Mike Stock: Not Responsible for Moral Decline by shoutingatco.ws

80s pop-pimp Mike Stock has opened his face hole to bollock modern pop stars for producing what he calls “soft-core pornography”. He is, of course, complaining about the half-nuddy dancing on The X Factor and the brand new trend of songs featuring raunchy lyrics.

First off, his X-Factor moan. This is what he has to say:

Pop stars Christina Aguilera and Rihanna’s X-rated routines at the 2010 X Factor final – and Ofcom’s shameful report on the matter, which infamously concluded that the dance routines were ‘at the limit’ of acceptability for a programme broadcast before the 9pm watershed – caused a public outcry, and rightly so.

Here’s the Guardian’s discussion of the same Ofcom report:

Ofcom received about 2,868 complaints about the ITV1 Saturday evening show after the two singers were involved in what the Daily Mail called “provocative pre-watershed performances”.

However, the regulator said that “approximately 2,000 of the 2,868 complaints about this programme were received following coverage about the performances in a daily national newspaper”.

Ofcom does not name the paper directly in its ruling, but MediaGuardian.co.uk understands that it refers to the Daily Mail.

At the time, the Daily Mail published a double-page story reporting “viewer outrage” at The X Factor performances and featuring pictures of Rihanna and Aguilera.

The regulator criticised the paper’s coverage of The X Factor final, noting that the pictures used were “significantly more graphic and close up than the material that had been broadcast in the programme, and had been taken from a different angle to the television cameras”.

“Readers of the newspaper would have therefore been left with the impression that the programme contained significantly more graphic material than had actually been broadcast,” the regulator said.

So that was brilliantly played by the Mail. Manufacture outrage, then perpetuate the same outrage by reporting on it. Round and round like a washing machine of hate. Actively misleading their readers and letting the whinging breed more whinging.

Oh, and do you believe that Mike Stock has sat down and read the entire “shameful” judgement? Nah, us neither.

Incidentally, the article is peppered with images to get the readers all in a froth. Including Rihanna giving a fan a lap-dance (not broadcast on TV, and screencapped from an illegal recording on YouTube), and Rihanna in a ‘raunchy’ performance (from the Billboard Music Awards, not broadcast in the UK).

In fact, the only singer who gets off lightly is Kylie, despite an upskirt photograph showing off her bum: (“Cheeky: But Kylie Minogue’s act has never been overtly sexual”) – despite a catalogue of videos of her half-naked. Could that be anything to do with Mike’s writing and producing credits on her first four albums?

Still upset about the suggestive dancing, he’s not pleased with the lyrics, either:

Ms Scherzinger’s gyrations prompted me to voice my concerns about the insidious impact the music industry was having on our children — that the lyrics of pop songs had become too sexualised, that music videos had effectively turned into soft-core pornography, and that the combined impact of both is almost certainly having a hugely damaging effect on our children.

“Almost certainly having a hugely damaging effect” is such a vague, bullshit phrase, especially from someone with less medical training than Gillian McKeith. He doesn’t know. It sounds like it might be true, so why not run with it?

Take these lyrics, for example:

Used to be so good and so bad

Sex was something I just had

Used to always know what to do

Now you’ve got me confused

Vaguely unsuitable for children, right? That’d be “Naughty Girls (Need Love Too)“, by former Page 3 girl Samantha Fox. Produced in 1987 by, er, Mike Stock.

He’s also worried about:

The recent Government report which highlighted the sexualisation of childhood – an inquiry sparked by the growing trend for padded bras for five-year-old girls and high-heeled sling-backs for eight-year-olds – met with nods of widespread agreement. Faced with a growing army of ten-year-old girls who move and dress like hookers, the moral tide in this country is turning.

Ignoring his weird view of the nation becoming overrun by zombie childwhores, let’s look at his claim of padded bras for five year olds. Tesco have said:

”Far from enhancing breasts or sexualising young girls, this product is designed to protect and cover girls’ modesty at the sensitive time when they are developing.”

And they’re not for five year olds – that would be insane. They’re for eight year olds. A small, but important biological difference. Does anyone want to swap internet histories?

As we mentioned above, the Mail are more than happy to be completely complicit in this sexualisation, with a half-naked promotional photoshoot of Beyoncé praised as “Looking good”.

An article on Taylor Momsen (aged 17) is illustrated with eight whole pictures and a video of her appearing onstage with a tit hanging out. But that’s fine, because, er. Because it is. We could go on all night quoting photos of Miley Cyrus singing with her legs on show, or The Saturdays in bikinis on their holidays, but you get the picture. Not to forget that an attempt to hide your body is worse in MailLand.

We admire the sheer gall of them – on one hand, complaining about the music industry bringing about the end of civilisation, but on the other, wanting to be first in the queue to cash in on this decline. But Mike Stock is as complicit in this as the Mail, as Rihanna, as anyone else he wants to moan about. And worst of all, he’s responsible for Never Gonna Give You Up.

Comments

1. Katie Frost says:

   July 4, 2011 at 2:18 pm

   I’ve got a copy of Sam Fox’s album and all I can see is Stock, Aitken & Waterman working on one song -”Nothing’s gonna stop me now”.

   Before you shout, get your facts straight.
   x

Leave a Reply