Jon Gaunt and the Page 3 Debate

James Roberts, Features Editor, spoke to radio presenter and former Sun journalist Jon Gaunt for his thoughts on banning The Sun on campus as the voting comes to a close.

Jon Gaunt is livid, and predictably so. After a lifetime dabbling in tabloid journalism, Gaunt has built a reputation as the lion-hearted defender of even the most controversial actions of the British red-tops.

With his cutting, ruthlessly effective, Midlands-man-on-the-street approach to political debate, Gaunt has utilised the right to speak freely as often as he has battled in television studios to defend it. And, as he explains, nothing angers him more than “banning a newspaper because feminist militants don’t like it.”

Image Credits- The Guardian

Gaunt is adamant that the desire to ban Page 3 is exclusively driven by hatred and ignorance.

Despite his bull-in-a-china-shop approach to defending a free press, he seems to genuinely soften when defending the girls printed on the page. “I’ve met Page 3 girls”, he remarks, “and these feminists would be surprised to find that they are more intelligent and assertive than these Exeter militants”.

To him, as an industry insider, Page 3 is “quite different to the pornography” with which it is often equated. It represents a good career for women; as he puts it, an aspiration “as healthy as a working class lad wanting to become a footballer”.

An interesting comparison, perhaps, but not one which is relevant in the Gaunt family home. “I wouldn’t want my daughters becoming Page 3 girls”, he authoritatively avows. One cannot help but wonder if he would note his son aspiring to become a footballer with the same prudence.

Regardless, for him, Page 3 is not the exercise in female exploitation that its opponents would have us believe. He is adamant that “it’s more like a saucy seaside postcard” than a reflection of some sort of feminist patriarchy.

As he puts it in his own unrepentant style, “it’s an institution, and nothing to get your knickers in a twist about”. Perhaps it reflects a deeper problem in society? “No one buys The Sun for Page 3”, Gaunt reminds me, “it’s just part of the menu”.

For Jon Gaunt, Page 3 is just part and parcel of a free press; an innocent, slap-and-tickle reflection of British culture fuelled by a wealth of gifted and ambitious young women. For him, to criticise Page 3 is “to do a disservice to intelligent young women by labelling them as thick and helpless”.

Whether many students would agree with that might be questionable, but he certainly believes whole-heartedly in crusading for free speech, no matter where it calls him. And, at the end of the day, it will be for Exeter students to decide whether they join in that crusade, or do not agree that Page 3 is as harmless as Gaunt would have us believe. His unapologetically defiant message to those that don’t? “Calm down, dears”.

Read more of the interview with Jon Gaunt in the next issue of Exeposé.

James Roberts, Features Editor

Banning The Sun: Boobs Aren't News

Leader of the, “Vote YES to boycotting The Sun on campus!” campaign Virginia Walsh makes the case for banning The Sun from Guild outlets until the bare breasts are removed from Page 3 in the Guild referendum because, “It is 2013… Boobs aren’t news.”

We are asking you to vote YES to the boycott of The Sun because, frankly, someone needs to tell them. As the online petition says, “George Alagiah doesn’t say, ‘And now let’s look at Courtney, 21 from Warrington’s bare breasts,’ in the middle of the 6 O’Clock News”. It is ridiculous that such images are accepted alongside the news, in a family paper, stored at child height. The problem with Page 3 is that it affects more than just those who choose to buy it. It impacts men’s perceptions of women in a very dangerous way, as well as women’s perceptions of themselves. Rupert Murdoch has hinted that he is considering removing the bare boobs already for a dubious, “glamorous” replacement, so hopefully with more pressure he will get rid of them altogether.

“The problem with Page 3 is that it affects more than just those who choose to buy it. It impacts men’s perceptions of women in a very dangerous way, as well as women’s perceptions of themselves.”
Photo Credit: No More Page 3

I raised the idea of a vote with the Guild because I felt that a strong response from students to boycott The Sun until the removal of boobs in the paper would be an effective way of supporting the national campaign. It will show that students are not willing to ignore the irresponsible journalism of Murdoch’s paper. There are over 100,000 signatures on the petition, and for those in doubt the comments section testifies that these images really do negatively affect men, women and children.

I disagree with our opposition, who believe that the ban removes their freedoms to information, given that the paper can be bought five minutes from campus and brought to campus, whilst The Sun will continue to be accessible online. The ban can’t be deemed censorship when people have had the chance to vote in the referendum, which has been actively defended on both sides.

At the end of the day, democratic policy-making is majoritarian, it has to be or nothing would get done in Parliament. We have the chance to tell the powerful media giants in this country that we believe Page 3 is outdated and harmful, while realistically only imposing a five minute walk on a small minority of consumers.

At the core of their argument, the ‘no’ campaign believe that the issue is not something that students should be able to vote on at all. To quote Spiderman, “with great power comes great responsibility”. It is clear The Sun is not a responsible publication, and we are in a position where we can use our powers of protest to challenge this.

This vote is our chance to decide whether we want to support No More Page Three, or create a very loud silence within the ranks of top universities who are pledging their support to such a positive campaign.  These include Cambridge, St Edmunds Hall and Brasenose College, Oxford, Durham University, London School of Economics, Edinburgh, Sheffield, Newcastle, Dundee and Manchester Metropolitan.

Lego have also expressed their support by cancelling their advertising in the newspaper, whilst Girlguiding UK are also supporting the campaign. A ‘no’ vote would send out the message that University of Exeter students are in support of Page 3, which is extremely damaging to both our credibility as a university and to the campaign.

Many would also argue that if we don’t like to see boobs with our news, then we shouldn’t buy it! Unfortunately Page 3 affects many more people than just those who choose to read the paper. Presenting women in this way for the last forty three years is obviously outdated, and actually harmful in shaping attitudes towards women, as objects to be readily available for male sexual gratification. Most people would agree that newspapers should not be allowed to print, for example, racist comments, and while Page 3 does not explicitly demand men to view women negatively, there is much evidence to suggest how damaging such images reinforcing women’s sexual availability can be when placed alongside the news.

The most important reason for you to vote YES this week is to support the No More Page 3 campaign nationally, adding vital pressure to the editors of the paper and maintaining the national media’s interest in the campaign. While the news consistently reflects that women still aren’t being taken as seriously as men in our developed world, it is more relevant than ever for university students to put their name to such a positive campaign. It is central to the campaign to create news and inspire debate, bringing the issue to a huge range of people.

That The Sun is not currently stocked in the Guild shop reflects just how overly dramatic it is to use arguments of ‘censorship’- if the paper is not sold for economic reasons, it can hardly be called censorship, in the same way that if the student body consent to remove the paper from its shops, it can hardly be called ‘tyranny’. I would call it democracy and protest at its finest, because there is no tangible loss but a very tangible gain.

Virginia Walsh, Leader of the “Vote YES to boycotting The Sun on campus!” campaign.

Click here to vote YES on the Guild referendum. For the view from the opposition, read Harry Chamberlain’s Banning The Sun: Nothing Short of Censorship. Did you vote? If so, which way? If not, why not? Leave a comment below or write to the Comment team at the Exeposé Comment Facebook Group or on Twitter @CommentExepose.