Benefits Street

[Webbo]

Don't say the programme showing those featured does not go along with stereotypes thus justifies Government poicies.

There are 100 houses in the street? How many of the residents have been shown? 6-10?

Is that a good representation?

Maybe the others in the street didn't want to be in the programme? But anyway how do you know what the people who haven't been shown are like?

[Rincewind]

Maybe the others in the street didn't want to be in the programme? But anyway how do you know what the people who haven't been shown are like?

I don't but then again I do not make assumptions.

[Guest MattP]

The Street was specifically chosen as it has more JSA claimants than any other in the country.

These food banks need shutting down, one of them had a job last week and now he's found out what a food bank is he is filling his face watching sky.

White Dees daughter is terrific, wants to work and has real aspirations in life, uncomfortable viewing for some. She isn't staying on the state payroll and voting Labour when she grows up.

[Webbo]

I don't but then again I do not make assumptions.

You're assuming it's all edited to victimise the working class.

[Jon the Hat]

I don't but then again I do not make assumptions.

Oh but you do Ken. All day every day.

[Vlad the Fox]

Well fungi gave us a lesson in how to **** up your life. Could have been living in a house with partner and kids but drink, drugs and crime got the better of him.

[Rincewind]

You're assuming it's all edited to victimise the working class.

I'm going by the evidence which is that those shown typifies the stereotype views put out by some people. Without seeing the edited out bits I cannot say it was done for this purpose or that the rest of the street were unlike themI can only go by what is shown. And common sense tells me that the ones shown are what would be called stereotypes by some. That fact hits me right in the middle.

I never watched it tonight but from the above comments it panned out like I expected. Was anyone expecting anything different? And wasn't the reason to watch it was to see what the 'scum' were up to?

[Webbo]

I'm going by the evidence which is that those shown typifies the stereotype views put out by some people. Without seeing the edited out bits I cannot say it was done for this purpose or that the rest of the street were unlike themI can only go by what is shown. And common sense tells me that the ones shown are what would be called stereotypes by some. That fact hits me right in the middle.

So, if I'm understanding you right, because these people match a certain stereotype it must be fake?

[Rincewind]

So, if I'm understanding you right, because these people match a certain stereotype it must be fake?

I never said that.

[Guest MattP]

That Marc is dreadful.

He turns up with his wife's id and blames it on luck rather than his own stupidity.

Ken, many people have mentioned characters who want to do well for themselves and praised them, why have the programme makers shown that if they want to show them all as scum?

If a bloke instead of seeing his children is boozing at 10am what do you expect people to think?

[Webbo]

 

I never watched it tonight but from the above comments it panned out like I expected. Was anyone expecting anything different? And wasn't the reason to watch it was to see what the 'scum' were up to?

I've never called them scum, I think a lot of them are pitiful. Why anyone would want to sustain a system that encourages that sort of life is beyond me.

[Strokes]

I need to catch up, only seen the first episode

[Rincewind]

I apologise for hijacking this thread. I'll bow out and let you carry on.

[Zingari]

I don't watch this shite and lasted no more than a few minutes as i flicked through the channels as i can't think what possible purpose it serves

.

But if you listen carefully to IDS he is more or less telling us   that programmes such as Benefits Street are just part of a propaganda campaign to justify gov reforms'

How much more fookin obvious does propaganda need to be ? 

 

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/jan/22/duncan-smith-benefits-street-shock

[MooseBreath]

So IDS and the government have control over channel 4? That's what you're saying?

[Zingari]

I'm sure they have "sympathetic friends" in TV and mainstream media  very capable of subtlety altering  viewers/readers perspectives.  They don't need total control

 

IDS paraphrased , 

 

We have a big problem of people living on  benefit and i've known this for a long time and we need to "free" them  from the shackles of lefty ideology,

 But of course you people are probably unaware of the scale of the problem and live sheltered from it .

 

 But look !!! as if by magic . hey presto !! Benefits Street just comes along and is proving how right I am 

[MooseBreath]

The welfare state has been a popular discussion point in society since long before benefits street started. I think it's reasonable to assume the television producers would want to make programmes that reflect current themes. That's why we've also had numerous programmes about the rich, the tax dodgers and the bankers in recent years. If you think that benefits street is government propaganda, you could easily find several shows weekly that meet the same criteria.

What IDS "is expected to say" is absolutely spot on though. It's a shame what you've taken away from that is only 'evidence' of another one of your conspiracy theories because he articulates the issue very well. Even the Guardian couldn't find a sinister slant to it.

[Zingari]

Yes of course you're right . 

How silly of me to believe that governments and rulers have ever or would even consider using media propaganda to shape public perceptions and opinions .

 

I really must learn to be more trusting 

[Strokes]

I'm sure they have "sympathetic friends" in TV and mainstream media very capable of subtlety altering viewers/readers perspectives. They don't need total control

IDS paraphrased ,

We have a big problem of people living on benefit and i've known this for a long time and we need to "free" them from the shackles of lefty ideology,

But of course you people are probably unaware of the scale of the problem and live sheltered from it .

But look !!! as if by magic . hey presto !! Benefits Street just comes along and is proving how right I am

Even if it is as you put it, propaganda. It isn't fabricated, these people exist. You only have to walk through highfields or eyres monsell to see snipets of it. Maybe it does take a programme like this to open a few eyes, it's a culture that cannot be ignored.

[MooseBreath]

Yes of course you're right .

How silly of me to believe that governments and rulers have ever or would even consider using media propaganda to shape public perceptions and opinions .

I really must learn to be more trusting

The same production company were responsible for The Tower Block of Commons, where they sent MPs of all persuasions (one of whom, a certain IDS himself) into council estates, the MPs later complaining that the show set out to "humiliate" them.

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2010/feb/17/fool-tower-block-of-commons-austin-mitchell

Does that sound like a company under government control? One which would humiliate their supposed backers?

Another one was Famous, Rich and Homeless where they sent famous people to live with the homeless in an attempt to highlight the problem of homelessness. Was that another IDS plant do you think?

[Alf Bentley]

I don't watch this shite and lasted no more than a few minutes as i flicked through the channels as i can't think what possible purpose it serves

.

But if you listen carefully to IDS he is more or less telling us   that programmes such as Benefits Street are just part of a propaganda campaign to justify gov reforms'

How much more fookin obvious does propaganda need to be ? 

 

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/jan/22/duncan-smith-benefits-street-shock

 

I disagree, though I can understand you getting that impression if you just caught a few minutes. I've watched all of each episode and don't think that it's shite at all.

 

For once, "I agree with Nick" (as quoted in your Guardian link). The problem is that people are having knee-jerk reactions on both sides of the spectrum. Either the people depicted are seen as wasters who deserve ridicule and punishment or it's all some right-wing conspiracy to depict the worthy, downtrodden poor as scum. Like Nick, I disagree with both views. It's a warts-n-all presentation of life in a community where a lot of people are on benefits long-term and have poor prospects and problems.

 

The programme makers are depicting people entrenched in benefits, not people with a long history of work who have been made redundant but may be back in work soon. Many of those depicted would take a lot of rehabilitation, but society (not C4) can't be bothered with that, while some politicians and tabloid press (not C4) have a vested interest in giving Joe Public someone to kick.

 

Most of the people depicted are in a mess and pretty clueless...but nobody seems to be helping to teach them the basic skills and attitudes needed to get out of the trap: "a hand up, not a hand out", as the Big Issue slogan goes. Some have low potential, but need to learn some basic life skills (like taking appropriate ID to the food bank). Others could do with being directed into suitable work training and/or drugs rehab. That would require patience and resources, and wouldn't always work, but it would be worth trying. If people deliberately opted out of such support, then they'd deserve penalties. Instead, they're just abandoned. 

 

It would be interesting to know a few more back stories. SB, the black would-be model and takeaway worker, had clearly suffered terrible domestic abuse, despite which she'd found work, had ambitions (unrealistic, maybe, but we're all allowed to dream/aspire) and seemed to be making a good fist of being a single Mum. I wonder what Fungi's history is, before the crime and drugs set in? His portrayal was quite touching. He knew that he'd fvcked his life up through drugs/crime and didn't try to blame others. Maybe there are others to blame in his past, maybe not (he might just have chosen to get into drugs, got addicted and all the rest of the mayhem followed from that).

 

A good - and subtle - programme that deserves less of a knee-jerk response on all sides.

 

Here's a decent review from the Torygraph (as recommended by Matt & co): http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/tvandradio/tv-and-radio-reviews/10595646/Benefits-Street-episode-four-review.html

[Zingari]

The same production company were responsible for The Tower Block of Commons, where they sent MPs of all persuasions (one of whom, a certain IDS himself) into council estates, the MPs later complaining that the show set out to "humiliate" them.

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2010/feb/17/fool-tower-block-of-commons-austin-mitchell

Does that sound like a company under government control? One which would humiliate their supposed backers?

Another one was Famous, Rich and Homeless where they sent famous people to live with the homeless in an attempt to highlight the problem of homelessness. Was that another IDS plant do you think?

That was 4 years ago and who knows what their agenda or purpose was was then.. Possibly  to humiliate a  labour MP ? ( labour were still in power i believe ) ,  They seem to have achieved if that was the case.

So yes I don't see why this can't be seen as similar technique

 

 

 Let's go and find some poorly educated demotivated lower class ghetto patsies, put them  in the spotlight and blame them for  all the ills of society. 

Have they  interspersed  film footage  of plagues of rats running through the sewers.into the documentary yet  

[Captain...]

Zing, channel 4 are just tapping into the zeitgeist, but the reason why this is such a popular topic is down to the governemnt's constant poor bashing, there is not a direct link between poverty porn and the tories, but a causal link. The more the governemnt bang on about it, and the Daily Mail whip everyone up into a fervour over these benefit cheats, scumbags and scroungers, the more likely Channel 4 will pick it up and run with it, it is an independent broadcaster reliant on viewing figures for revenue.

 

@Alf, was going to say the same about Clegg, the voice of reason, and a man I did agree with a lot before he sold his soul for a shot at power, a real disappointment, UKIP fans will know what I mean in a few years if/when Farage actually gets a chance to make a differnce and fails spectacularly. Chewed up and spat out by the entrenched powers that be and the corrupt political system we live in.

[Zingari]

Zing, channel 4 are just tapping into the zeitgeist, but the reason why this is such a popular topic is down to the governemnt's constant poor bashing, there is not a direct link between poverty porn and the tories, but a causal link. The more the governemnt bang on about it, and the Daily Mail whip everyone up into a fervour over these benefit cheats, scumbags and scroungers, the more likely Channel 4 will pick it up and run with it, it is an independent broadcaster reliant on viewing figures for revenue.

 

@Alf, was going to say the same about Clegg, the voice of reason, and a man I did agree with a lot before he sold his soul for a shot at power, a real disappointment, UKIP fans will know what I mean in a few years if/when Farage actually gets a chance to make a differnce and fails spectacularly. Chewed up and spat out by the entrenched powers that be and the corrupt political system we live in.

yes , but who has the greatest  influence on the zeitgeist ? you ? me? residents of JT Street ? or the gov and meedja itself ?

[FoxyPV]

I found it really depressing and pathetic.

 

People unwilling or unable to help themselves or so used to the poverty that they see it as aspirational.

 

It's just sad.