Bad Mo’ Fo’

So last night saw the launch of Channel Fours over 30’s channel More Four. I was chiefly interested in watching The Daily Show as I intimated yesterday, but I stuck around to watch “A Very Social Secretary” a “satirical drama” about former home secretary David Blunkett’s affair with married ultra right wing rich-bitch Kimbery Fortier.

It wasn’t very good, very funny or the least bit satirical.

Blunkett was portrayed throughout as an arrogant, self-deluded bully while Fortier was characterised as a selfish, thoroughly spoiled brat with little concern for anyone other than herself. Ah duh; like we hadn’t figured that out for ourselves.

Their relationship, as unbelievable as it was in real life was even more difficult to swallow when fictionalised, thanks to two dimensional character development and the annoying, stilted performance from the usually excellent Bernard Hill.

Previews told us that the star of the show was going to be Robert Lindsay as Tony Blair, but his portrayal was pretty lifeless and nothing we haven’t seen before.

Overall, this was tripe masquerading as satire; lurid tittle-tattle made drama with a few tasteless blind jokes flung in for the slow viewers.

My main problem with “A Very Social Secretary”, apart from the fact that is was poorly written and unfunny was More Fours insistence that it was “satire”. It most certainly was not. For me satire raises a political point, counterbalancing whatever it criticises. A true satirist nails his or her colours to the mast, using humour and wit to say something that could easily be put plainly. Thus the shortcomings of the target are exposed and an alternative to the target’s arguments are at least alluded to. Plus you get a laugh.

Of course, if you make no political or socially relevant point, the problem of fulfilling satires secondary function ceases to exist.

The makers of the show will tell you the satire lies in themes such as the “fake” nature of the labour party leadership and the age old story of how absolute power corrupts absolutely. Certainly that theme is alluded to (indeed, the drama features a character slung in simply to clumsily make that very point; a local party worker who appears once to set her up and then later to tell Blunkett he’s “changed”) but it is so poorly handled as to render it utterly inert.

“A Very Social Secretary” was little more than poorly performed character assassination dressed up as satire. Television I consider to be profoundly damaging, as it gives ammunition to those who would see our tradition of satire blur into actionable libel, limiting opportunities for those who actually have an important point to make.

Here's writer Alistair Beaton in an article attempting to defend the film, comparing himself to Swift and seemingly suggesting he would rather have written a post 9/11 film about Tony Blair.