This week Channel 4 has attracted considerable attention. Its high-profile, much discussed ‘documentary’ strand Big Fat Gypsy Weddings has returned to a big fat viewing audience and water-cooler debate over the style merits of pineapple themed dresses. But the marketing campaign for the series has also brought the channel to the notice of the Advertising Standards Authority, which has received just under a hundred complaints.
The accusation is one of causing offence by way of racism. A national poster blitz has featured images of the travellers who appear in the show, strapped with the line: ‘Bigger. Fatter. Gypsier’ Some of the complaints have been offered by the London Gypsy & Traveller Unit and London assembly members Jennette Arnold and John Biggs.
An investigation by the ASA is underway, but to many commentators this is an open and shut case of prejudice in advertising. As usual, however, the truth is far more nuanced.
It seems none of the complainants was upset by the ‘bigger’ and ‘fatter’ bits. The attention is all on the term ‘Gypsier’. Apart from being a pretty ghastly mangling of language, the controversy stems from the notion that the word is racially pejorative. Interestingly, the programme doesn’t actually portray the Romany community - “ those most closely associated with the name Gypsy - but Irish Travellers, a different ethnic grouping. As far as the ASA is concerned, this is likely to be inconsequential. Whether there are ‘real’ Gypsies in the show or not, if the word ‘Gypsier’ is offensive to a particular section of the populace, the broadcaster will be in breach of the body’s code. But how offensive is it?
Nobody is arguing that ‘Gypsy’ is an insulting term, just the invented variation. So, let’s play with that language a little. What if the poster claimed a show starred people who were ‘blacker’ than before. Or ‘gayer’. It’s difficult, but common sense suggests these terms would be problematic, using a personal trait to measure the behaviour of the whole person. In other words: stereotyping.
But consider this. The Irish Travellers gave their full consent to be filmed for the programme and were absolutely familiar with the title. This is the second run and is very much in keeping with the traditions of the first. There are no genuine signs of it being ‘bigger’ or ‘fatter’, just more of the same. And, of course, the ASA as far as we know, has received no objection from the participants
Christine Cawley, an Irish Traveller appeared in the Guardian on Tuesday, saying Channel 4 "seems to be using who we are against us in a way that feels very hard to take".
On the same day, The London Gypsy & Traveller Unit wrote to the broadcaster’s Chief Creative Officer, Jay Hunt, and Chief Executive, David Abraham, pointing to the perceived stereotyping in the advertising and asking for the campaign to be withdrawn.
"We wonder if Channel 4 would have been so ready to use the adverts with similarly compromising phrases for other ethnic groups” said the unit, which also asked Channel 4 to remove the ads.
Channel 4 responded: "The advertising builds on the celebratory nature of the first series ... The word 'gypsier' refers to the fact this series offers even greater access and insight to the communities featured, and the term 'gypsier' is not being used in a negative context. Everyone featured in the campaign has seen the posters and is happy with them."
If this last comment is true, then what was once a prima face case of objectionable and prejudiced marketing takes on a different aspect. Surely, if the people whose lives are presented in BFGW have signed off on the campaign, all is well? Not quite. The posters are a red herring. It’s the series itself which begs closer examination and the trend for ‘ridicule TV’ is an unhealthy development. The community featured in this show, may or may not be aware of the pointing and sniggering it attracts from many viewers. They may not care. But the fact is, BFGW doesn’t attempt to explore the history, social or political issues faced by travellers, it merely holds up a section of society and invites ‘normal’ folk to stand aghast at their rites and activities.
Whether or not ‘Gypsier’ is an appropriate word to appear on a poster, exposing minorities to cheap laughs, without a hint of insight, is at best a missed opportunity and, at worst, pandering to bigots.
Magnus Shaw - writer, blogger and broadcaster
