Published: 23 March 2012
Region: UK
By Radman Selmic
The Channel 4 reality show Make Bradford British has attracted public attention with its ambition to shake up the multiculturalism debate through a progressive media experiment aimed at tearing down social barriers that divide communities in the UK, and Bradford in particular.
The project was a brave and good intentioned attempt to approach the multiculturalism debate in an entertaining way, and so bring it to the attention of the mainstream audience, who would normally shy away from the usual dull panel of experts debating the issues on news and current affairs programmes. However, it did have its flaws.
The series starts with selection of participants from diverse communities through a citizenship test (to see the interesting full results of the survey on ‘Britishness’ commissioned by Channel 4 click here). Amusingly and indicatively, the test resulted in failure for more than 85% of the candidates from all ethnic backgrounds, all of them already British citizens (including ‘native’ white Britons), and put into sharp focus the central question around which producers start to develop their theme – what is it that makes the participants British?
Most media commentators have been harsh in their criticism of the series. At one stage in the TV show, participants were paired off and had to spend a couple of days with their partner’s family in order to experience cultural difference from inside the home. As media critics pointed out this is reminiscent of another reality show, Wife Swap, also from Channel 4. It was, according to Lanre Bankare in The Guardian, who is originally from Bradford, “nothing new or particularly controversial, just tired and formulaic reality TV.”
He said:”The Big Brother meets Wife Swap format is designed to create conflict and ignite sparks to create ‘must-watch television’. Mix that with some people with views that are sure to clash and it’s an easy win for producers. Somewhere along the way, the idea of saving Bradford from itself seemed to get lost”.
Despite this, the show, although dubious from some cultural and sociological perspectives, seems to generate more positive than harmful effects. It does not reinforce bigotry but instead offers an interesting insight into the views of British people from diverse ethnic backgrounds, and despite what some might consider the banal and formulaic format of swapping places, the format is usefully applied to reveal the level of prejudice at work relating to social and cultural differences, and how participants made an effort to overcome those prejudices. In one heart-warming example, an average white English guy and a British Pakistani Muslim, find common ground and even friendship.
However, the series had two obvious flaws. First, the show neglects to provide social or economic context for discussing racial and multicultural issues. Racism, nationalism and ethnic exclusion are also bound up with the social realities of poverty and deprivation. No one mentioned this and nor were participants encouraged to take it up. Bradford is a town where economic hardship is a fact of life and it has its impact on segregated communities.
Secondly, participants struggled to identify their Britishness, and the producers made no attempt to help with this and try and explain what this might mean or explain that this might be a difficult concept to define. Instead of illustrating how “being British” is a collective social construct — like being American, French, Japanese, or Algerian, for instance — participants were pressured by organisers to find some concrete common “social substance” that makes them ‘British’ (something even experts might struggle with). This led taxi driver Ahmed, during his challenging night shift ferrying around British revellers, to suggest that being British seems to be about “going on piss ups and getting blathered” (going out to get drunk and over achieving on the objective).
Moreover, when regular pub goers asked Sabbiyah, a well educated, British born Muslim girl, why she wears a scarf instead of mini skirt, they were preparing terrain for their final conclusion – if she wants to be a British she has to dress like they do. By pressing the participants to reveal what Britishness means, organisers indirectly and unintentionally stayed on the same side as the bigoted standpoints expressed in the pub.
However, overall the show was a good and well-intentioned attempt by Channel 4 to approach the multiculturalism and ‘Britishness’ debate from a different and more interesting angle, and they should be congratulated for treading where other broadcasters either fear or cannot be bothered to tread. The producers should just try and do it with a little bit more thought and finesse next time.
Image courtesy of loveproductions.co.uk