 by Sarah WarnColumns
Video
Currently Recapping
Popular People
|
BBC America explains the editing of Emily and Naomi's sex scene on "Skins"Last week, many AfterEllen.com readers expressed concern about the edited sex scene between Naomi (Lily Loveless) and Emily (Kathryn Prescott) in the latest episode of the third season of Skins, which recently began airing on BBC America.
In the original version that aired on British TV, the girls are shown kissing for several seconds by the lake, stopping to take off their sweatshirts (leaving them in t-shirts and underwear), and then making out again as they begin to have sex on the blanket. Next we see Naomi trying to sneak away the next morning, before Emily wakes up. In the version shown in the U.S. last week, the girls are shown kissing and removing their sweatshirts, kissing again as they lie down, and then the scene cuts to Naomi's departure the next morning. I contacted BBC America on Friday about their decision to edit that scene, and a spokesperson for the show gave me this explanation:
When I asked for an example, she pointed to the scene between Cook and Effy having sex in a closet in an earlier episode in the season, telling me, "we shortened that scene for the same reasons." Here's a quick rundown of the U.S. television standards she's referring to: Federal law prohibits the broadcast of "indecent" or "profane" programming between 6 a.m. and 10 p.m. local time. Although cable channels like BBC America aren't officially required to adhere to these, they usually do anyway, for a variety of reasons (they don't want to become the target of conservative watchdog groups, they don't want the FCC to start enforcing these rules on cable, etc.) Here's how the Federal Communications Commission — the arm of the United States government charged with enforcing that law — defines these terms:
To avoid even coming close to violating these rules (which incurs penalties and large fines), most networks tend to edit their shows somewhat conservatively. So those are the facts. Now here's my take on the situation: It's disappointing the scene was edited down, if for no other reason than that there are so few positive depictions of lesbian relationships on American television. But the edited version was still longer, more raw/honest, and more explicit than almost any other depiction of a lesbian teen relationship on broadcast or basic cable television (including the scenes between Ashley and Spencer on South of Nowhere, which pushed the envelope in this area, but not this much). There have been, and continue to be, U.S. TV networks that employ double-standards when it comes to displays of physical affection between same-sex couples (e.g. Guiding Light). There's also the larger question of why scenes of torture, violence, and even simulated sexual assault are OK on TV (violent programming is not regulated), but scenes of consensual physical affection between same-sex couples are considered taboo. I'm not convinced that editing the girls' sex scene by the lake in this way didn't negatively affect the storyline, as BBC America asserts, since the portion that was cut made it clear how much Noami was enjoying having sex with Emily (which is important because Naomi has been really struggling to accept her attraction to another girl).
But I'm also not convinced that BBC America is applying a double-standard in how they edit same-sex relationships on the show. It appears as though they are simply adhering to the FCC's guidelines. The portion of the scene between Naomi and Emily on the blanket that was cut is more explicit (and longer in duration) than is currently allowed on broadcast or basic cable television in the U.S. I can't recall any other examples of U.S. shows portraying two teenage girls — and very few involving two teenagers of opposite sex — taking off their clothes and rolling around in their underwear while making out (if I'm forgetting one, feel free to let me know in the comments). There hasn't been a similar scene shown between two of the opposite-sex teen couples on the show this season, either, as far as I remember (again, correct me in the comments if I missed one). So unless BBC America proves me wrong by showing more heterosexual skin on Skins this season, I think the FCC is ultimately to blame for the editing, not BBC America. On the other hand, I'm not sure what America needs is more sex on television. But that's a blog post for another day. Agree? Disagree? Discuss in the comments. Read all about "Naomily" on Skins here (warning: spoilers for season 3) Submitted by on September 14, 2009 - 10:00am. |
Recent blog posts
New forum topicsActive TopicsNew Comments
|
Welcome to AfterEllen.com!
- Login
- Join Now!
News, Reviews & Commentary on Lesbian and Bisexual women in Entertainment and the Media
censorship sucks
I do think it's the FCC
We just have to face the truth: we live in a Puritanical society compared to the UK.
Much to my lament.
Otalia
One thing doesn't make sense...
Well, as far as I understand it, the FCC's jurisdiction over cable is limited to technical stuff, they have NO authority over content on cable, just over broadcast tv (ie. over-the-air networks like ABC, CBS, NBC and FOX).The Supreme Courts have ruled time and again that they do not have the power to reglate cable or satellite content.
BBC America is a cable channel, so FCC mandates for content shouldn't apply to them anyway.
You are right about the FCC
The FCC does not in any way, shape, or form regulate cable channels. Shows that air at the same time on other non-premium cable channels are often more graphic than Skins (basically anything that airs of FX).
The more likely reason that BBC America censored the episode was to be less offensive to the parents of its teen viewers. If the show were to stir up enough outrage among parents, the parents would be likely to complain to companies that buy ads during Skins which in turn would cost BBC America money.
BBC America should have just claimed that the scene was cut for time so that more ads could be squeezed into the show, just as with shows like Top Gear.
Incidentally, the FCC will only review a show for indecency if a citizen files a complaint. Unfortunately, in recent years, far right wing groups have prevented the over air networks from showing things like Saving Private Ryan unedited like the networks could do in the past.
I wish to pummel BBCA management, is this a crime?
Oh goodness BBCA is so much a pet peeve of mine that I finally registered an account on here instead of just reading the articles during my news spins like I usually do! They constantly edit scenes and claim either 1 ) it's because they have no control and must adhere to "American" time slots. What? Dudes, it's -your- channel. Every so often, you can set the time slot as you wish! or 2) They claim it's because the American audience is so much more prudish and reserved and it's not their fault that we live under a puritanical FCC dictatorship.
Give me a break! So the sex scenes in Trueblood are Family Friendly FCC sanctioned viewing compared to this tasteful and sensual scene? Psh. Have they NOT seen the stuff showing on HBO or Show lately let alone basic cable? And to top it off, they cancel shows left and right and have utterly no respect for the intelligence of the fans.
Oki… I'm done now, I just had to get that off my chest… I love this site and BBCA can suck my theoretical nuts. They are why TV piracy was invented. That's my theory and I'm sticking to it.
oh dear
Even If That's the Case...
good point
@above.
.... we all saw this coming.
"indecent" or "profane"
"indecent" or "profane" or "patently offensive" !!!?!
The Naomily scene doesn't come anywhere close to these descriptions.
Scenes that show someone getting murdered, raped, beaten to a pulp are however maybe, yes.., and yet these scenes are everywhere in crime dramas, sometimes more drawn out more than they need to be, and deemed ok to show in full because its vital to the storyline. And yet a fluffly sex scene where no full frontal nudity or explicit sexual actions where shown in Skins has to be cut down because someone out there is opposed to a bit of loving!
Me thinks censorship follows a strange and inconsistent rule.
And tbh, whats wrong with sex on tv if you show it at the right time and it makes sense to the storlyine. After all, the human race depends on the end product of it.. (unless of course you're a test tube baby).
Well, if they started to
Well, if they started to implement a a whole time delayed broadcast thing for live performances because of Janet Jackson's little nip slip, is this really surprising? ;)
:D
UK Editing of US Shows
Editing/censoring also works the other way, though if your shows get edited here it's for violence. For example, BUFFY was shown early evening here and all the sounds of necks being snapped and knives/blades going into flesh were edited out. The BBC did however show late-night unedited repeats of episodes in later seasons a few days after that initial airing.
Incidentally, Sarah, in your line "I'm not convinced that editing the girls' sex scene by the lake in this way didn't negatively effect the storyline" that should be 'affect'.
Thats a liiiiitle different.
Thats a liiiiitle different. What you are referring to are just watershed edits.
They wouldn't be shown with full violence in the daytime in America either.
Other that instances like that, the UK don't edit US shows like they do to ours.
Thanks!
Thanks for catching the affect/effect mistake. I seem to have a hard time remembering the rule around those words, especially when I'm tired (I was still fiddling with this post late last night :).
Don't be fooled
I don't get BBC, however since it's cable I don't believe the: "We're following FCC" guidelines nonsense. I mean seriously if you watch UPN or CW 50 late nite yo can catch heterosexual activity of a questionable nature and that's BASIC cable, so why not on the BBC which is a premium cable channel? In order for me to get BBC I's have to subscribe to digital cable at a cost of 60 dollars monthly.
Technology Will Lead To The Demise Of Civilization As We Know It.
Bullshit
Whatever crap they're spouting on about 'censorship guidelines and the FCC rules and regulations' is cowards talk. They don't want people to see two women having sex because to them, its far more taboo and explict than the heterosexual sex you watch on everyday television shows during bright daylight. Please. The next time they want an excuse, they should make it sound believable.
The Beeb's got form for
The Beeb's got form for showing pretty explicit same-sex sexual activity at home. The BBC America brand's big business, and exporting to the US brings in lots of revenue - it also gets Aunty's brand recognised over there in terms of other programming (TV and radio news, etc.).
You're right that it's not a bold move. On the other hand, BBC America has a lot to lose if your more vocal and active right-wing groups get bolshy. They're still showing more same-sex sexual activity than your usual stations (well, more than when I was living over there a few years ago), which is a win in the land of TV conservatism; on the other hand, I suspect that many of Aunty Beeb's American viewers - particularly viewers of more youthful programming - can cope perfectly well with the unedited versions. Give them feedback about it - I have always found them to be very polite, and surprisingly prepared to listen when their responses are challenged (back in the 90s, they didn't allow the word "queer" to be used on their message boards to positively denote unstraight orientations until some of us engaged them in conversation about it and explained that context is everything; there's been a lot of back and forth over the years about their use of the terms Pagan and occult, and they've really upped their game in covering Earth-based religions since then, for example).
They're between a rock and a hard place in many ways, but they may not realise that there's a substantial chunk of their viewing public who may be prepared to stand up for them if the right-wing kicks up a fuss.
the bias ive noticed ..
There is a bias on TV when it comes to oral sex for men vs women. For ever 10 references to the pro-male act , there is maybe one reference to the pro-female act. It starts from the writers minds ofcourse, Im not blaming the channels ... But Its all quite retarded , like a 5th grader boys vs girls.
Back to the scene: Watch it on youtube... let it get all the clicks and money. leave what is no good.
Do you have a link?
I've Been Looking, Too
The FCC is full of crap
I remembered seeing the scene for the first time and it didn't look complete, then I came here and figured out that it was edited...booo. I guess they just think that American eyes aren't ready for explict content on tv. Damb you FCC, and you too BBC for your "following the guidelines" crap.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"Vivono nella speranza"
Come on guys. Do you think
Come on guys. Do you think it's strange the brits would be hesitant to push any envelope regarding sex? The USA is the country of Nipplegate!
"Whatever crap they're spouting on about 'censorship guidelines and the FCC rules and regulations' is cowards talk. They don't want people to see two women having sex because to them, its far more taboo and explict than the heterosexual sex you watch on everyday television shows during bright daylight. Please. The next time they want an excuse, they should make it sound believable."
Perhaps you should watch the Tipping the Velvet film that was made by and for the BBC. They didn't mind showing a sex scene between two women in which one of them is wearing a strap on wooden dildo ;)
i agree with you
and given that the bbc is what we pay our tv licences for in britain they cant afford to get in trouble in america.
but, you know if it was violence no one would object. its only the human body and matters of sexuality that provoke shock horror reactions
Tipping the Velvet
Totally agree
Oh my! It's def a must see!
"Love makes your soul crawl out from its hiding place."
_Zora Neale Hurston
Is there such a thing as an
Is there such a thing as an entertainment visa? Where I can apply to immigrate to another country because the television in my own, with very few exceptions, sucks?
*is off to look into this*
That's a good one
In the meantime, BBC execs
Censorship on US TV
Hi Sarah,
until GL and now this I was always kind of aware of censorship on US TV (didn't we all want to send the girls on SoN another hairbrush?)
But until recently it never struck me so openly.
Could you please run an article on censorship?
General practices, fees, network policy, etc.
Why it is ok for a non -gay woman to make out in lust, but not for a woman being in love with another woman to express that emotion.
I would love to hear of previous rulings and fines regarding that matter.
Ok, actually it just makes me angry and wish to sue their pyjama bottoms off for discrimantion.
I just would like a who to direct my anger and frustration at :-)
Cheers:-)
BTW, anybody remember Sailor Moon? They actuall censored whole episode centering on the Lesbian couple and made them call each other "cousin" which was very weird, because they slipped up with the censorship sometimes..and uhm..well it was just weird.
For another taste of British TV on that matter:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9O2FmnabFSU&feature=related
(the good fun starts at 5:19):-)
I agree about the FCC, BUT...
Although I'm American, I'm currently living in the UK, and I was watching Skins when these episodes originally aired and loving every minute of it, and I agree, The blame for the Skins editing does rest firmly on the shoulders of the FCC.
I'd like to say something, though - the UK is also subject to content restrictions before 10pm, the "watershed" time period, and Skins only airs after 10pm in the UK. Admittedly, they are much more comfortable about and inclusive of LGBT content on television programs, and the shows here do tend to be more equitable about the air time of their LGBT characters, including physical intimacy, but they have to do so within the same sorts of time-dependent regulations the FCC imposes in the US, especially if BBC America is to maintain its presence on American television screens.
In fact, the UK is even more restrictive when it comes to digital cable and satellite box permissions for watching films above a certain rating - you know how in the US, you have the parental control option of setting a password that is required for children to be able to watch movies above a certain rating? In the UK, there are parental control settings like that which are always in effect if you choose to set them, but even if you never set the parental controls, you still cannot watch a film above a certain rating before 9pm without first inputting a security code. On the other hand, they also never edit films or television programs for content or to fit into a specific time period the way we do in the US either, so they don't cut out the best bits of films to make room for commercial breaks. For this reason, the films will often air later at night than they would if they didn't include that content.
But anyway, the point is that both the US and the UK have to contend with content regulations and sometimes it's just as simple as airing it at a later time of night that makes all the difference in the world to what it is and is not allowed to include.
Watershed in UK
Watershed in the UK is 9pm. When we disscused it in Media Studies that was the time which we were aware of it being at. Programs with un-bleeped swearing and content of an adult nature can be def be seen from 9pm onwards.
With the whole digital /cable box thing, I've never experienced what you have ?!
I agree that the Uk has its own regulations to contend with (just like the US). And funnily enough its probably one of the least liberal parts in Europe when it comes to tv censorship compared to other more relaxed European places. But it is still prob however a little bit more liberal than the US.
The land of the sheep and
The land of the sheep and the home of the meek.
-I speak in random thoughts
I know
lol -I speak in random
lol
-I speak in random thoughts
Sailormoon!
"BTW, anybody remember Sailor Moon? They actuall censored whole episode centering on the Lesbian couple and made them call each other "cousin" which was very weird, because they slipped up with the censorship sometimes..and uhm..well it was just weird."
I remember that happened apparently! I neevr got to finish watching all the sailormoon episodes but I knew those two girls were lovers. But that was removed, and they turned them into cousins instead.
BBC America is full of it
BBC America is full of it. 2 episodes before the Cook/Pandora scene was not touched and it was the same level of graphic (and some would argue more so). Not only that but a shirtless Pandora coming to orgasm was not only not cut - it was featured in commercials for the 4th episode and the previously segment this week. The Cook/Effy scene's only cleanup was due to some of the dialogue. This was clearly and without any doubt censorship due to it being a same sex love scene. BBC America should be ashamed to say that junk with a straight face.
That BBC America is definitely operating under a double standard is obvious. I watch BBC America all the time and they have no problem showing straight and unclothed sex scenes - unless it is two women.
YEP!
Let's see: do the FCC and
Let's see: do the FCC and (other) right-wing "watchdog" groups routinely go after that kind of content on US TV? Er, no. So the Beeb sees what's socially acceptable and rolls with it in order to stay afloat in the US.
Not the most pioneering of attitudes, but safe business strategy.
Give them feedback. Explain that you're BBC America viewers, and that you object to cuts in same-sex scenes that don't get made in male-female scenes. Seriously. Being firm but polite and very persistent pays off. The right-wing noise machine is so effective because it involves people taking the time to argue the toss - and if they can do it, then American supporters of queer equality can do it better :) They won't know if they're not told.
Did they not censor Cook/Pandora?
I've got a question...
Miss Sarah Warn, do you know if they've put the cut version on iTunes? I know they changed the music when it was aired in in the US, but I'm sure about which one is on iTunes.
Very occasionally, if you pay attention, life doesn't suck.
-Joss Whedon
Agree...
Yes, I would have to agree. I would take their word for it until it is proven otherwise. Actually, I would probably believe the BBC before any American network! The BBC does gay-themed show and storylines more so than their American counterparts. Didn't the BBC produce the mini series "Tipping the Velvet?" That's unheard of here in the states.
I too do not understand the warped reasoning behing sexual content being so taboo but the ultra violence that is constantly seen is o.k. The logic being sex/sexuality is much safer than violence, one would think...
www.twitter.com/LKG65
Season Three of Skins has
Season Three of Skins has just started in Australia hopefully the same thing won't happen here.
Another life saved by hot girl on girl action.
can't believe no one's posted this yet
Come Live With Me
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
http://www.facebook.com/home.php#/profile.php?id=60072
This is one of those times I
This is one of those times I thank God for YouTube. :D
www.twitter.com/your_tourniquet
Cowards
I'm American but never saw the edited version and I'll never watch BBCA if this is what they do.
Some of the commenters have said that they didn't edit the sex scene between Cook/Pandora, wow....now that makes me a little angry.
Does anyone else remember
Will BBC America censor Katie's scene this week?
That will be the real test of whether BBC America is practicing lesbian-specific censorship. In the "JJ" episode 9-17-09, Katie has a sex scene in which she is nude from the back.
Will it be censored?
It will be interesting to see. (It's a pivotal scene for Emily as well and will be difficult to edit.)
Sarah, I hope you will do a follow-up story if it isn't censored. I understand all the FCC regs but they minimally apply to cable TV, because cable is seen as a choice that people pay to bring into their homes. Mostly the FCC regs are about broadcast TV only.
I can safely report that it