Sordid and ugly, but dramatic truth

Press, 24 August 1977, Page 19

Sordid and ugly, but dramatic truth

“Johnny Go Home” was ugly, disturbing and sordid. But this was no pro-duction-line TV murder. It was true — a developing and bizarre account of fraud, cruelty, blackmail, perversion, and murder, with the added ingredient of bogus charities and doubtful religious organisations. It was not nice viewing — far from it. It was hardly the kind of thing comfortable, affluent, middle class people would want to know about — except, of course, in this case the bogus bishop was an outrage to public respectability. Here was television playing an important role in society, pointing up in a dramatic way what could happen to thousands of youngsters attracted to the bright lights of London. Yorkshire Television, like dozens of other channels around the world, had set out to produce a piece showing what happened to some of these young people, and the kind of environment and companions they might expect to meet.

What resulted was a striking example of how the medium can be used to present dramatically events leading up to a murder, as well as its macabre and horrifying aftermath, in the living rooms of millions. One can almost hear some viewers asking: Why inflict all that sordid stuff on us? The fact is that

society itself must bear the responsibility for what happened; and provided the portrayal is accurate, television has an important role to play in portraying what is happening. Those producing the programme obviously had to ask questions, probe deeper, and look behind the do-good facade of a man the public had come to respect, and even admire. At some stage a producer decided to commit

time and money to a project that might have been unproductive in television terms. As it turned out, the publicity on television assisted the police to find the killer of the pitiable young boy, Billy “Twotone” McPhee. And the police allowed television in, with all its equipment, lights, and gear, to record wnat happened. Yorkshire's programme, which lasted almost two hours, was a salutary and memorable piece, and it did cause an outcry in Britain — as well it might. The subject was debated in the House of Commons, questions were asked in the House of Lords, and special screenings were arranged at Westminster.

The programme was later up-dated and re-screened. From a current affairs producer’s point of view, of course, the programme had everything — the appeal of youngsters in need, lack of parental responsibility, glimpses of the shadowy world of the alcholic and drug addict, extreme religious practices, sexual assault, and the misuse of public noney for personal gain. The temptation that had to be resisted was to over-

exploit the material in the making of a television programme. Here and there sequences were unnecessarily long, but in the context of a country in which the self-styled Bishop of Medway was being encouraged by the authories, this was excusable. Perhaps there are not enough of these hardhitting social documentaries being produced for the postscript to the programme was hardly encouraging — the hostels spread across London were now closed down, it said, but the thousands of children flocking to the city each year still had nowhere to gd. But at least "Johnny Go Home” resulted in some soul-searching.

By

KEN COATES