The show starts with Brand swanning onto the set in a cloud of dry ice, strutting around in prima donna mode between two huge frescos adorned with large and colourful pictures of Hindu deities. Ganesh sits on a wooden pillar with two large bronze statues on either side. The temple metaphor is unmistakable.
Then Brand starts his familiar, obscene and sleazy routine. I find it ironic that one of his longer jokes focuses on how he felt like shooting someone who swore at him. But it was about his simulating the sex scenes in front of this pious, temple-like setting that I began to feel uncomfortable, despite the fact one of my ancient ancestors compiled the Kama Sutra (although of course it is actually about relationships rather than unadulterated sex). Slowly my discontent became disgust.
Clearly Brand and his producers feel justified in using Hindu deities purely as art even if it offends the Hindus, a minority in the UK. Their weak statement in response to criticism was simply to say that they “didn’t mean to offend.” Well this excuse didn’t work for Carol Thatcher at the BBC last week and it shouldn’t be allowed to work for Channel 4 now.
What I find particularly irksome about this incident is that it comes in the wake of a large thud I heard recently when a particularly chunky document from Channel 4 landed on my desk. This weighty tome went into great detail about Channel 4’s commitment to equality and its commitment to support ethnic communities. I now wonder if this was little more than a costly but ultimately ineffectual piece of spin.
Whatever the media’s lofty PR proclamations, I can’t help but feel that the truth is that journalism has moved many miles away from what should be the professions worthy aim, as summed up by the great Lord Reith, to “inform, educate and entertain … [and] bring the best of everything to the greatest number of homes." These days, it is shock that too often drives the media agenda.
The ‘freedom of speech’ argument does not hold water here either. I doubt it holds any weight at all when the motives are commercial or, as in this case, also about promotion of personal fame and stardom. While I believe strongly that we should have the right to offend others to make a political point if we are fighting a selfless cause and make our points in a non-violent way, this privilege cannot be adopted for use by those whose aim is simply to provide a cheap thrill at the expense of others who pose no harm to society. Freedom of speech is too valuable and important a safeguard of tried and tested British values to be so belittled.
As I hinted earlier, few Hindus are against the odd sex joke. We are made of stronger and earthier stuff. But broadcasters and journalists must beware of becoming so selfish that they want to enjoy the benefits of civilisation and freedom of speech but do not care for their responsibility to maintain and uphold it.
Anil Bhanot
General Secretary
Hindu Council UK
