The Sun?s page 3 feature has now been going for 40 years, and some say is central to its success. However, the Conservative now say they want to halt the ?sexualisation of children?.
Would Cameron consider taking action or making a comment regarding the Sun?s ?page 3′ soft porn then? It is of course widely consumed in public spaces where children are often exposed to it.
Or would he not want to confront the paper in this way?
Some argue the Sun isn?t really aimed at kids, so it?s not really the same issue. But it?s culturally acceptable for adults leave it around kids of all ages in cafes, schools, hairdressers, and even at home.
I know I remember the unsettled and ashamed feeling in seeing such soft-porn in newspaper rags on the floor when I was too young.
Conversely, teenage girls may decide, for example, that these ?glamour-models? are a role-model for them before they have even become emotionally mature enough to make an adult decision.
In his explanation of the Conservatives pledge, Cameron talked of the importance of not exposing his children to Lily Allen lyrics because he thinks they aren?t appropriate. But Lily Allen too would argue that her songs aren?t necessarily made for consumption by children.
David Cameron should at least state whether he thinks newspapers with soft porn content are inappropriate to consume in public places, as he says of Lily Allen?s lyrics.
And if the Conservatives, or Cameron himself, would not consider raising the issue, then what is the point of their pledge?
Might it have more to do with their concern for the business interests of News International, than their wish to make Britain ?the most family-friendly country in the world??