Why would an adult want to waatch a bunch of 15 year olds getting naked and having sex on tv? There is only one reason.

A Parent. With their child and there is no nudity on the show.

Have you watched any of the clips on the link I provided?

Here.
I'll provide it again.

http://www.bbcamerica.com/video/skins.jsp

The episode in question hasn't aired yet.

Subway Latest Sponsor to Pull Ads From MTV's Controversial Show 'Skins'

In yet-another blow to MTV’s controversial show “Skins,” Subway has pulled out of all advertising spots amid allegations of the show’s use of child pornography, according to the Hollywood Reporter.
While ads for the sandwich chain appeared on the premiere episode last week, a rep for Subway tells THR that they “will not be advertising on [Monday’s] episode.”

Subway is the fourth major sponsor for the show to pull out of the show’s advertising after the Parents Television Council (PTC) began targeting advertisers last week. Taco Bell was the first company, followed by Wrigley and General Motors, as FOX411 first reported.

Tim Winter, president of the PTC, said in a statement FOX411, "Every single advertiser who sponsored the premiere episode of 'Skins' is not only endorsing but glorifying teen drug and alcohol abuse, not to mention a plethora of baseless sexual content."

Last week, reports of a 17-year-old actor alternating between nudity and an appeared state of arousal also prompted the PTC to call on Congress to investigate the show for child pornography.

"In addition to the sexual content on the show involving cast members as young as 15, PTC counted 42 depictions and references to drugs and alcohol in the premiere episode. It is clear that Viacom has knowingly produced material that may well be in violation of [several anti–child pornography laws],” they said in a statement.

But MTV is standing by the show, telling FOX411 "We are confident that the episodes of 'Skins' will not only comply with all applicable legal requirements, but also with our responsibilities to our viewers.

“We also have taken numerous steps to alert viewers to the strong subject matter so that they can choose for themselves whether it is appropriate."

The PTC is also aiming to convince L’Oreal, Foot Locker, Orbit chewing gum and Extra chewing gum to pull spots from the show.

http://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/2011/01/24/subway-latest-company-pull-ads-mtvs-controversial-skins/#

I say it's overblown. The first episode was Good and nothing Sexual happened there. Maybe watch An episode and see for yoUrself. I think alot of Flak against it is by People who never saw it.

It's on an upcoming episode. Read the articles.

I'm on my iPhone so Internet is wonky. But if that scene is edited out than all this would be pointless. I am bias for the show I know.

The PTC and fox news.

I should have guessed.

Forward into the past.

Then they are tampering with evidence.

Pulling at straws again, eh?

honestly though, MTV stopped being family friendly years ago

its not really the place for kids who might watch the 'reality' tv believing its actually a viable reality for everyone or for kids whose parents wish more age appropriate television for them

its mostly preteens and college aged people engaged in drugs or promiscuity,,,or worse

spoiled adults who throw tantrums and behave like civil criminals every time they dont get their way, whichever show you pick


I would accompany any teen watching that channel and not even bother having pre teens have acces to it

It's 15 to 17 year olds so it's nOt like the actorS have no idea whatS going on. The BBC version was great and while edgy it was good.

Oh nO! It showed tWo underage girls kissinG! Child porn!

Technically, yes that would be.

Let's see who the PTC actually is.

Didn't the ptc hate sesame street a while back? And it Was a good ep tonight about A girl who Finds out she lesbian. Omg child lesbian poRn!

Uproar over 'Skins' is a blessing for the show

NEW YORK — You gotta love a show that can upstage MTV's raunchy reality hit, "Jersey Shore."

"Skins" has done it.

In a week of TV happenings that included Ricky Gervais going comedically postal at the Golden Globes, Regis Philbin announcing his retirement from his daytime show, and the return of "American Idol," "Skins" soared to most-talked-about status, even reducing the reprise of attention-sucking "Jersey Shore" to the level, for the moment, of "Snooki who?"

Way to go, MTV! For a network that's no stranger to provocative fare or controversy, here's another buzz-blessed smash!

Most people know by now that "Skins" is a steamy scripted drama about overwrought teens, spun off from the acclaimed British series of the same name. It began its 10-episode season last Monday on the wings of heavy promotion by MTV, generally positive reviews and high anticipation by its young target audience.

There was also a smattering of pre-opening outcry, mainly as an inevitable protest from the Parents Television Council, a TV watchdog group. It declared that "'Skins' may well be the most dangerous television show for children that we have ever seen," which had to be as welcome a critical rave as MTV could wish.

The premiere of "Skins" drew 3.3 million viewers, 1.2 million of them under 18, the Nielsen Co. reported. This was a robust turnout, though hardly in the league of "Jersey Shore," which, a week ago, seized 8.4 million viewers for its Season 3 debut

But this is only the beginning for "Skins." With its new wave of publicity, it has nowhere to go but up.

On Thursday, a front-page story in The New York Times introduced the notion that "Skins" may — with the emphasis on "may" — be trafficking in kiddie porn.

"Skins" producers have boasted of its gritty realism. In that spirit, many of the teenage characters are played by actors who are 17 or younger, and therefore legally minors.

Executives at MTV "in recent days" have become concerned that some scenes "may violate federal child pornography statutes," the Times reported, without naming those executives.

Faced with the possibility that future episodes of the show may be breaking the law, those unnamed MTV executives "ordered the producers to make changes to tone down some of the most explicit content," the Times reported.

Oddly, the only potentially problematic scene the Times identified occurs in the third episode, airing Jan. 31. Jesse Carere, a 17-year-old actor playing the tragicomic character Chris, is shown from behind, naked, striding down the street. In the preview of that episode provided to critics, the played-for-laughs sequence lasts about 10 seconds, and it's impossible to tell whether Carere was really in the buff when shooting the scene.

In the face of brewing controversy, MTV said "Skins" is a show "that addresses real-world issues confronting teens in a frank way.

"We review all of our shows and work with all of our producers on an ongoing basis to ensure our shows comply with laws and community standards," the statement continued. "We are confident that the episodes of 'Skins' will not only comply with all applicable legal requirements, but also with our responsibilities to our viewers."

Any scenes that might leave MTV, well, exposed will be up to the lawyers to determine, if it comes to that. In the four episodes shared with critics, "Skins" shows almost no skin. Despite all the talk of sex, there is almost no explicit sex depicted.

Nonetheless, by raising the specter of kiddie porn, the Times story made "Skins" notorious with new urgency. And it gave the show's detractors a fresh new front for attack. (Viewers who condemn a show like, say, "Jersey Shore," must acknowledge at least that its degenerate house mates are adults, whether they act like it or not.)

Within hours of the story, the PTC called for the U.S. Senate and House Judiciary Committees and the Department of Justice to "immediately open an investigation regarding child pornography and exploitation on MTV's 'Skins.'"

Story: Racy MTV show 'Skins' is losing an advertiser
..Meanwhile, Taco Bell announced it would pull its advertising from "Skins," explaining in a statement, "We've decided that the show is not a fit for our brand and have moved our advertising to other MTV programming."

Though Taco Bell will be missing, "Skins" will air its second episode Monday at 10 p.m. EST. People who would never have considered watching it, who may never have even heard of it until the current uproar, will likely be there sampling in droves.

They'll be watching a show that may or may not have been edited to correct what may or may not have broken the law, but has clearly gotten under everybody's skin.

As a publicity spectacle, this couldn't be going better if MTV had masterminded it


http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/41197672/ns/today-entertainment/

Just a bunch of old folks with nothing left to do.

Most are religous zealots, ex-politicians, and Disney execs.

Ummmmmm, why are you defending kiddie porn?