MAILOUT piece for the editor Kit Wells
White Punks on Dope –
An open letter to Michael Jackson at Channel 4 and Alan Yentob an the BBC
I have a problem, a problem that I feel will continue until
I die – the naive notion of integration of disability into the mainstream
of broadcast television and radio.
In particular within Channel 4 (but also within the BBC) and its disability programming
which is seemingly rooted around an intellectual vacuum at the heart of both
organisations that sees disability as little more than an equal opportunities issue
rather than the complex social reality that it is. Of course, this suites their organisational needs –
the reduction of all complexity to suit a white middle class status quo and
sensibility – except when one seeks to appease a vocal and dominant minority
within the media industry (i.e. the lesbian and gay media Mafia). This sounds like a criticism of
such a Mafia, it isn’t, as what I wish an organisation like Channel 4 to do is foster and facilitate a
disability media Mafia: a group who seek to protect and promote their own
through radical, original and cutting edge creativity. Disability programming that is loud and
proud in the face of life and death hostility from outside of that group (as Channel
4 does with its
extensive lesbian and gay programming).
Mainstreaming of disability and disabled people (Channel
4 should have been
doing from its inception not decades in) is what should be being done anyway as
a matter of course - for all groups in fact - in all areas of
broadcasting. It should not be, as
it is presented a new and innovative challenge in the present situation in
which difference and diversity are more under threat than ever, it is not: the
opposite is actually the case.
Though I accept this is largely due to the tendency of certain disabled
people themselves within the industry and their wish to be accepted by
non-disabled people, this is no excuse for the broadcasters exploitation of
such individuals and their lack of understanding of the realities of the
situation. It is significant that Channel
4’s
mainstreaming policy on disability has been taken up by Radio 4 – that socio-cultural placebo
to diversity for middle-England’s sensibilities (the true target of
dumbing down) – doesn’t that tell you something Mr Jackson. Though it is irrational to criticise
James Boyle for taking account of his audience / remit. But Channel 4 …
Someone rang me once to ask me to defend disability specific
programming such as the now defunct Does He Take Sugar? (BBC Radio) and the soon to be defunct (I can
but hope!) From / Over the Edge (Disability Programmes Unit, DPU, at BBC Television). I articulated at length of how I strongly believe in
disability specific programming but that I could not defend either programme as
they failed to deliver to any great degree on what they promoted their remit to
be. I even went for an interview
at the DPU once
as research for my forthcoming book and their awareness of disability issues
even on a simple level was obviously lacking. My point is: I am not merely asking for lots more of what
exists that has the appearance of disability specific programming. That which exists (i.e. the
retro-aesthetic/dogma of the DPU) is, by and large awful; having the same few producers
produce the exact same programme week in, series in, year in makes the DPU its own best case for its
abolition. The value of its
training opportunities is debatable also, but that is another issue. As few disabled people actually watch
it its value to disabled people must also be debatable.
Channel 4 has been perhaps the most guilty of failing to deliver on
its promise – to all section of the community – in relation to
disability (as disability is all section of the community). Its first sit-com on disability is not
only funded abroad but is PC for PC’s sake – House Gangs – and promoted in a season (Access
all Areas)
obsessed with integration (not equality, diversity and quality). Integration for integration’s
sake – mainstreaming – will not improve the status of disability
within the community at large it will make it worse for the majority of
disabled people. The only ones it
will benefit are those pseudo-normal people who need it the least anyway. Those unable to integrate / mainstream
are pushed further in to the margins that ever before, denied even life
itself. Mainstreaming, as the
recipients of such naive practice will tell you, of groups such as blacks and
gays only benefits the whitest black and the straightest gay – those in
the mainstream anyway. You
don’t mainstream them – and the rewards for them and Channel 4 have been high – so why
mainstream us on the say so of few normalised disabled people whose engagement
with disabled people is limited except to legitimate their organisations (incl.
Channel 4).
Channel 4, and to some extent the BBC in its disability specific
television programming (your spending enough money on it to seek some reward),
should be – as you are with black/gay culture – engaging in the
debate, not taking sides. Channel
4, especially in
its proposed increase in disability programming, exploring the edges where the
most original and creative ideas, programmes and research is happening. At present you are both stifling the
debate with a single view – why else support organisations such as the 1
in 8 Group or the
institutionalised DPU – that is doing more harm than good for all of us. Its time for change; participate and
engage with us; get some disabled people in who are in the margins or not media
people trained to do the thinkable.
Get disabled people in to think the un-thought. The by-product of the
current situation is low quality programmes often created to suit restrictive
institutional philosophies and dictates rather than the creative drives of
existing and excluded programme makers against their wills. Disability is currently a contestable
terrain, engage in it to create a radicalising moment for the benefit of us all
– better programmes as a minimum.
Disability theory is as much about freeing the non-disabled from the
constraints of their own imprisoned imaginations as it is about liberating us,
the disabled, from the results of those (mainly white) limited
imaginations. Stop giving
society us as a sop to soothe its own insecurities; stop feeding the dangerous
habit of the white punks on dope.
Give me a ring and lets do lunch; we can have some cold turkey.
Paul Anthony Darke
Words 1063