By Karma Salvato
Staff Writer
“Dawson’s Creek” has one. So do “Felicity,” “ER,” “Spin City” and “NYPD Blue.” “Buffy the Vampire Slayer,” “Friends” and “Will & Grace” have two. Oh yeah, don’t forget the ever-popular recent Golden Globe winner “Sex and the City” and of course the crass, yet new favorite among the younger generation, “South Park.” Don’t overlook MTV’s “The Real World” or “Undressed” either. They have had several.
What is it exactly that all these shows have in common? Gay and lesbian characters.
Since these characters are already so prevalent in prime time, why can’t gay viewers have a channel devoted solely to their interests? After all, those individuals interested in adult entertainment have the opportunity to subscribe to such channels.
There is no escaping issues of this nature and it is time we stop hiding from them. We need to push our own discomfort and homophobic fears aside and accept one another as individuals.
While I’ll admit I don’t necessarily agree with the homosexual lifestyle, I would never turn a friend away because of their sexual orientation or sexual preference. I don’t agree with a lot of the ways heterosexuals conduct their lifestyles either. But aren’t we supposed to love one another unconditionally, allowing us to live free from judgment? Isn’t it up to God to make the judgment call, and not us?
There is far more offensive material in the world that has no regulation at all. These days, everyone, including children, have easy access to sexually explicit or suggestive material through the invention of the Internet (which is almost completely uncensored), the music that they listen to; the video games that they play; and the television/film that they view.
But now, two Viacom cable divisions, MTV Networks and Showtime, are joining forces. They are in the process of devising the first cable channel aimed directly at gay viewers.
After much research and audience testing, these cable channels have concluded that this is an untapped demographic in the television market. The addition of a gay channel would take the trend of gay characters on television “to a new level,” according to a January article in The New York Times.
Gays on TV have been accepted because of comedic relief or dramatic intensity. Hints of it have always been there in such shows as “Beverly Hills, 90210,” “Party Of Five” and “My So-Called Life.” Even though attempts have been made to ignore this trend, we are subjected to this alternative lifestyle almost everywhere we turn.
The same New York Times article explains that “the programming, as described by several of the executives involved in the planning, would include acquired films, original series, imported series, news and information programs, talk shows, comedy shows and travel shows.”
The channel would be offered to cable system operators as a pay channel like HBO or Showtime. According to Gene Falk, senior vice president for the MTV digital media group, the networks feel it is necessary to make it a pay channel because it would eliminate any potential protest from anyone who might object or oppose the content. “No one who doesn’t want this will ever see this channel,” he said.
Is it really any surprise that MTV is involved in this new venture? Probably not. They have been shocking us for years with innovative new concepts and offensive, yet profitable, ideas.
We live in a world where practically everything revolves around the all-mighty dollar. It is a marketing scheme that may honestly want to provide television programming to a new market, but at the same time selfishly wishes to generate a whole new cash flow. This doesn’t mean that this is right, but at the same time it can’t be disallowed.
This is a country where the First Amendment of the Constitution protects our right to free speech. This scenario is a prime example. As long as the networks take responsibility for this new concept and monitor who has access to it, there should be some modicum of control.
It is sad to say, but today’s youth are confronted with issues that never had to be dealt with by the youth of prior generations. Children are forced to grow up a lot faster and deal with more than they can handle. These are complicated times. Instead of running from our differences we should learn how to embrace them.
If individuals choose to watch this type of programming, that’s their prerogative. We don’t have to buy the channel and we don’t have to watch.
Just the same, varying degrees of sexual content, pornography and sexual images are thrown in our faces every day everywhere we turn. What about the whole issue of excessive violence? Has that been resolved? Sometimes regulations and restrictions may lead to censorship. That opens another Pandora’s box. But we choose exactly how much we will allow into our life — and our spirit. It is time we take responsibility for ourselves and concentrate on perfecting our own lives before we start criticizing and regulating others. Maybe the issue is really about good taste.
Some of the sexual material that bombards us we have little control over. But this new, currently unnamed channel being proposed by MTV Networks and Showtime is something we as TV subscribers have full control over.
If you aren’t interested, don’t order the channel. It’s that simple. Stop complaining. Do something. Doesn’t that seem more productive?
By Kyle Jorrey
Opinions Editor
Well, now it’s official. TV executives have lost their minds.
If channels such as “Home and Garden TV,” “The Game Show Network” and everyone’s favorite “C-SPAN” didn’t give it away, this announcement certainly has.
Just last week, TV executives from MTV and Showtime confirmed reports that they were in the process of creating a new gay-orientated channel that they say might be out within the year. The two networks, which have combined their efforts on the project, will offer the channel at a subscription fee and earn revenue off niche market advertisers.
In a day and age when it seems that the homosexual community has finally begun to separate itself from age-old stereotypes and enter into society as an equal, this project has the chance to take that movement two huge steps back.
Though many business experts are predicting the plan will have financial success, as the channel will tap into a market that reportedly makes up 6 percent of all TV viewers and will face no real competition, it is the moral side of the issue that has become a hot topic. But as usual, this is a side most television executives seemingly care little or nothing about.
The problem here is not necessarily that the channel will focus on a part of our society that many Americans still deem sinful and wrong, it’s the exploitation of a group that has fought for so long not to be exploited.
Instead of being satisfied with the plethora of shows already on TV that give notice to that part of our culture (“Will and Grace,” “Ellen,” and “The Real World” to name a few), which have tried to show that homosexuals function just as do the rest of society, these executives think that the gay and lesbian community deserves a network of their own. While the aforementioned shows have been successful in covering homosexual topics with sensibility, there are doubts if the same can be accomplished by a network dubbed “GAY TV.”
While executives have promised honest and smart content, I can’t help but wonder what exactly will be shown on the Gay and Lesbian network.
If plans include such viewing selections as “Behind the Music: The Village People,” “Biography: Liberace- American Icon” or even “The Broadway Show Tunes Marathon,” then there will be a serious problem. By trying to choose shows according to content that will appeal to gays, these networks will enhance stereotypes, not disregard them.
By leaving the crucial decision about content up to networks that brought us such gems as “Beavis and Butthead” and the stomach churning “Queer as Folk,” we are risking putting a network on TV for gay-bashers to flip to for comic relief. Just as male chauvinists have made “Lifetime: Television for Women” the butt of uncountable amount of their jokes, so will those in society who want to keep Americans thinking every gay man has a keen fashion sense and every lesbian woman desires to shave her head and enlist in the military.
Yes, we can have sensible programming for homosexuals, but an entire network? That is asking a little much. We can only wonder the consequences of trying to theme all types of programming, not just movies and music, but news and sports, according to a sexual preference.
For example, what more would the gay community have gained from the coverage of the attacks of Sept. 11 if the reports were delivered by a homosexual anchorperson? Would they have felt more grief if the sexual orientation of each victim of the attack was made known to the public?
And is there really a need for more in-depth coverage of figure skating or gymnastics?
The point is that most topics covered on TV do not, and should not, revolve around a person’s choice of a sexual partner. And if these television executives think they should, they are terribly wrong.
The creators behind this new network have one thing on their minds, and it’s not the well being of the gay and lesbian community: it’s money. They wish to fill their wallets at the expense of exploiting a group that has long desired to fit in and be treated in the same manner as other members of society.
While they will try to tell us that this channel is a long time in coming, don’t let yourself be fooled.
More in-depth figure skating coverage and documentaries on polyester will not mean more respect and acceptance for the gay community.
In fact, it will mean just the opposite.
January 24, 2002