It was pretty obvious what position the panel would take on this subject, and I'm by no means condemning them for taking this view. It's their opinion, and everyone should be entitled to their opinions.They clearly couldn't understand why people would watch such videos, including, as they mentioned, executions such as beheadings and hangings to chucking puppies into a river. One person even expressed there puzzlement and fear of these people by calling viewers of these videos sociopaths. Now, something strange struck me here as I got a whiff of hypocrisy. 'Whiff' may be the wrong word, since the hypocrisy shown here was about as subtle as getting your head stuck up an elephants backside. For they actually showed two of the films that they were discussing and deemed as a 'nasty'! Bare in mind that this is around 10 o'clock in the morning. Sure one could argue that these two videos (one in which a woman throws a cat into a bin and one in which someone throws a couple of puppies into a river) are not particularly violent or gruesome (compared to the executions), but that's beside the point since The Wright Stuff panel discussed them alongside the more 'hardcore' Internet videos. My main argument here is that unlike videos on the Internet in which viewers chose to search for them and watch them, these two videos were shown on national television without any warning whatsoever.
So far you may be thinking that I'm condemning these videos and taking a similar view to The Wright Stuff guys, but that couldn't be more wrong. I strongly believe that adults should be allowed to watch anything they wish. In my opinion, NOTHING should be banned or censored. However there is a very clear difference between someone finding a 'nasty' video and someone unexpectedly watching one without warning. It was almost a way of shocking the audience into being disgusted by the videos and therefore would provide them with a position on this argument - one that is against these films.
