviour. And in times of economic hardship and high unemployment, the show's recurrent theme is the exorbitant, excessive and 'fantasy' weddings.
Whilst the show may entertain many, provide Channel 4 with impressive ratings, not to mention continue the brand reputation of Ch4 as an innovative, progressive station, the impact of this media representation on a community group cannot be overlooked. Many complaints come from those in the communities themselves with particularly older community members saying that the representations are unrecognisable. Another issue is that for younger members watching the programme, these representations become their 'reality' and the culture begins to mutate and eventually is changed forever, because of an 'entertainment' show broadcast by a national television station.
No comments:
Post a Comment