Just my opinion - but from what the preview shows on the new MTV series "Skins" it seems like a very, very irresponsible show for consumption for viewers. I could post the You Tube preview clip but it would probably be pulled by OKC Talk...yes its that bad.

Just my opinion - but from what the preview shows on the new MTV series "Skins" it seems like a very, very irresponsible show for consumption for viewers. I could post the You Tube preview clip but it would probably be pulled by OKC Talk...yes its that bad.

A watered down re-make of a really good BBC show. And, yes, even watered down it's probably too shocking for OK audiences. You ever see the documentary, "Kids" from the mid-90s? Every parent who thinks, "Not MY darling child!" should see the film, "Kids", and the BBC version of "Skins".

Open your eyes, parents. Yes, your darling children.

H&R Block joins GM, Wrigley, Taco Bell in pulling advertisements from racy MTV show 'Skins' (http://www.nydailynews.com/entertainment/tv/2011/01/22/2011-01-22_hr_block_joins_gm_wrigley_taco_bell_in_pulling_ advertisements_from_racy_mtv_show.html?r=entertain ment)

A watered down re-make of a really good BBC show. And, yes, even watered down it's probably too shocking for OK audiences. You ever see the documentary, "Kids" from the mid-90s? Every parent who thinks, "Not MY darling child!" should see the film, "Kids", and the BBC version of "Skins".

Open your eyes, parents. Yes, your darling children.

I agree. I saw most of the BBC episodes and, even if much of it was daring for US tastes, it was fascinating. It is an eye opener and these aren't the 50's. The US version doesn't seem quite as well put together though.

hahaha, yeh, this news just in, American teenagers are rumored to have sex and abuse drugs/alcohol. The BBC series was quite good, and this show looks like a cheap, watered down knock off. However, the thing I may hate the most in our society is our knee jerk fake modesty. I mean come one, it was our 1950's/60's desire for pristine order and morality that all wound up with back alley abortions, witch hunts, and race riots. They will loose some advertisers, but they will also gain some too. Yadda yadda yadda, usual disclaimer, if you don't like it, don't watch it don't let your kids watch it etc.. Some of us aren't christians with children and we don't care about someones supposed wholesome sense of decency. I am thankful to MTV, if they aren't going to play any music videos at least they are still producing controversial tv, even if it is a remake of an even more controversial show that ran for numerous seasons on a government supported network in another country with little protest of any kind.

hahaha, yeh, this news just in, American teenagers are rumored to have sex and abuse drugs/alcohol. The BBC series was quite good, and this show looks like a cheap, watered down knock off. However, the thing I may hate the most in our society is our knee jerk fake modesty. I mean come one, it was our 1950's/60's desire for pristine order and morality that all wound up with back alley abortions, witch hunts, and race riots. They will loose some advertisers, but they will also gain some too. Yadda yadda yadda, usual disclaimer, if you don't like it, don't watch it don't let your kids watch it etc.. Some of us aren't christians with children and we don't care about someones supposed wholesome sense of decency. I am thankful to MTV, if they aren't going to play any music videos at least they are still producing controversial tv, even if it is a remake of an even more controversial show that ran for numerous seasons on a government supported network in another country with little protest of any kind.

In this situation, that's a good thing.

I would be fine with it if they cast 30 yr old actors like 90210 did instead of actual teens

Show is a goner now that advertisers are fleeing

The idea that people are entertained by under aged boys/girls engaging in drug and alcohol use and multiple sex partners is very telling about our culture. I've never understood the excuse, "well 'those' television shows are what's going on in our culture" is freaky. Just because it goes on - does that mean its entertaining? With the mind set of showing, for entertaining purposes, what's going on in our culture - why don't we see shows about abortion or capitol punishment taking place? Why don't we see the drug/alcohol abuser taking their last breath when their body can't handle another dose of drugs. Get a grip folks! The issue is NOT these things are taking place. The issue is why do we allow ourselves to be entertainted by them?

I'm the opposite--I think that the fact that people are so hypersensitive about the content of these TV shows is a telling reason as to why we have the societal problems that we do.

I'm the opposite--I think that the fact that people are so hypersensitive about the content of these TV shows is a telling reason as to why we have the societal problems that we do.

Interesting. Are you saying the more we are entertained by adultery, drug use, sex, murder,etc. -then our culture improves? Tell me -what limits would you place on broadcast content - if any.

Interesting. Are you saying the more we are entertained by adultery, drug use, sex, murder,etc. -then our culture improves? Tell me -what limits would you place on broadcast content - if any.

I would offer that he's saying that when a society buries its head in the sand because it doesn't want to face the issues presented, then, yeah, societal problems will multiply.

I'm a she, but yes, that's a good summary of my thoughts.

I watched the show, and actually see quite a bit of satire in it.

I would offer that he's saying that when a society buries its head in the sand because it doesn't want to face the issues presented, then, yeah, societal problems will multiply.

Help me understand....so....when we are entertained by the things "society buried its head in the sand" over it makes us a better society?? If thats the case then perhaps we could have a lot of entertainment regarding how drunk drivers have destoryed many families and many lives!! Maybe we can be entertained by watching people being mamed physically and emotionally by sexual abuse! We might even find entertainment in how gangs can destory the lives of young people! Its worse than sad if you honestly think that all of the ills of society means placing it on television as entertainment....give me a break!

Help me understand....so....when we are entertained by the things "society buried its head in the sand" over it makes us a better society?? If thats the case then perhaps we could have a lot of entertainment regarding how drunk drivers have destoryed many families and many lives!! Maybe we can be entertained by watching people being mamed physically and emotionally by sexual abuse! We might even find entertainment in how gangs can destory the lives of young people! Its worse than sad if you honestly think that all of the ills of society means placing it on television as entertainment....give me a break!

You're the one that keeps saying "entertainment". Substitute "Acknowledging these problems are out there" every place you say "entertainment" and I would say "yes" to all the above questions. Is that all you want from your TV, entertainment?

I would offer that he's saying that when a society buries its head in the sand because it doesn't want to face the issues presented, then, yeah, societal problems will multiply.

There hasn't been enough of the US version of the show to tell for sure how they will handle things but in the BBC version, even though they presented a wide variety of issues that today's youth are envolved in, they didn't hesitate to show that there are consequences to the actions. That can be entertaining with a message.

IMO--The fact that shows like this are even an option speaks volume about today's socitey, God help us !!

Here's a concept... change the channel if you don't like the show or get 24 hours a day Leave it to Beaver.

I doubt many people complaining here have actually watched the show (not that that will change your opinion, because I just watched it). There is episode one available online on MTV's website.

Personally, to me, its just bad TV. Its the same issues (teenage sex, drugs, bad decisions, etc.) that are in tons of other shows. If it was better acted and produced, I might watch it - but I found it boring and just low budget.

I've never found these types of programs harmful because I've never allowed them to influence our child. When our son was younger and living at home (he's 20 and moved out now) he wasn't allowed to have a TV in his room and the computer that accessed the Internet was in the living room. But, we also didn't raise him to think sitting in front of the TV or computer for hours was a normal thing. He never asked for a TV in his room because he rarely watched it.

I would rather there be tons of choices than to try and force a particular viewpoint upon everyone.

The exact same issues were highlighted in a special on CNN last night "Selling the girl next door." An hour of men buying 13-yr olds for sex. The end message was different, but the subject was the same.

For all you Skins bashers, They are discussing it on TODAY right now.

Whatever the topic, I am sick of reality TV.

You're the one that keeps saying "entertainment". Substitute "Acknowledging these problems are out there" every place you say "entertainment" and I would say "yes" to all the above questions. Is that all you want from your TV, entertainment?

My question to you is --what purpose, do you suppose, MTV placed this show on in the first place? Educational to warn about the dangers teenages are placing themselves in? Or entertainment? We both know the answer don't we?

Last i time checked MTV wasn't in the education business. They learned long ago controversial TV equates to revenue.

Last i time checked MTV wasn't in the education business. They learned long ago controversial TV equates to revenue.
You are so right! It's always, always, always about the dollar. No dollar - no interest from TV execs....its that simple.

More like ~ no dollar no TV station.

Whatever the topic, I am sick of reality TV.

It is not reality. Skins is entirely scripted.

More like ~ no dollar no TV station.

Very true. Kinda like no dollar - no website. Would your website (http://www.johntv.com) be as successful if you were focusing on panhandlers as buyers and sellers of "skin" - the world's oldest profession? Was this a social-activist activity or entertainment? Be honest now, Brian.

Edit button is gone!! Arghh....I meant to say:

...if you were focusing on panhandlers instead of buyers and sellers of "skin" - the world's oldest profession?...

Edit button is gone!! Arghh....I meant to say:

...if you were focusing on panhandlers instead of buyers and sellers of "skin" - the world's oldest profession?...

This isn't about me - but, I don't see panhandlers as a societal problem - so focusing on them would have never been an issue for me. How is that question even remotely focused on making a point? Also, like I said earlier, I don't have a problem with MTV's programming. If its good it will succeed, if its bad it won't. I have a bigger problem with parents who think the TV is supposed to raise their kids and not them. TV is the easiest negative influence for a real parent to overcome - just change the channel and know what and when your kids are watching TV. People complain because at heart they are complainers. I don't see them getting worked up over Two and a Half Men. Every episode is the same sex theme and you don't have to subscribe to cable to see it. My wife and I watch the show on occasion but would not let our son watch it until he was 16. Last night we watched HOUSE, a well written and acted show, but one character spent half the show trying to identify the women he had a threesome with while at a wedding (not really something I'd want to explain to a young child).

How is that question even remotely focused on making a point?

Just wondering if it was the same with you as you say it is with network executives. I'm curious - (seriously) - was it a real concern with prostitution or an entertainment vehicle with the titilation factor? I'm serious - not being snarky here. You were a hero in my book catching the cop beating on video.

Just wondering if it was the same with you as you say it is with network executives. I'm curious - (seriously) - was it a real concern with prostitution or an entertainment vehicle with the titilation factor? I'm serious - not being snarky here. You were a hero in my book catching the cop beating on video.

Actually, I only picked up a video camera after living in one of these effected neighborhoods and having signed numerous complaints and been to court to testify twice - losing both times to my now attorney Mr. Adams. The prosecutor (Porter) told me "unless you get it on tape, I guess a jury will never believe you."

I started using the video camera and never had to testify again.

I also found out that with video images the local media would actually cover this issue with regularity - which put the issue on the agenda of the city. My subject is street level prostitution - pretty hard (and a legal liability) to show that and not the act of prostitution itself.

I do subscribe to MTV's model that shock and controversy does get people's attention and if you don't also make it entertaining then they won't even bother to be exposed to your message. But that is no different than shows on Discovery, Animal Planet, CNN, MSNBC etc. There have been anti-prostitution activists for as long as there have been prostitutes. While people can rattle off the names of Heidi Fleiss, the DC Madame and Ashley Dupre - I defy them to name the activists.

Organizations like OATH have been around in Oklahoma a long time and have a great message, but I doubt many people here have ever heard of them or can tell me much about them - why? They often preach to the choir and rely on PowerPoint presentations to get your attention. Their 'shock' comes from over inflated statistics they throw around so much that they no longer have any effect. But these organizations often come to me for the real images of what's going on.

Even huge outlets like Discovery, CNBC, MSNBC and studios like Harpo and Roker license video from me regularly for documentaries because they can't get the images anywhere else. I was awarded a regional EMMY in 2009 for my images.

But it comes at a huge cost. The critics are everywhere and you have to have thick skin and keep your nose very clean. I don't worry too much about my critics though because often I find what motivated them to criticize was their own deviant behavior they desperately want to normalize. The critics are also vital to me and I delight to stir them up, because without controversy you lose an audience you might not have otherwise been able to influence. Heck one of my biggest critics on this board is actually a regular poster at an underground pro-prostitution forum. And, realistically, can a person even claim to be an activist if their topic is not controversial? So, to answer your question - For 15+ years I feel I've had a message on a topic that needs to be discussed and solutions sought. To get my message across I'm willing and able to get the images of the reality of the topic. I disperse those images through other media outlets worldwide with and without recognition. I produce my own media for my personal websites and social media presence and I am asked to address at least a dozen audiences a year both in and outside of Oklahoma. This is only possible through the combination of an interesting and controversial topic, the ability to verbalize the issue and shocking and entertaining images.

I felt dirty watching the previews of Skins while I was watching Jersey Shore. They make my girl Snookie look like a Saint!

Interesting article http://www.tvsquad.com/2011/01/25/skins-mtv/

In other MTV news, they are now auditioning for the gay version of Jersey Shore.

I felt dirty watching the previews of Skins while I was watching Jersey Shore. They make my girl Snookie look like a Saint!

LOL...funny! Very funny.....

Hi Brian, Thanks for the detailed response. I found your perspective and history fascinating and can see why you would be invited to give talks, etc. You may have created for yourself the single most unorthodox job in the world. Thanks again!

I saw first show isn't that bad, I never saw the BBC version. Maybe they can just put it on in the night.

Not being pissy here but no one has yet been able to explain to me what could possibly be entertaining about a show like this - I don't get it. Maybe its the Jerry Springer - look at the car wreck when you drive by - kind of deal -the shock value??? And no one seems alarmed at the age of those in the show - apparently most of them are under age.

It's entertaining in the same way most TV shows are entertaining. Like I said earlier, much of it is satirical. In once scene, one of the main characters (Tony) was in class talking to a character who has just been released from a mental hospital and who has a love for narcotics (Cady). She was wearing headphones and looking like she was in a third dimension. When he stared at her as though he clearly wanted to talk to her, she took her headphones off and said "Tony?"

Tony: "Yep."
Cady: "Sorry. I have a bad memory."
Tony: "Yep. From the drugs."
Cady: "Drugs?"
Tony: "You know...the pills?"
Cady: "Whose pills?"

Just like other TV shows, the characters learn lessons and the episodes wrap up tidily, but with just enough suspense for the next episode. Again, this is not reality TV. This is scripted.

Maybe it wouldn't be entertaining to you. But maybe instead of imploring an explanation from others, you should just watch an episode. You won't lose too many brain cells. I promise.

http://www.mtv.com/videos/skins-ep-1-tony/1656101/playlist.jhtml#name=shows

Not being pissy here but no one has yet been able to explain to me what could possibly be entertaining about a show like this - I don't get it. Maybe its the Jerry Springer - look at the car wreck when you drive by - kind of deal -the shock value??? And no one seems alarmed at the age of those in the show - apparently most of them are under age.

For some, I guess it's entertainin--- in a closet pervert kind of way, I just don't get it.

Well, I think it is for a 16-22 bracket, you know....

My content issue would be, its too 'adult' for kids and what adult wants to watch the sex lives of children?