"What happened to her is not fiction"

February 10, 2017 9:14 AM

The BBC aired a new drama this week about the disappearance of Shannon Matthews in 2008. The drama has been criticised for fictionalising a real child's life.

The producer appeared on BBC R4's Front Row to defend the programme and the writer has stated that “Whatever Shannon thinks about her mother, and we can’t speculate about that, it’s better that there’s a portrait of Karen that’s more balanced and nuanced."

posted by threetwentytwo (6 comments total)

So I actually agree with the producer about the value of this program (I think) but his insisting in the radio transcript on not calling it "entertainment" feels really disingenuous.

But I think what makes me the most angry about that is that it dismissed anything entertaining as fluff, separating anything you enjoy from something that's good for you. Sometimes vegetables that give you the right vitamins also taste good.
posted by MCMikeNamara at 9:41 AM on February 10, 2017

I haven't seen it, but from reading around, there doesn't seem to be much dispute that this was not a lurid blow-by-blow of her kidnapping but rather a study of how a despised community rallied in defense of their own, even if it later turned out they had been deceived. It seems to me that the big potential concern here is whether the publicity will summon the usual sick bastards of the Internet to harass her in some way, but of course that is true of pretty much any big story.

I also can't help but notice how many people here seem to be speaking for Shannon without actually having talked to Shannon about what she actually thinks, or if she even cares.
posted by praemunire at 9:42 AM on February 10, 2017

praemunire: Well she's not available for comment, so that applies to everyone involved. So is the answer not to question when a TV company decides to take on the role of describing what went on?
posted by biffa at 10:03 AM on February 10, 2017

I've seen the first episode. The child appears in a single shot, from the back, holding hands as she walks into the police station. On screen for perhaps half a second.

Also, I'm guessing that Shannon would be over 18 now, so not actually a even child any more.
posted by PeterMcDermott at 10:30 AM on February 10, 2017

Well she's not available for comment,

Not really? She's a legal adult now. She could comment if she wanted to. Evidently, for whatever reason, she has chosen not to. Which is her right, but you can't say that there's no way we could know what she's thinking and so have no choice but to speculate.

So is the answer not to question when a TV company decides to take on the role of describing what went on?

I don't think the answer is to engage in definitive indignation on her behalf, as the linked objection in particular seems to. That author simply does not know how Shannon is reacting to this show (if she even is), but she sure acts like she does. Her tone was such that as I read her article, I genuinely expected to read an included quote from Shannon or from someone speaking for her objecting to the show. I was surprised to reach the end and find no such thing.

As a semi-separate matter, I think it really is important to keep clear that Shannon Matthews's life is not actually being used for entertainment. Chasing this woman down in the present day when she is obviously leading a private life would be distasteful and intrusive. But she was, in fact, part of an awful news story in her childhood. That's what "Moorside" seems to be about.
posted by praemunire at 2:32 PM on February 10, 2017

Off topic, but I think it's down right silly that we can't use the BBC I Player (without doing...you know) or the BBC store in the US. I don't care why, it's just silly.
posted by james33 at 7:58 AM on February 11, 2017