Who watches the Watch Dog?
Once upon a time I was an avid
viewer of the BBC’s Watchdog. It was, so it seemed, a good way of finding
out all the crappy things that happen in life and how to avoid them. Yes I
knew it was frequently full of sensationalism, Anne Robinson had by this
stage become completely consumed by her gimmick and the presence of a
fluffy Friday “entertainments” sister show (complete with cheesy live
musical guest) diminished its status as the hard man of British television
but it was still good rollicking stuff. It was a kick in the arse for
those who needed a kick in the arse. It did some good. It was on Our side
against Them. Anne Robinson was, like the classic aristocratic hero who
fights the nobles on behalf of the commoners, one of the Establishment who
used her great powers for good.
There was also Charlotte Hudson who had taken over the “bit of totty”
mantle from the never that attractive Alice Beer. A buxom wench, Charlotte
had a strange twin career at the time as Anne Robinson’s sidekick and as a
comedy performer in a sketch series that was so good that the BBC decided
to bury it late at night on BBC2. It was called Bruiser and lasted but six
episodes. Charlotte was the glamorous one – half Anne’s age and far more
suited to a miniskirt and low cut top. She was also a Cambridge graduate
which probably means she’s gay or a spy or both. She’s done sketch comedy
on television – one of the three Cambridge clichés – so we can but hope
that the others are true as well. I’m speaking about her in the past tense
because I have no idea if she still presents Watchdog. I don’t watch it
anymore. Not, I hasten to add, out of protest at the departure of sour
faced Anne Robinson and the arrival of light entertainment’s least
convincing hard man Nicky Campbell.
I stopped watching a few years ago. There is a tendency to believe what
we’re told by people who present themselves as journalists. Watchdog tells
us that British Gas are rubbish and we nod our heads and say “I’ve always
thought that”. They tell us that foreign hotels are always riddled with
building work despite the holiday companies assuring customers that they
wouldn’t be. We nod our heads sagely and say “I’ve heard about that”. They
warn us, inform us and generally educate us about the state of the world
and we believe them because it more or less fits into our belief that
things aren’t that great.
That pandering to general and ingrained prejudice distracts us from any
serious thought about the show and what it tells us. It’s only when you
see a report about something that you know a bit about that you realise
that it’s shite.
A few years ago I saw such a report. The now defunct wrestling promotion
WCW were touring the UK. Watchdog had received complaints from parents who
had taken their children to shows and not seen the big stars perform.
Knowing the background to this I watched the report with interest. When I
saw how utterly ignorant Watchdog’s presenters and “journalists” were in
this instance, my faith in their abilities in every other report vanished.
They said Goldberg hadn’t turned up “because he didn’t want to” when I
knew he’d suffered a very serious arm injury a week or so earlier when a
stunt went wrong (his arm was in danger of possibly needing amputation at
one point, so serious was the initial diagnosis). Five minutes on the
internet could’ve sorted that one out but it didn’t fit in with the story
they were telling so they made something else up. They quizzed the
promoter about why stars who weren’t even advertised (like Hulk Hogan, who
doesn’t work overseas shows unless it’s really worth his while) weren’t
there and tried to make out this was some how fraud. They got names wrong
– Kevin Nash was referred to as Kevin Ash throughout. It’s years ago now
but I remembered almost every piece of information they gave was either
flat our wrong or twisted to fit a belief that wasn’t actually the truth.
Was there a problem with that WCW tour? Oh yes – it was crap by all
accounts. Lazy performers, bad booking and a dearth of stars but Watchdog
were too idle to get at the truth and instead fabricated a story to fill
five minutes.
If they did that in this instance, how can we be sure they don’t do it
every time. How can we have faith in any of their facts, any of their
evidence, any of their statements or any of their reports? When all they
really present is badly researched propaganda dressed up as news, is there
any point in watching it? I didn’t think so and closed that chapter.
Besides, there cuter women than Charlotte on telly.
|
