Advance warning . Channel Four programme

[videokim]

Parts of it was more like the "Blair witch project" with the 3 walking in the woods with a torch lol!...what happened to their car lol!, the flicking of headlights, how many times the area gets raided by the police, how they get around this etc etc.

What i don't like in these swinging/adult industry progs is that they talk about what the people like etc but unlike other progs they also slate it, clips will show the opposition to the subject shown so it gives in one hand & takes in the other...

No other progs do this so its not a show for the public but an anti sex prog for the government to levy their laws to protect these disgusted vanilla people from the likes of us in the swinging/adult industry.

[one eyed jack]

Ok I'll say it again:

Every now and again these TV folk come up on here and every time they are rebuked and scared off with torches and pitchforks then when these programmes are made and broadcasted you all object to it

Why not just do it and prevent them from doing it the wrong way if you feel that strong about it?

is this not the same as someone making the porn business look bad when what thtey filmed was what it was. The fact the film makers showcased that was because the mission parameter of any film maker is to find some tthread of drama....If you dont want that then dont give it

That programme seemed real to me in that it wasnt using actors but real people who do that so its as real as any dogging situation

[Peter]

one eyed jack wrote:


> Every now and again these TV folk come up on here and every
> time they are rebuked and scared off with torches and
> pitchforks then when these programmes are made and broadcasted
> you all object to it
>
> Why not just do it and prevent them from doing it the wrong way
> if you feel that strong about it?
>

it doesn't matter what the participants do or say, the outcome of the programme will have been decided at the point it was pitched to the comissioning editors. It has to be, it wouldn't get financed without a brief.

All the producers have to do then is shoot the material, and edit it in the right way to arrive at that pre-determined outcome. And they'll do whatever it takes to reach that conclusion, they won't get paid if they don't deliver the promised result.

So it's pointless doing these shows in an attempt to show the 'real' side of things, it'll just get moulded into the result they want.

Thats why when people come on here talking about doing a 'sympathetic' piece, you know it's bullshit, the conclusion is already decided, they're just looking for some mugs to get them there. (For free, obviously, because they never have a budget for the participants)

[one eyed jack]

it's pointless doing these shows in an attempt to show the 'real' side of things, it'll just get moulded into the result they want.

Thats how i feel about the news but in this case it reminds me of Jack Nicholson in A Few Good Men when he said "The truth!? You cant handle the truth!"

Its a defeatist attitude to assume that the footage was made to make them look bad. I dont think they were bad because it only represented a small facet of those who go dogging

Cold there ever really be a good reason to advocate its meits? It was what it was

Im suprised that no one suggested they were all actors for the fact they were masked.

Unfortunately there are some aspects of real life that are sad and people will find their entertinaments by any mans necessary...Even if it is in the woods late at night

Or maybe you are influenced by your own perceptions of dogging through the various porn made on the topic over the years which is a protracted if not fantastic perception of the reality of it

[videokim]

Peters right the TV companies want titillation not the real stuff so it will never be real, real would shock & real would get complaints so the vanilla plastic safe version is all the viewers will ever see in our Victorian styled censorship.

[Cuntybollocks]

seemed real enough to me.

1)People who are totally insecure. (Bulimic woman, fat woman)

2)People who are total fuckwits. (Vanilla 3some, utter joke!!)

3)People who are void of loving another. (The lorry driver)

Not a sane one among them, go and get you minge and cock out in the woods. Me?. My bed is a queen size and i ain't for moving!!!

Cunytbollocks.

[one eyed jack]

Never thought Id agree with that CuntyBollocks chap but here I am, agreeing with him

Seemed real to me too. Sorry about the painful typos earlier everyone

[one eyed jack]

Peter wrote:

it doesn't matter what the participants do or say, the outcome of the programme will have been decided at the point it was pitched to the comissioning editors. It has to be, it wouldn't get financed without a brief.


But it does matter Peter. thats how we differentiate bias from whats really going on. I question motives when I watch the news and listen carefully to how things are said

I dont believe the show was set up to show dogging in a bad light. If anything it made you the viewer think about what was said to give insight to all those involved which is why it was not important t to know what they looked like. It gave an insight into the human condition by what they did

There is something debauched about it. Thats the very appeal of it. It isnt called dogging for nothing. Its a prime example of people seeking sleaze as a turn on to what they do.

Sleaze is that extra thing that gives porn its naughtiness. People just feel guilty admitting to it