This lady is actually an arthritic Boston Terrier

Today, Dr Linda Papadopoulous’ report for the Home Office on children’s consumption of sexualised images was published, part of a wider investigation and strategy on tackling violence against women and girls. The findings within suggest that a glut of sexualised imagery in the media is responsible for a generation of aggressive, macho boys and  promiscuous and permissive girls. The problem comes, she says, with unrealistic aspirational images being presented to children, which cause them to become stressed about their own bodies.

She recommends, among other things, that images which have been airbrushed should be marked with a warning – an unworkable if noble plan. In fact, the majority of her recommendations are flawed for one simple reason – they paint the child as a non-interacting victim of media, as outdated a notion as the Hypodermic Model of media theory which has become an anachronism via technological advantages as well as plain old common sense.

In truth, we are not ‘victims’ of the media unless we don’t understand it. A child playing with a loaded gun is much more likely to blow his own head off than a police-trained sniper. By putting the onus on parents, the industry and , God help us, the government to protect our children we are depriving them of a life skill which is vital not in their future, but now.

Teach a child that the camera does lie, that airbrushing and photoshopping are rife and that their idol only looks like that with the help of professional make-up artists, good lighting and a computer, and they will be less likely to look in to the mirror and hate themselves.  For compliant agencies to add warnings to their airbrushed photos will only tell children that every other image on the internet and beyond must be real because it doesn’t have the warning. Teach them how to photoshop, and you take away the wizard’s magic.

Currently, children in the UK study media as part of their English requirement on the Curriculum, but it is usually taught by none specialists, and concentrates on the mechanics of, for example, writing a newspaper article. For children to become media literate, they don’t need to know the how of writing a newspaper article, they need to know the why.

Media Studies has been derided as an ‘easy’ subject, but in fact it is complex and rapidly changing. The reason that is sees a high take up rate and good results in UK schools  is that young people choosing their options at 14 already are media literate to some degree. The less academic will still struggle with the analytical skills required in reading a media text, but they will at least be able to decode the barrage of media messages they receive to some degree, therefore enabling them to become not just consumers of media, but creators and critics.

An element of protection will always be needed, but we teach children about road safety and stranger danger as well as employing crossing guards and operating a sex offender’s register, so why not apply the same logic to media? Putting media studies onto the curriculum as a stand alone subject would give them skills and knowledge which would protect them through empowerment.

Kirsty Walker is a qualified teacher as well as the best person at doing media ever, so she knows what she’s on about innit.