The controversy surrounding the underage patron of the Zen nightclub remained among the major news stories for more than a week.

The dance routine in which she participated provoked great consternation when all was revealed in the media, although undoubtedly it must have drawn applause on the night.

The story’s prominence may have been because of her sensual antics or because she was only 15 years old – and a pastor’s daughter to boot. It should have served as a good opportunity for the society to examine itself. 

While the behaviour of the teenager at Zen was unacceptable, much of the recriminations directed at the girl and her family suggest a lack of honest introspection.

It is wrong to direct so much venom at one person and one family and not seriously examine the roots of the sordid exhibition. The display with the African hip hop artiste and the promise of a prize trip to Africa reveal much about the people we have become – and about our gullibility.

If we are shocked by the activity at the nightclub, then it must be that our eyes are closed to much that takes place at several of our fete venues and on our streets from one Carnival to another, to the degenerate values that so often our own music extols, and to the music video cable channels which are accessible to all, offering their vulgar lessons for free.

The young woman is not a visitor from another country; she is homegrown – nurtured in the local cultural environment in which she is subsumed.

With communication technology the way it is today geographical distance is no barrier to our young people acquiring knowledge and information – including that which may not be helpful to their true development.

We ignore to our peril the various forms of new media and the attraction they hold – and that is even without taking into account the actual messages that are sent through them. Pity our young people.

Continuing media education

The Church, for its part, does not see itself, first of all, as a censoring authority in matters that are morally threatening. It believes “more is obtained by reasoned explanation than by prohibition”.

It does expect though that Church communities and citizens in general will take seriously their moral and social responsibilities. It places particular emphasis on media education seeing it as a way to “inoculate” all of us the recipients – but particularly the young – against questionable media content.

A recent World Communication Day (WCD) message from the Pontifical Council for Social Communications, Ethics in Communications, states: “Today everybody needs some form of continuing media education, whether by personal study or participation in an organised programme or both. More than just teaching about techniques, media education helps people form standards of good taste and truthful moral judgment, an aspect of conscience formation (para. 25).”

It ought to be clear that there is not enough of this media education taking place: neither in our homes where some television viewing restrictions ought to be applied nor in our schools which ought to support the lessons and training learnt at home.

Another WCD message, Pornography and Violence,says “children and young people must be taught how to be discriminating, informed consumers of media (para. 24).”

How often at our school parties and bazaars do we make a point of setting standards for the kind of music to be played and the behaviour that will be tolerated?

After all that has been said about the Zen incident, it will be a shame if there is not some deep reflection on our permissiveness and passivity and, if as a local Church, we choose to treat lightly the subject of communication and media education.