On Benefits And Proud

[Netty7]

Unbelievable!!

[andy-hughes]

Not watched it - but I guess the title says it all.

This is more point-and-scoff TV, designed to wind up people.

It's best avoided - it does nothing for anyone, viewers or participants.

[Mamyalynne]

That particular programme has been on umpteen times,think they use it as a filler.

Not unbelievable that a minority act like they do.

[sandyRoe]

Was the recipient of benefits flaunting a 50" TV and boasting of two foreign holidays a year at our expense? If so, that's the exception rather than the rule.
When I was on benefits I bought my clothes in a charity shop and didn't like to go out in the rain because I'd holes in the soles of my shoes.

[Mamyalynne]

I know Sandy,but that wouldn't make good telly.

No one would be outraged.

[andy-hughes]

Mamyalynne - //I know Sandy,but that wouldn't make good telly.

No one would be outraged. //

That's exactly it!

99% of people on benefits would wish they were not, and if able, are striving to change their situation - but that is boring TV.

1% love being idle, and boasting to people who pay for their lifestyle - that makes 'outrage' TV which is cheap to make, and high in ratings, hence its popularity.

[Canary42]

It's all part of the Right Wing Media supporting the Tory's mission to kill off the Welfare State.

[andy-hughes]

Canary - //It's all part of the Right Wing Media supporting the Tory's mission to kill off the Welfare State. //

I think you are reading too much into things there - honestly, it's cheaply made high ratings TV - bread and circuses, nothing more than that.

[trt]

As mamya says, its been on before, but I did watch the 'the great british benefit hotel' after it.

The owner must be making a fortune from the Council, but wouldn't like to be in his shoes, with that lot as guest, and the fire risk.

He seemed to be a nice bloke, but didn't really believe him when he says there's not much trouble.

[ummmm]

The council aren't great payers...

If they changed the programmes name would as many people be as outraged? Would 'On benefits but trying really hard to find a job' make people as angry?

[andy-hughes]

Ummmm - definitely not.

The notion that the majority of benefits claimants are 'scroungers' is one that resonates loud and long through our society, so it's very easy to inflame people by giving fifteen minutes of fame to people who have absolutely nothing else to do but upset others.

It's not edifying for anyone involved - including the viewers.

Increasingly, there are tv series being made which bring nothing in terms of education, enlightenment, amusement, or any real benefit to any viewers, but the thread that runs through them all is that they are cheap to make and high ratings earners - the Holy Grail of TV these days - even the BBC.

[andy-hughes]

divebuddy - //Sure, you feel sympathy for a few of them, but the majority (as seen on the programmes) are miserable excuses for human beings. They just leech off the rest of us and have absolutely no intention of ever doing a day's work if they can avoid it. They give those who deserve benefits a bad name. //

I think there are sections of society where 'things happen ... or not'.

These people are not in control of their lives, they have no input into their circumstances, they lack the ability to take charge and make changes.

Personally I try to override my initial anger, and see beneath to the miserable individuals who have slipped through the cracks of life, and really don't know how to change their lives, or even see that a change is needed.

That has to be a sad way to live.

[ummmm]

Not always divebuddy. It's easy to say that when you have a job, self respect and self confidence.

You lack self respect and self confidence and have been jobless for sometime you almost become unemployable. The easiest way to get a job is to already have a job. Even mothers who take time out to bring up the children struggle to find a job.

[andy-hughes]

I'm with ummmm on this - I think to examine this situation from our perspective - and by definition we have enough about us to have a job and a life - it is very easy to assume that those who do not have simply made that choice to opt out and be supported by the state.

I think it is far less simple than that, and no, they don't have the chances and choices that we have had.

With regard to the 'publicity' such people receive, that is the responsibility of the point-and-gasp audiences who watch these shows - if they stopped tuning in to be wound up, programme makers would move onto something more worthwhile - which would not be difficult, let's face it!

[ukbod2015]

This must be some different definition of proud to the one I understand.

[andy-hughes]

ukbod - I doubt they looked past the payment cheque to find out what the programme title means - or the potential for shed-loads of grief from neighbours once the programme is broadcast!