Irish Times Wesley picture

santosubito

r3nu4l wrote:

And by the way, just for the record, I think the Evening Herald, The Irish Sun, The Daily Mail and all tabloids (including the Indo) are also rags too The Irish Times ftw

Funny, it was the Irish Times that put the photo of teenage girls in mini skirts on the front page today...

flogen

I split this into a new thread because I wanted to discuss it but didn't want the Daily Ireland thread to go off topic.

I have to say that I didn't have a problem with the picture used; it was considerate enough not to reveal anyone's identity and if anything it simply highlighted the way that junior cert students are going out; I mean you'd be forgiven for thinking they were 21 yo+ girls, and slutty one's at that going by the picture.
It wasn't done in a sleezy or inappropriate way IMO and if anything was inappropriate about it it was that these young girls were allowed to go out like that.
Had it been in any way sexually explicit or suggestive it would have an issue with it but I think it was a fair way to highlight the sexualisation of Irish children and the willingness of parents to allow it.

The pic:

mike65

If that was the (unwritten) message it would have been more effective if we'd seen thier young and possibly gawky faces.

Mike.

flogen

mike65 wrote:

If that was the (unwritten) message it would have been more effective if we'd seen thier young and possibly gawky faces.

Mike.

Not really, all showing their faces would do is either encourage them (they'd get pats on the back for looking "deadly" on a national scale) or make them the butt end of a few school-yard jokes for a week or two.
Without sounding too liberal here the people who should be made to feel embaresed publicly are the parents, the kids are just following the herd like every generation, trying to be all grown up, trying to look as cool as everyone else and trying to push the boundries where they can; the parents should have the cop-on to draw a line.

Revealing their identity isn't going to have some kind of "name and shame" effect, it'd just give the irresponsible parents fodder to bad-mouth the paper and avoid the point being made.

There's also that minor issue of needing a parents consent to publish a picture of their child...

santosubito

flogen wrote:

I have to say that I didn't have a problem with the picture used; it was considerate enough not to reveal anyone's identity and if anything it simply highlighted the way that junior cert students are going out; I mean you'd be forgiven for thinking they were 21 yo+ girls, and slutty one's at that going by the picture.
It wasn't done in a sleezy or inappropriate way IMO and if anything was inappropriate about it it was that these young girls were allowed to go out like that.

Flogen, I think you're contradicting yourself here.
You can't say it's considerate and not sleazy or inappropriate and at the same time write: "I mean you'd be forgiven for thinking they were 21 yo+ girls, and slutty one's at that going by the picture."

I think that WAS the whole aim of the photo. It was a cheap shot and it diminished a great paper. There were plenty of photos the IT could have put o the front page of JC students. Most other papers, including the tabs, had pix of happy students, wearing uniforms, etc. I'm flabbergested by the IT's use of that photo, to be honest. And not showing their faces makes it even worse. It dehumanises them even more. But, of course, the faces weren';t shown because they're under age and the parents would have sued the hole off the IT for implying the wee girls were slappers, which is what that photo did. I'm sure a lot of people looked at that photo and thought:Sluts. What a disgrace for a great paper.

Crubeens

Well ,the good people at The Star were shocked and appalled that the paper of record had the audacity to print such a picture. The moral outrage was simply dripping off the page.

This was an unadorned, unapologetic pornographic portrayal of one of the most glorious wonders of human nature - the blossoming of young sexuality....the front page of yesterday's Times should have seen it banished to the top shelf of every newsagents.

Needless to say, the rest of today's Star is in keeping with the puritanical mood of that article. For example, Page 9 runs a story about a guy who engaged in his dream threesome, only for his wife to leave him for the third party. A photo of the two women, semi-naked in bed, accompanies.

Page 11 talks about good locations for 'doggers' in North Dublin, page 29 gives us the details of Imogen Thomas' leaked sex tape, and page 31 displays 8 bare celebrity bottoms that would give 'rear of the year' winner Javine a run for her 'honey'.

And lets not forget that the Star was the first newspaper to publish the photos of the couple involved in the recent 'frozen embryos' court case. Can they really get away with wagging the finger at yesterday's Times?

flogen

santosubito wrote:

Flogen, I think you're contradicting yourself here.
You can't say it's considerate and not sleazy or inappropriate and at the same time write: "I mean you'd be forgiven for thinking they were 21 yo+ girls, and slutty one's at that going by the picture."

I don't think so; the way the girls were dressed was inappropriate for their age (and I'm sure it would attract the sleazy-type too) but I don't think the picture was either of those, and there is a difference.
I think the picture raises the point that these young girls are going out to a (notorious) disco dressed like slutty adults and the parents don't seem to be bothered. It does so without showing the girls identity (which as you say it cannot) and without showing them in a compromising situation; it's nothing more than what people saw when they walked down the road on Wednesday night.

There was nothing crude or lewd about those pictures; they're just legs after all... the point the picture makes however is indicative of a wider issue and is something that any paper should be proud to make a point of (within the realms of decency which this picture most certainly is)

I think that WAS the whole aim of the photo. It was a cheap shot and it diminished a great paper.

How a cheap shot? It's pointing out something that is going on, not just on JC night and it isn't doing so in a sensationalist way or an inappropriate way. If you think that showing that picture is inappropriate then surely anyone who sees an underage girl dressed like a slutty adult is also guilty of being inappropriate in some way...

There were plenty of photos the IT could have put o the front page of JC students. Most other papers, including the tabs, had pix of happy students, wearing uniforms, etc. I'm flabbergested by the IT's use of that photo, to be honest.

They could have used those pictures if they were trying to cover a different issue or topic; the picture they did use just highlights another side to JC night that most rational people knows exist; it doesn't claim that this is 100% representative of JC students it just shows that it's a part of the "festivities". I don't see why their choice to use a remotely challenging picture should be met with disgust.

And not showing their faces makes it even worse. It dehumanises them even more. But, of course, the faces weren';t shown because they're under age and the parents would have sued the hole off the IT for implying the wee girls were slappers, which is what that photo did. I'm sure a lot of people looked at that photo and thought:Sluts. What a disgrace for a great paper.

I didn't think that, I just wondered if their parents let them go out like that (and if their parents had heard of the Wesley before); all I thought was that the parents are either ignorant or irresponsible.

santosubito

Crubeens wrote:

Can they really get away with wagging the finger at yesterday's Times?

That's all well and good. But I'm talking about the IT here, not other papers. So, perhaps, you might want to say whether the picture was right or wrong. I say it was wrong.

lostexpectation

think of what was going through the head of the photopack photographers prowling the street for underdressed teenagers to photograph yesterday...

mike65

"...and I'm getting paid for this!"

Mike.

santosubito

I'm raising this point because people have very often criticised other papers on this site, with justification, but seem to put the IT on a pedestal (the rag debate, for example).
I think what the IT did on this occasion was, shall we say, raggy in extreme. And if anyone knows anyone in the IT they will know a: staff were unhappy at the pic and b: there were lots of complaints.

flogen

santosubito wrote:

I'm raising this point because people have very often criticised other papers on this site, with justification, but seem to put the IT on a pedestal (the rag debate, for example).

True, the IT is often put on a pedestal and there are probably plenty who believe it can do no wrong (just like there are those who believe it can do no right, and is nothing more than an anti-US, anti-Israel, pro-left publication)..
While the IT should be held to account just like any other newspaper in this country I don't think this was a worthy issue to attack it on as there was no problem with what it did.
That's my opinion of course and I've no doubt that there are plenty who took serious issue with it; I'm sure plenty of letters will be sent into it and I hope, if that is the case, that the IT publishes those worthy of note.

Sgt. Sensible

Can someone please post a scan of the photo in question so i may offer an informed opinion?

mike65

http://www.ireland.com/ITImage/2006/0914/FR114,0.jpg

Mike.

whiskeyman

Sgt. Sensible wrote:

Can someone please post a scan of the photo in question so i may offer an informed opinion?

See the 2nd post.

Was surprised myself it made the front page of the IT.
Can't say I'm shocked or anything, as I wouldn't have thought much had it been in the inside with other photos, just to highlight what the JC results actually mean to many students.
I guess most people would have expected to see the national nerd holding up his/her script with 15 As adorning the front page of the IT.

On a different note, isn't amazing how such a photo brings up such debate and complaints, yet the countless photos of dying childing in war-torn parts of the world never even get a second glance...

billy the squid

And no one mentioned that the star had the picture of the two female junior cert students snogging on the same page as their contempt for the Irish Times.

Chucky the tree

was that not the Hearld billy?


I was a bit suprised too see the picture on the front of the IT, but it didnt really shock me though.

billy the squid

Chucky the tree wrote:

was that not the Hearld billy?


I was a bit suprised too see the picture on the front of the IT, but it didnt really shock me though.

It was in the star this morning as well

exiztone

They look bloody stupid if you ask me... then again I think 20 somethings who dress like that look stupid too.

Bet they all smoke Marlboro lights and think the plural of euro is euros If not, it'll probably happen in 5 years time :rolleyes:

santosubito

JUNIOR CERT CELEBRATIONS

Madam, - I seem to remember that the front page of The Irish Times this time last year also showed the mini-skirted legs of teenage party-goers as they celebrated their Junior Certificate results. What message are you trying to send with the repeated use of this image (The Irish Times, September 14th)? Is it intended to prompt debate about what the nation's teenagers get up to when they go out dressed like this? Or could you possibly be taking a leaf out of the book of your tabloid brethren, who are well aware of the sales-boosting power of bare flesh in print?

And lastly, is anyone else disconcerted by the fact that the flesh in question belongs to girls who, having just completed their Junior Cert, are clearly minors? - Yours, etc,

ORLA SHANAGHY, Dunmore Road, Waterford.

Madam, - A photograph, two years running, of Junior Certificate girls' mini-skirted legs in a South Dublin disco queue. Is this obsessive, biased, or simply a record? - Yours, etc,

MAIRÉAD GALLAGHER, Ballymurphy South, Innishannon, Co Cork.

The photograph is a reflection of the times in which we live. That is the message it was intended to convey. The faces of the students were not shown precisely because the young girls are probably minors. - Ed, IT.

billybobxx

Well excuse me!! to let all you people out there who are calling these girls sluts,slapper etc. i would just like to let you know that i happen to know sum of these girls and these are not the people you are making them out to be!! and what gives you the right to judge people that you dont even know anything about??? :mad: :mad:

billy the squid

billybobxx wrote:

Well excuse me!! to let all you people out there who are calling these girls sluts,slapper etc. i would just like to let you know that i happen to know some of these girls and these are not the people you are making them out to be!! and what gives you the right to judge people that you dont even know anything about??? :mad: :mad:

I think the criticism in this debate is directed more at the hypocracy of the Daily Star than the girls themselves.

santosubito

billy the squid wrote:

I think the criticism in this debate is directed more at the hypocracy of the Daily Star than the girls themselves.

I think some people would see it the other way around. It's the Irish Times that is being hypcritical, in my view. But, I forgot, the IT can do no wrong on this board.

lostexpectation

it seems to me as suggesting in the indo today (no they can't talk) the photographer for the times was sent out specifically to get that picture of 14/15 yr olds girls legs in short skirts (but no faces we're a broadsheet ), seeing they used a similar one last year.

One photographer Mark Doyle said their editors pressures them to take such photos... poor paps :rolleyes:

will anyone own up here to going out to taken such photos that night?

santosubito

Not me, anyway!

flogen

billybobxx wrote:

Well excuse me!! to let all you people out there who are calling these girls sluts,slapper etc. i would just like to let you know that i happen to know sum of these girls and these are not the people you are making them out to be!! and what gives you the right to judge people that you dont even know anything about??? :mad: :mad:

I'm not sure who has called these girls (whoever they are) a slut or slapper; they seem to dress in a slutty way but that's about all anyone can say about them unless they know them personally.

This discussion is about the IT's use of the image however, and the validity of the response from other media outlets.

santosubito wrote:

I think some people would see it the other way around. It's the Irish Times that is being hypcritical, in my view. But, I forgot, the IT can do no wrong on this board.

While I appreciate your opinion that the picture was inappropriate and, in your opinion a very low-brow thing to do I'm not sure how the IT is hypocritical; has it ever chastised other media outlets for showing the same kinds of pictures or do you feel it's hypocritical just because it doesn't show these kinds of pictures on a regular basis?

santosubito

Well, I think the IT regularly does chastise other media. If you give me a few hours, I shall go on LexisNexis and see what I can find. I'm annoyed by this photo because I feel the paper of record should not be trying to titillate people, which, in my opinion, is what it was doing. I didn't realise until I read the letters page that it did the same thing last year. And all Geraldine Kennedy can say is "The photograph is a reflection of the times in which we live." Fair play to her grammar, but it's not much of an argument, is it? And another thing: why two years in a row? Is that what the whole junior cert saga boils down to, making some young girls appear slutty?
Did she not make make her point last year, is she going to do it in 2007 as well?

flogen

santosubito wrote:

Well, I think the IT regularly does chastise other media. If you give me a few hours, I shall go on LexisNexis and see what I can find. I'm annoyed by this photo because I feel the paper of record should not be trying to titillate people, which, in my opinion, is what it was doing. I didn't realise until I read the letters page that it did the same thing last year. And all Geraldine Kennedy can say is "The photograph is a reflection of the times in which we live." Fair play to her grammar, but it's not much of an argument, is it? And another thing: why two years in a row? Is that what the whole junior cert saga boils down to, making some young girls appear slutty?
Did she not make make her point last year, is she going to do it in 2007 as well?

I also didn't know they did the same last year and I agree that making the same point twice is a bit odd; if anything I'd chastise them for regurgitating their own content.
That said while her response was brief I think it's clear what the point was, and I really don't think it was to titillate. There's no point in me trying to expand on the IT's justification but IMO the picture is there to show the times we live in (as in it's a time where junior cert students are attempting to and being allowed to act as underdressed adults during their celebrations of academic achievements... it was the same when I did my JC but that wasn't very long ago; not sure what it was like when GK did hers)
It is questionable as to why they chose to do the exact same thing last year; did they forget or just get lazy?

Mad Finn

flogen wrote:

I'm not sure who has called these girls (whoever they are) a slut or slapper; they seem to dress in a slutty way but that's about all anyone can say about them unless they know them personally.

The Star did when it described the picture as pornographic.

The word pornography comes from the Greek word pornos, meaning a slut or a whore.

I find this entire debate sanctimonious in the extreme. I think the Times was perfectly right to print a picture which perfectly reflected at least one part of the society we currently live in --over sexualised youth--without identifying anybody in particular and causing especial embarassment. It's a fine line to tread and it did it well.

r3nu4l

santosubito wrote:

...making some young girls appear slutty?
Did she not make make her point last year, is she going to do it in 2007 as well?

The IT making them look slutty? I think the young girls dressing like that made themselves appear 'slutty', not the Irish Times photograph.

I was surprised to see the photo on the cover of the Times but if you have ever been out and about on Junior Cert results night (and I have been) then you will see that the majority of young girls dress like this!

Mick86

The Gardai should go around arresting the photographers as suspected paedophiles. That would soon put an end to what is just sad titillation. If they want to photograph drunken teenagers they could do so any weekend night not just when the JC results come out.

The Sunday World went one worse by publishing a photo of some young lad fingering his girlfriend or maybe a complete stranger. Who knows. Public sex seems to be a fad with teenagers. Unfortunately I was born thirty years too early.:D

monument

r3nu4l wrote:

I was surprised to see the photo on the cover of the Times but if you have ever been out and about on Junior Cert results night (and I have been) then you will see that the majority of young girls dress like this!

I was in, err... 'town', that evening/night. There was some wearing less.

Mick86 wrote:

The Gardai should go around arresting the photographers as suspected paedophiles. That would soon put an end to what is just sad titillation.

I would like to think at such a point the newspaper(s) would back the photographer(s) in a nice little case of, at least, wrongful arrest.

Maybe it isn’t apparent from the legs alone, but most of the people I seen were not borderline cases, they looked young. Which isn’t “titillation” for myself, I would think not for the Irish Times, and would hope not for the rest of the posters here.

Mick86 wrote:

If they want to photograph drunken teenagers they could do so any weekend night not just when the JC results come out.

The 'JC' results night was far worse, and the vast majorty dressed like were actualy girls not woman, unlike "any weekend night. And was this picture not taken of girls lining up for some teenage event?

lostexpectation

monument wrote:

I was in, err... 'town', that evening/night. There was some wearing less.


The 'JC' results night was far worse, and the vast majorty dressed like were actualy girls not woman, unlike "any weekend night. And was this picture not taken of girls lining up for some teenage event?

atleast they were sober legs going to non-alco party (aprt from what they drank before hand)

The Sweeper

I can't believe the mini skirt is stil causing a stir in Ireland, thirty years after its invention. If those girls were all in shorts, exposing the same amount of leg would that still be 'slutty'?

flogen, what does 'dress in a slutty way' mean? Are they wearing thigh-skimming leather boots and open crotch panties with a peephole bra?

This is a bare step away from the "asking for rape by dressing a certain way" school of thought.

The photograph is clever because the photographer managed to find a line of similar styled skirts - because they're the fashion. The inference - that it's 'slutty', comes from the viewer, because the viewer has a problem with a stretch of teenaged bare leg.

flogen

Minesajackdaniels wrote:

flogen, what does 'dress in a slutty way' mean? Are they wearing thigh-skimming leather boots and open crotch panties with a peephole bra?

What I mean by dress in a slutty way is when someone dresses in very skimpy clothes, ie very short skirts or really revealing tops. I'm not saying they're sluts, maybe they love the clothes or wear them for fashion reasons etc., I just think the clothes are still slutty.
I guess put simply, to me slutty clothing is the type that phone's in sexiness or class and subscribes to the notion that showing additional skin is by definition a good thing.
I'm really not going to get into a debate about that though; as I don't know the girls pictured I have no idea if they are slutty by nature, I do think that they were dressing inappropriately for their age however (or at least if I had a daughter I wouldn't even think of letting her celebrate her junior cert results dressed like that... or in the Wesley either)

This is a bare step away from the "asking for rape by dressing a certain way" school of thought.

No, it's not.

Cork

flogen wrote:

Had it been in any way sexually explicit or suggestive it would have an issue with it but I think it was a fair way to highlight the sexualisation of Irish children and the willingness of parents to allow it

a Picture is worth a 1000 words - but adiction goes on 365 days a year - it is not even confined to those as young as junior certs.

This country has a massive problem with ancahol - It need both analysis and solutions.

flogen

Cork wrote:

a Picture is worth a 1000 words - but adiction goes on 365 days a year - it is not even confined to those as young as junior certs.

This country has a massive problem with ancahol - It need both analysis and solutions.

Have you read this thread at all?
I'm not sure why you decided to mention alcohol abuse but it's not something that is up for discussion here, please take the topic somewhere else and stay OT here.