The response after the first episode was unbelievable.
Social media exploded with disgust at the ‘scrounger lifestyle’ those on James
Turner Street seemed to be enjoying. Those unlucky enough to have been featured
on the show were bombarded with abuse and death threats. People blamed the
welfare state for giving too many ‘hand-outs’. Shouts of ‘scum’ and ‘get a job!’
filled Facebook and Twitter. All of this was on the very day that George Osborne
announced his plans to cut £10million from the budget for welfare spending. All
very convenient; let’s just nicely cover up this horrific news with a poisonous
programme that at worst will merely justify the need for cuts.
What ‘Benefits Street’ neglected to show is the thousands
upon thousands of people who rely on benefits simply to survive. The single
mother who is faced with skipping meals so her child can eat, the man who
spends all day, every day pitting his job application forms against hundreds of
others, the pensioner who faces choosing between heating or eating, the family
wondering how the hell they’re going to afford to pay the Bedroom Tax- for
these people, benefits are crucial for them just to make it through another
week. This is the reality for so many
in Britain. If ‘Benefits Street’ was ever serious about producing a truthful
account, the demographics included would have been entirely different. By far
the largest proportion of welfare spending in Britain goes on pensions, to
people who have paid in to the system for all of their lives. 20% goes on
supporting those who are already in work, but earning so little that they are
well below the poverty line. Why was this not represented? Because ‘Benefits
Street’ would prefer to show a distorted version that riles the general public
as opposed to a hard, unpalatable truth.
The most damaging thing about ‘Benefits Street’ and its
parody of life in working-class communities is the way it is designed to turn
people against the poor. Shortly after the first episode aired, some of those
who were filmed spoke out about the lies the production team had fed them. They
had agreed to take part in a show about community spirit and togetherness. There
are rumours that the cans of beer and cigarettes seen in the hands of those on
the show were provided by the production team, which, if true, is a disgusting
way to enforce the stereotypes it was seeking to portray. But that’s the whole
point; the producers of ‘Benefits Street’ had the opportunity to put across any
message they wanted to. When faced with false promises, skilled editors and no
voice of their own, the residents of James Turner Street never stood a chance.
So many of them have spoken out about how their lives have been ruined by the
show, with abuse being hurled at them in the street and family members
disowning them. It’s all too easy for people to blame those on the programme
for their situation- one tweet I saw said that, as we all receive an education
in this country, there’s no excuse for not being able to read or write, and
thus get a job. However, if at twelve years old, you’re going to school hungry
with an unwashed uniform, worrying about whether your parents will be sober
enough to function when you return, doing your homework probably isn’t at the
forefront of your mind. Everyone is where they are in life due to a huge range
of different circumstances. To judge, or to tar everyone with the same brush is
more than unfair, it’s dangerous.
So, when I consider who I’m really disgusted by in the ‘Benefits
Street’ controversy, it is the vile, immoral production team who are at the
receiving end. To create such a harmful, prejudiced account requires a lack of
a conscience and a vindictiveness that turns my stomach. In my opinion, there
is no better place to be than in the middle of a working-class community. And
it is heartbreaking that one twisted, distorted representation can shape so
many opinions of what it means to depend on benefits.