Recently in Media matters Category

Blubber and blubbering - The Biggest Loser, ITV1 Tuesday 9pm

You'd think it'd be easy to escape the morbidly obese, after all they'd hardly likely to catch you even at a slow jogging pace. Should you be watching any prime-time TV however you'll find they're omnipresent; if it's not morbidly obese crime (the 74 stone babysitter, C4) then it's the morbidly obese trying to be less obese or perhaps less morbid.

This week saw the return of The Biggest Loser (ITV1), doubtlessly scheduled to coincide with most of us reaching our guiltiest and flabbiest ebb, reminding us of our resolutions and a nationwide desire to pull back from the seasonal excess. In some respects it was hard to know if they're telling us to stop before we get as bloated as these people or reassuring us that maybe we're not so bad after all.

There's no doubt that the participants in TBL should've moved from the sweet trolley to the salad bar a very long time ago. All ten have bodies that would shame the Michelin man and personalities that greatly belie the theory about fat people being jolly; so many tears were shed in the first programme that the contestants could've swam their way to fitness.

Frankie Cocozza, remember him? Me neither. I understand that he was the 'rock 'n' roll' one on this year's X Factor, the one that was supposed to inject some rock energy into the increasingly dull proceedings. Apparently he got sacked for doing something a bit too rock n' roll, perhaps a case of prematurely believing his own hype or just life imitating television.

Likelihood is that he'd have survived if he'd been any good in the first place but they needed the revelations and front-page stories more than they needed his dubious talent. He was one of this year's 'colour-characters', the contestants they keep in the mix to make it a little bit interesting, to stimulate the 'water-cooler' moments, to keep us chatting about the unfairness of it all - as if anyone believed it is a fair and just contest.

It's perhaps easier to see what the producers of TOTP had in mind, keeping the older male audience perhaps, with this performance from Legs & Co:

A natural part of the aging process is the discovery that things you considered fundamental or essential in your childhood have no relevance at all to your children. There's a photo currently circulating in social-media-land which depicts a cassette tape and a pencil with the legend that 'our children will never know the correlation between the two'.

They're right of course but it goes further than that: my kids would barely have knowledge of a cassette tape anyway and their kids probably won't have much need for a pencil. I occasionally wander into this cul de sac of thought surmising on what the future holds and the past has left behind - the term cul de sac is appropriate, fitting both the dead-end nature of this thinking using a phrase that no-one uses or needs anymore. Not that I needed to explain that of course.

At any rate this process began with an episode of Top Of The Pops from September 30th 1976 broadcast on BBC4 last week as part of a repeat series they're undertaking week by week with old episodes of the programme. I sat and watched it with some horror in the company of my 15 year old daughter. Sadly it wasn't a classic.

My mum has joined Facebook; no good can come of this. My daughter has already had to 'clean up' her wall to avoid potential embarrassment or awkward questions from her nan.

I only know about the 'clean up' as she told me, I wouldn't otherwise since I'm not allowed to be her Facebook friend. Using this principle - eldest child rejects parent - I could similarly ignore my mother's request. It speaks volumes that I wonder if she'd actually notice.

I have regularly commented upon the Mercury Music Prize, usually at some point around the nominations or event and if I wasn't suffering from post-holiday-lethargy I'd probably link to those pieces here. To summarise them all though, I've generally been fairly dismissive about the random nature of it all and the dubious prospect of comparing different genres within one award.

Some of that critique possibly still holds water and you wouldn't compare carpet with chocolate, but since they would obviously argue that all music is an audio art form perhaps you can make a judgement on which is the best, or most artistic.

In retrospect it was a bit like shooting fish in a barrel or punching Piers Morgan in the face, too easy and too obvious. Indeed with the 2011 award going to PJ Harvey you might think that a pattern is starting to emerge where I'd initially claimed there was none. If the 'MMP' has a function it may be in recognising music that challenges, that has an artistic purpose beyond sell-out-commerciality.

All around us: HD, 3D, surround-sound, flat-screen, LED, LCD, plasma, home-cinema, free-sat, cable, on-demand. Do we get the televisual delights we deserve or is it all just moving wallpaper with nonsensical sound? Did we sign up to be shown these distorted versions of reality - scripted scenarios enacted by the mentally challenged but aesthetically pleasing? Is this what it has all come to?

You think you can avoid the excess but it's all around, there is no escape so sit back and vegetate.

It's an odd day when you get to confront your own hypocrisy. In many ways I've been doing that in public (though not with great visibility as it was via this blog) over the last few weeks in trying to square my views on 'synching', or the use of popular music for commercial/brand purposes.

It was spurred initially by a knee-jerk reaction, a 'how dare they' moment, to the VW commercial and its use of what I consider to be one of the greatest songs ever recorded. I did make the point at the time that my thoughts and views were compromised and far from clear cut. There's a grey area where sometimes it works and sometimes it doesn't, and your position is influenced by your views on that artist or piece of music.

I like Volkswagen, it's important that you should know this. I've bought two of their cars in the last decade, it's a reliable brand and I'd be happy to drive with them again. This is not about VW; it's about the denigration of art by association, or commercialisation.

Naturally I'm aware of how pretentious that sounds, I know very little about art and not that much about music but I do know what the song 'God Only Knows' means to me, and it doesn't have anything to do with a fucking van.

I was ready to unleash a stream of bile, an invective, a torrent of abuse against the commercial use of one of my favourite songs; then I paused.

I frequently tell myself (and others) not to hit send on something they might regret, or may not even be fully understood. If I take stock on this maybe it isn't that important, most people don't take music that seriously. Others may just believe that the song concerned is just a nice pop tune, not the major development in popular music or timeless classic that I believe it to be.

It's all about perspective. Maybe some people do love their cars that much, probably the creative types involved in the commercial believe that they're paying homage to the song and the vehicles involved.

It is subjective, of course. I was also wary that I was unleashing vitriol against a company to whom I'd recently proposed a sponsorship deal. They foolishly knocked it back in preference to one of their own ideas, one that they don't actually have the budget to execute properly. Generally speaking I don't take these things to heart and it certainly didn't influence my feelings about the ad - I was having those before the 'knock-back' and would've published them either way.

I suppose I didn't want to think that my thinking, and consequently my writing, was compromised. If I'm going to commentate on popular culture and express my deep-held beliefs then I should just get on with it. Those will be printed above, very soon.