What The F**k? or Has The World Of TV Gone Mad?

I have just seen an advert for a new Channel 5 show featuring Tamara Ecclestone Billion Dollar Girl and find myself mystified as to who the hell watches this crap. At a time of recession, where the government is slashing the services and benefits of those at the bottom of the heap, who really wants to see a "reality" show about a spoilt little rich girl? Why would any TV company think that this is the right time to make such a show?

Last weekend I compared at the Hardest Hit Rally in Brighton, where a large number of disabled people came out to make their voices heard about how the government's policy of cutting benefits is really effecting them and making their lives incredibly difficult. I heard many people talk about their worries and panic regarding how the cuts and changes will make it impossible continue to live independent and happy lives. Speaking to many of the people there I discovered facts about the proposed changes to those benefits awarded to disabled people and some of them made no sense. One shocking change is that the Mobility part of DLA, or the new PIP, will stop at the age of 64. Now what actually happens to people with mobility issues at the age of 64 that means they no longer need help with getting around is beyond me. I would have thought that many people, even non-disabled people, will end up becoming worse at getting around as they get older and so be entitled to more financial help not less... or none.

But then that is what is really behind these changes and cuts. It's not making the benefits system fairer or target those who really need it, it's just a way of saving money. As we now live in a society where the number of older people is growing massively, any payment that goes towards helping people who develop problems with mobility will end up being paid to more and more people who really are entitled to it. Oh dear, that will cost us more... what shall we do? Just get rid of the benefit, not caring if this means more and more people are left in real financial difficulty and loose their independence. (I feel at this point I should mention that many people who receive the mobility payment put it towards getting a Motability hire car. Motability is one of the biggest fleet car companies in the UK and plays a massive role in keeping the UK car industry afloat. With out it countless jobs will go, damaging our economy hugely) And that's just one of the changes that will have a real effect on people who do not have much money to start with.

Now maybe that would be OK if we lived in a society where everyone was poor or at least feeling the effects of recession, but it is criminal that while some are living in fear about how they will be able to afford to live others are so rich they can throw money away. How can it be OK that billionaires are out buying massive yachts, ridiculous sports cars and house after house costing huge sums that they only live in for a few days a year when others are terrified about being able to heat their home this winter? Ms Ecclestone is currently redecorating a mansion in Kensington that is worth 45 million pounds, so she will never have to worry about making ends meet will she? Yes I know I'm a rabid lefty, and so obviously this huge disparity in wealth offends me but even if you don't think there is something wrong with the rich being so rich while others freeze, surely you do see that making a TV show about the rich spoilt daughter of one the those billionaires is in bad taste?

As well as the timing and subject, the thing that really grinds my gears is that the star of this show is already super wealthy, yet she will be getting paid for the show and will earn even more money because of the publicity she will receive from it. We already have the awful Made In Chelsea on Channel 4, filled with vacuous rich kids hamming it up for our "entertainment" but Billion Dollar Girl is a step too far. I for one will not be watching this waste of time and have no idea who will.

Blonde Ambitions

A few months ago I had a meeting with a BBC exec who works with talent, to see if the BBC might be interested in getting me back on our TV screens. We had a productive chat, and fingers crossed things might happen. One thing that threw me was the comment that my peroxide hair dye job might be stopping me get work. The exec thought it didn't look right for current tastes and advised me to try for a more natural look. Through out my life people have reacted badly to my alternative image, from before I entered he media and worked in a dole office to my short period as news reporter for BBC News. I never really took much notice, and saw my bleached hair as part of the Mik Scarlet brand. I mean my sign name is the signs for Mouthy with Blonde Spiky Hair, so it is part of who I am.

Or was. You see I really want to get back to work, and decided to give it a go. I mean with the Paralympics coming up and there's window within the media for disabled broadcasters like me to either get on board or miss out forever. So I went natural, and changed my hair style to something more current and put away my leather trousers.

Now I won't deny that I don't miss the hassle of bleaching my hair. Leaning over the sink, with peroxide running in my eyes as I try to wash off the chemicals is not fun. I started dying my hair at the age of 16, and after a period of going from blonde to red to black and red and then black before going back to blonde, I began sticking with peroxide around the age of 23. So that's exactly half of my life with a blonde spiked hair do. But the spiky thing goes back further. The treatment I had as a baby caused my hair to grow very thick and spiky. Nothing my Mum did would get it to lay down, and so everyone nicknamed me Tufty. This left my hair with a natural need to spike up, and getting it to do anything else is real battle, even today.

But it's not only that my hair has been punk since the mid 60's, but being blonde is now so much part of me that I don't recognise the person I see in the mirror every morning since going natural. If you spend half your life looking one way, and then suddenly dramatically change it's weird. It's harder as I didn't really do it because I felt it was time for a change, but more because someone else did. I broke a rule I set down for myself was a teenager. I changed the way I look for a job. Not even a real job, but the possible promise of one. As I write this I feel such a traitor to myself. Not only to me today, but to the young me. I mean I had real commitment to my beliefs back then that I would never have changed the way I look for anyone or anything. But that's OK when you're young and filled with confidence and belief that your generation will change the world.

Now I am an old duffer, and no longer feel that my alternative image is of such importance. I also want to avoid looking like an old git, dressed the way I used to over 20 years ago. But should I have to go so heavily the other way? Is there a middle ground? On top of that question, I am finding that the new natural Mik is not as confident and confidence is key to getting work in the media. I'll never get the few jobs I get to audition for if I'm not on my A game, and changing my image has made me less "me".

The most annoying part of all this is that I still have my hair. I always thought I'd be bald by now, with so many years of abusing my hair behind me. Sure it's receding a little, but it's pretty good for 46. So what should I do? Do I stick with the natural look and learn to love it, or reach for the peroxide, feel more Mik and maybe loose out on work as I don't fit with the current ideas of a what a TV presenter looks like? Of course, I never fitted with the stereotype of a TV presenter, or a wheelchair user for that matter. All I can say is watch this space. I promised myself that if I don't get any work within six months I would say "Sod it" and go back to the old Mik. But I am finding the wait too much to bare.

I ask you dear reader, if you have any thought's on what I should do, please comment below.

The Law Should Be The Law

This won't be up to my normal essay length blogs (hooray I hear you all cry) but I just wanted to comment on something my wife showed me after she received an e-mail today from the League Against Cruel Sports regarding a Fox Hunt that went through a village in Kent. I won't give you all the gory details, but please visit the story on their website for the full story.

Whatever your beliefs on Fox Hunting (yes as a life long veggie I am against it), the big problem with this story for me is that what occured is currently against the law. Allowing the fox hounds to kill the fox is illegal, and to do it in front of a village full of people means that the hunt cannot claim it did not happen. Yet it is normally the kind of people who go fox hunting are amongst those cry out against light sentencing and criminal behaviour. I am sure many of the people on that hunt would have been baying for blood after the recent riots, crying for harsh sentences for all rioters. Surely law breakers are law breakers, and if you break the law you should face the consequences?

To me if you want a society that works, but believe that some laws are unfair or wrong, then you don't just do as you want. You campaign and work to change how society feels about the laws and thus bring pressure on the government to change them. Those who feel they are being unfairly targeted by out of touch city based governments should be running campaigns to explain the reason behind their desire to hunt and to try to change the law. Instead it appears that many are choosing to break the law, just like a teenage rioter.

So surely all involved with this hunt should be hunted down themselves and prosecuted with an equal vigour as any other criminal? I know I do not want to be part of a society that allows this level of cruelty in the name of sport, and I am sure many of you agree with me. This lack of support from the majority of the country is the real excuse behind the flouting of the current laws. If we all feel that rioting is wrong and we also feel that fox hunting is wrong then there should be no difference between them in the action undertaken by the police and courts. I just hope that the proof gathered by the LACS leads to legal action and prosecutions.