Month: November 2012

Finding My Inner Nemo in the Sea of Commuters

I laughed as I came out of the London Tube this morning. A few people looked at me like I was from another planet – not many people laugh on the tube! Oxford Circus is a very busy station and I really saw the humour in how we interact with one another.

Remember the film “Finding Nemo” and the scene where all the fish are in the current? Little critters simply holding themselves in their aquatic constellation. They never bump into each other or impose. They have accepted the flow and swirl they are in and are masters of just letting go and being in harmony with each other.

Resistance is futile!

There is a graceful power in letting go and simply allowing the current to take us as we weave and curve around the subterranean world below London. When I resist, or try to force my way through the crowd, it just doesn’t work. I bump into people, bags and feet. The impact of others fighting against it is also felt as a harshness, a force. The resistance to the natural flow around us all equally.

Today I felt the joy of being with everyone, letting them in, feeling everything and being me. It’s like being a fish in the sea and not getting wet!

Response to the Letter from 10 Downing Street

November 13, 2012

Susan Alleyne
Ministerial Support Team
Department for Culture, Media and Sport
2-4 Cockspur Street
London SW1Y 5DH

Your Ref: 218392/SA/01

Dear Ms. Alleyne,

I am very disappointed that the Government’s stance is that they will wait for the recommendations from the Leveson Inquiry.

The contradictory advice that the Press Complaints Commission is the recommended avenue should a complaint need to be raised against a publication; “However, the Code does not cover matters of taste and decency because what is offensive to one reader may be utterly innocuous to another” is an inadequate response. We have already submitted a complaint to them about the Evening Standard and were told that there’s nothing they [the PCC] can do. Which is why I felt to write to David Cameron in the first place. The PCC are inundated with complaints about sexual images in newspapers – and they have no power to act on them. What are you as a Government going to do about that?

Further, when you say “We know that some people find some of the content of newspapers and adult magazines offensive, and I can assure you that the Government if particularly concerned that children should not be exposed to inappropriate material of any kind.” Really? We are NOT talking about adult magazines; we are talking about daily newspapers. You are allowing abuse of children by colluding with the press.

The question that urgently requires a response is; why are you continuing to defend a man’s right to ogle, over a child’s right to innocence?

Adult magazines used to be on the top shelf, with a cover. Now they are on every magazine rack in every supermarket – Nuts, Loaded, Esquire, FHM – all have semi-naked women on their covers. Objectification is rife. Where are concerned citizens to go when we need to raise a concern? Your recommendation is to go to the police, who are already overwhelmed by alcohol related violence and increasing domestic violence. That’s your solution as a Government? To overload the police force by not taking responsibility to change an archaic system that allows the press to remain unaccountable?

The Obscene Publications Act 1957 you mention brings up no results on the Legislation.gov.uk website. Could you please advise where I can access a copy? The Wikipedia page has some information that deems it a useless act as only one person, on appeal, was convicted in the history of the act since 1957. So this doesn’t seem a relevant option to use in a case against a newspaper. And the recommended fine is only £100, hardly a deterrent.

I would like to know the details of the out come of the meeting Ed Vaizey had on the issue of the representation of women in the media. Great that they devoted a meeting to the issue, but from your letter, no decisive outcome was achieved. What is the status of the Communications Review? It is blatantly obvious that existing regulation is not a fit for the modern media environment.

Unfortunately, the truth is that no one is taking responsibility. The supermarkets are not stopping putting the sexual images away from the eyes of children, the papers, and it now the Government, are allowing this to continue and claiming a “body confidence campaign” will somehow build self-esteem. Yet every day, young children see semi-naked women on magazine covers while their parents are buying the groceries. Their parents are bringing home newspapers that have sexually graphic images of women and it’s accepted as the norm.

The NSPCC has just released a report on the qualitative study of children, young people and ‘sexting’. It makes for shocking reading about the state of our children’s lives and what we have created. We are out of control – following numbly in the footsteps of the press. I recommend you taking a few minutes to review the chilling information it uncovers.

From the report: Brian McNair (2002) has argued Western society has become a ‘striptease culture’ preoccupied with confession, revelation and exposure. This is connected to an ongoing breakdown or renegotiation of the boundary between public and private, which is itself the outcome of multiple, intersecting factors including the partial success of the women’s and sexual liberation movements, shifts in media regulation away from censorship and towards ‘an informed consumer model’ (Bragg & Buckingham, 2009), and the possibilities opened up by rapid technological change.”

“Perhaps the broadest level at which sexism operates in the young people’s lives is to be found in the deeply rooted notion that girls and young women’s bodies are somehow the property of boys and young men.”

Would you like this to be your daughter? Gang raped at the age of eleven by a group of ten or more fourteen-year-old boys outside her school? This is happening every day somewhere in London. And still the Government is taking no responsibility for the images our innocent children are seeing every day. The men that ogle are fathers, brothers, uncles, grandfathers and professionals and are seen as role models to our young men – those boys are upholding that behaviour as normal.

Why are we continuing to defend a man’s right to ogle, over a child’s right to innocence?

ENOUGH.

Seriously. Enough with our complacent attitude towards the treatment of women in our society by the Media. We need to step up and take responsibility for the impact that the Media has on our attitude towards women.

We have a dossier that’s growing every day. Please let me know if you would like to see examples of the trash we are allowing – it’s too big to post.

Yours truly,

Sarah M Cloutier

Leveson Inquiry Submission Three

November 13, 2012

The Leveson Inquiry
Royal Courts of Justice,
Strand,
London
WC2A 2LL

Abuse of Women in/by the Media – Leveson Inquiry Submission Three

“ANY FAILURE WITHIN THE MEDIA AFFECTS ALL OF US”

Lord Justice Leveson opened the hearings on 14 November 2011, saying: “The press provides an essential check on all aspects of public life. That is why any failure within the media affects all of us. At the heart of this Inquiry, therefore, may be one simple question: who guards the guardians?”

I call on the Leveson Inquiry to establish a monitor for the Abuse of Women in/by the Media and to create a platform for this type of journalism to stop as part of Module 4: Submissions on The Future Regime for the Press.

With no response to my first two letters, I will continue to send updates on the state of the Press in the UK with the hope that you will take the responsibility given to you by the Government. In a recent letter I received from the Department of Media, Culture and Sport, they will not act on any of the concerns I have brought up with your Inquiry and the Prime Minister. They said they are going to wait to see what your recommendations are.

In the absence of any true leadership from the Government on the denigration of women in/by the media, we are left with the option of going to the police to stem the flow of obscenity from our Press. The Obscene Publications Act 1959, which was quoted by the Department of Media, Culture and Sport letter as the avenue to raise a complaint, it appears has had only one conviction since its inception. This doesn’t bode well for concerned citizens like myself who are seeing the erosion of value and the explosion of how women are sexualised in/by the Press.

The denigration has become so mainstream that we no longer see it. We are numb to it.

We made a formal complaint to the PCC on 22 October 2012 in response to the continued objectification of women in the London Evening Standard. We spoke with them yesterday and were informed that there is no part of the PCC that deals with complaints about the soft porn images in the print media. We are now investigating further as they keep a log of these complaints and share this with you. They did advise us that they have shared this information with the Leveson Inquiry so I am very keen to know what you are planning to do to stop this insanity. The set-up in it’s current form means that concerned people of the community have no where to go to stop the out-of-control press. They are unaccountable for their actions in this regard.

The Government’s response “However, the code does not cover mattes of taste and decency because what is offensive to one reader may be utterly innocuous to another” is unfortunately a stock standard response to the whole subject of sexualisation and objectification of women in the press. Are we not to be supported in our aim to reduce and remove the denigration of women in our newspapers, in print and online?

You must do something. For if not you, then who will, if the Government are unwilling to take any true responsibility here?

Or are we as concerned citizens, being forced by this unsupportive legislation, to go to the police and make a formal complaint when we see this abuse? Are the police not busy enough without having to deal with a Press that have created a system in which they are not held accountable? How convenient.

The question that urgently requires a response is; why are we continuing to defend a man’s right to ogle, over a child’s right to innocence?

Why are we continuing to defend a man’s right to ogle, over a child’s right to innocence?

ENOUGH.

Attached is a comprehensive dossier that has been compiled over a five-week period up to 11 November 2012. You will see that there is a pattern of language used and repetitive images proving we have an issue with the treatment of women in the UK press. Please let me know if you would like to see more examples of this trash we are allowing – there’s plenty more where that came from.

ENOUGH.

Seriously. We need to step up and take responsibility for the impact that the Media has on our attitude towards women and children.

I welcome any questions or for more information.

With thanks,

Sarah Michon Cloutier

PS. I’m reminded of the Library at Shawshank Prison and Andy Dufresne sending a letter every week to the state body asking for books and funding – and they gave him what he wanted to shut him up – let’s hope that works for us with the Leveson Inquiry …

Letter to Dinah Rose QC

* Dinah Rose is leading the BBC investigation regarding the handling of past sexual harassment claims against Jimmy Savile

1 November 2012

Dinah Rose QC
Blackstone Chambers
London

Good morning,

I have been following the continuing exposure of the Savile case with interest and disbelief.

Ms. Rose’s investigation into the past claims not acted upon expose a greater ill in our society and one that I hope will be included as part of the recommendations at the end of the case.

The Savile situation proves that many, many people knew what was going on – and did/said nothing for over 50 years – because “that was just how it was in the 60’s/70’s/80’s”. This attitude is still in existence today. We see abuse and say nothing. The ex-porter at the Leeds hospital who saw Savile with girls on numerous occasions; the BBC staff; the police who didn’t follow up claims – all in criminal collusion.

The on-going abuse of women in/by the media has devalued women to such an extent that there is a deep illusion that we have advanced as a western society. Of course, there are women in positions of power, but we well know that these are few and far between and are often treated with abuse from the press and male colleagues as per the recent expose by Australian Prime Minister Julia Gillard.

I feel Savile and the obvious paedophile gang operating at the BBC link this to the contempt with which the girls were treated, over many years. The behaviour was/is acceptable and continues unabated – in fact with more force than the Savile years. There is more porn-style media in our mainstream press than ever before.

When a recommendation is made at the end of the Savile case, please consider the wider picture of how we see girls/women/children are treated in the mainstream media – porn is on our supermarket shelves and on the front of every paper. We are numb to it and when it’s brought up, the attitude is usually that we are making a big deal of nothing, eg, Page 3. Men can see this as normal and sexualise women without giving it a second thought.

Ms. Rose, you are in a position to bring a voice of true change and be a true leader. With your knowledge, experience and heart, you have the power to highlight the ROT we have all accepted as ‘normal’. As a sexual abuse survivor myself, your voice is needed now more than ever.

Thank you for your time to read this email and the attachments.

Please let me know if I can be of any support.

Yours truly,

Sarah M Cloutier
London

Second Letter to Prime Minister David Cameron

October 31, 2012

Mr. David Cameron
Prime Minister
10 Downing Street
London SW1A 2AA

Dear Mr. Cameron,

“ANY FAILURE WITHIN THE MEDIA AFFECTS ALL OF US”

In your own words printed in The Times on 25 October 2012, “What matters most of all is we are going to have a regulatory system in which the public will have confidence, that if mistakes are made there are proper corrections, that if newspapers do the wrong thing they can get fined, there is a proper investigation when things go wrong”.

You show a clear support for the Legal system, and NOT the people who voted you in. All lawyers will be wringing their hands with glee, knowing they will be filling their coffers in no time. You have shown no regard for the innocent person, who is lied about, vilified, attacked, abused and denigrated by an out-of-control Media juggernaut that is rarely held accountable. How could one man or woman ever feel that they have the money or time available to sue a monolith such as The Times, for example? There is no support for the average person to feel they can stand up to that force.

Your comment also very clearly shows that you are only interested in the end result of the abuse from the Media, litigation. You are not seeking to PREVENT it from occurring in the first place. Why is that? Unfortunately, we exist in a society that waits for something terrible to happen BEFORE we act. There is an obvious pattern of abuse, yet we allow it to continue and to be acceptable. Let’s turn the tables.

By using the word “mistakes” you are lessening the charge against the press. What they did and continue to do are not mistakes, but systematic and calculated abuse to create a story. This is why the Leveson Inquiry was set up.

It is your responsibility as leader of THE PEOPLE’S ELECTED GOVERNMENT to stand up for the people and say ENOUGH to this abusive power held by the Media.

Your full responsibility is needed now and the dismissive hope that “there is a proper investigation when things go wrong” is unsubstantiated with the current reflection of justice.

How can a Nigerian national only now be sentenced to trafficking young orphan girls out of Nigeria, through England and into Europe on fake passports for sex slavery, when it had now been proven that he’s been doing it since at least 2009? This is not a ‘mistake’ – this is criminal collusion.

How can people have known about the predator Jimmy Savile for over 50 years and still stand by and do nothing? The recent statement from the BBC that he was banned from the Children in Need charity OVER A DECADE AGO because the charity’s executives found him “creepy” and wanted to prevent him having contact with youngsters. This is not a ‘mistake’ – this is criminal collusion.

Both these examples prove the FACT THAT we have become so complacent to the abuse of children that authorities are using ineffectual legal mumbo jumbo instead of truth to not be exposed in their criminal collusion.

Mr Cameron, will you be the one that stands up and says ‘ENOUGH’? Or does it have to be one of your daughters that has porn on her phone and is exposed in the press about her sex-tape before you will look at the ROT we live with as a society every day? Or will you be the one to hand the keys to the perpetrator, like they gave them to Jimmy Savile at Stoke Mandeville Hospital?

What about holding those police accountable who dismissed the complaints against Jimmy Savile? And the BBC staff that knew what was going on ten years ago? The customs officials who let those orphan girls be trafficked into sex slavery? No one is being held to account. Why is that?

We know that sex slavery, pornography, domestic violence and sexual abuse of children are big issues that are seemingly complicated and tough to stop. In truth, we have allowed all these to become normal, expected and commonplace. Are we really simply going to allow these to continue unabated because no one has the guts to stand up and do something about them?

And so to return to the current abuse of people in/by the Media …

If you allow this current situation to continue, we are allowing the endemic abuse of ‘powerless’ people; children, orphans, women, men and low-income earners. You are choosing to support the ‘powerful’ in society to continue to crush the ‘powerless’ and seemingly taking pride in the fact with your comments in The Times. Are you not in criminal collusion by not making this behaviour unacceptable?

Governments all over the world have brought in regulation for the Finance industry to stop greed and theft, so you must for the abuse of people in/by the media. Or is it that the men affected by the greed and theft by the banks had more sway than the average person who is assaulted by the dismissive, abusive and invasive nature of the Media. As a society, we are no longer numb and submissive and we need your support to dis-engage the Media’s deceptive illusion.

Granted there are some traditional reporters that expose truth. However, there are many more that have no accountability on their vile trade of abuse. A very decisive line needs to be drawn and it’s your responsibility to make a stand.

Here is a real opportunity for you to choose to go with real change and truth and be seen in history as a true leader.

In November, we are launching our campaign Enough! – Stop the Abuse of Women in/by the Media. Attached is the press release, a dossier (growing every day) of some examples of recent front pages, letters to the Leveson Inquiry and to the Australian Prime Minister Julia Gillard. This is a real issue that we have researched extensively to show that there is no longer the option to ignore this damaging pattern of systematic, calculated abuse.

Enough.

I welcome your questions and would make myself available to meet with you or one of your team to discuss this further.

Yours truly,

Sarah Cloutier
London