Salon.com > Skins

Why MTV canceled “Skins”

Fri, 10 Jun 2011 17:11:00 +0000

"Skins," the controversial teen sex/drugs/whatever-the-kids-are-listening-to-these-days (dubstep) scripted dramedy on MTV, has been canceled. America just doesn't "get" the program the way the U.K. does, where the original "Skins" is about to premiere its 6th season. So what happened?

Some critics are blaming the Parents Television Council for calling the show "child pornography" and scaring off all the advertisers. Some are claiming that Bryan Elsley's show was just too racy for American audiences and/or Viacom. Other say it wasn't racy enough to compete with actual reality television. My contention? The American version of "Skins" just wasn't good enough to warrant a second season.

When child images shock: A history

Sun, 23 Jan 2011 01:01:00 +0000

MTV's "Skins" did not invent sex, and it didn't invent cultural angst over underage sexuality, either. The raunchy show is just the latest pop culture entrant to spark anxious debate over what is and isn't child pornography. As the network's executives reportedly huddle behind closed doors, trying to determine the legal risk of showing underage actors nude and in countless steamy scenarios, observers are left to administer the classic obscenity test of "I know it when I see it." The problem, of course, is that people see these things very differently. What appears to one person a touchingly innocent black-and-white photograph of a nude toddler can seem prurient and exploitative to the next -- and these perceptions shift in reaction to our changing social landscape. Nothing makes that clearer than a survey of the major child porn controversies.

Why MTV should stick up for “Skins”

Fri, 21 Jan 2011 14:01:00 +0000

MTV made its bed. Now it needs to go lie in it -- for the greater good of free speech, television and common sense.

But will it have the guts?

First, the back story: Thursday's New York Times says executives at the cable channel are freaking out over the Parents Television Council's reaction to its MTV's remake of "Skins," a prime-time English soap that shows teenage characters played by teenage actors simulating sex, drinking, drug use and masturbation.

MTV has officially declined comment to all media outlets, but somebody there anonymously told the Times about "a flurry of meetings" Tuesday that debated cutting some of the show's more flagrantly provocative images, and that wondered "who [at Viacom] could possibly face criminal prosecution and jail time if the episodes were broadcast without changes."

According to the Times, MTV executives "are particularly concerned about the third episode of the series, which is to be broadcast Jan. 31. In an early version [of Episode 3], a naked 17-year-old actor is shown from behind as he runs down a street. The actor, Jesse Carere, plays Chris, a high school student whose erection -- assisted by erectile dysfunction pills -- is a punchline throughout the episode."

“Skins’” salacious teen thrills

Tue, 18 Jan 2011 16:53:00 +0000

Is there a greater P.R. agent for risqué television than the Parents' Television Council? I doubt it. If I were a young viewer who paid attention to the pronouncements of watchdog groups (and has there ever been one of those, ever?) I'd put any show it condemned on a list of must-sees. It recently labeled the American version of the sex-and-drug-saturated, casually bi-curious English teen series "Skins" -- which premiered last night on MTV with a TV-MA rating --"the most dangerous television show for children that we have ever seen." Setting aside the loaded phrase "for children" (it's not as though MTV is aiming the show at fourth graders) that's a classic alarmist reaction, one that may turn out to have more promotional currency than a Super Bowl ad.