It is, we were informed yesterday, "the latest in the long line of sexually explicit, violent and vulgar programmes that have, sadly, become the norm."

Okay, you have my attention, now tell me more.

It is "a shocking tale of depravity, explicit sexuality (bordering on pornography) and vile language".

Carry on, now I am really hooked.

Just what is this TV show, which "is animalistic, violent, corrupt and scary" and is, incredibly, aired on terrestrial television?

Actually, before you get all hot and bothered, it's just HBO's controversial True Blood, (or 'Intercourse With The Vampire' as one American wag dubbed it) which goes out on Channel 4 in Britain. Not surprisingly, it's shown here by TG4, the one Irish station that looks like it is staffed by people who actually watch television.

The above quotes come from a piece in yesterday's Daily Mail, which is so florid with indignation and righteous fury that it could have been written by Chris Morris as a parody of the Mail's tendency to go completely ballistic any time they see a TV show, a movie or a record they don't approve of.

Personally, I like True Blood, although on a purely critical level, it's not as good as it thinks it is.

Because HBO is a subscription channel, the remarkably strict content levels of American network television -- which are much more draconian than they are here -- don't apply.

Sometimes, this can work in its favour, with programmes like OZ and The Sopranos and Curb. But, equally, sometimes, this can give the programme makers too much latitude.

Let's put it this way, the two best ever TV vampire shows, Buffy and, later, Angel, benefited because creator Joss Whedon had to work within the standards and practice codes of ordinary network TV and this helped him become even more subversive within the genre.

But surely given the fact that True Blood is a post-watershed programme it can pretty much do what it wants, right? Wrong.

Because, inevitably, the British-based Daily Mail writer goes on to say that: "While Channel 4 might argue that it is screened after 9 pm, the watershed is not as effective as it once was. First the breakdown of the traditional family means that many children might not be supervised adequately . . ."

Aha -- there we have it, it is no longer your responsibility to keep an eye on your kids, it's up to television stations, cinemas and theatres.

The journalist who wrote this piece of hackneyed codswallop, Olivia Lichtenstein, is doing her best impression of Reverend Lovejoy's wife from The Simpsons, getting an attack of the vapours and squealing 'will someone please think about the children'.

The current threat du jour is, obviously, the internet.

Here, we are told, children are routinely exposed to a vile diet of pornography, bestiality and all sorts of unpleasant stuff.

They go onto chat rooms and get bullied; they set up a Facebook page and are lured to their inevitable death by a tech-savvy pervert.

Well, there's a simple way to avoid such pitfalls -- keep the computer in the living room where you can keep on eye on what they're logging on to.

And, frankly, I'm amazed that parents aren't more worried about the disgusting proliferation of beheadings and other atrocities which are online.

After all, which would worry you more -- your child watching some people having sex or being exposed to footage of a young, captured Russian conscript screaming, then gurgling pathetically as a terrorist slowly, deliberately, saws off his head with a blunt knife, all this done to the laughter and obvious delectation of the sub-human scum who surround him, while they taunt the other two kids they have captured, letting them know what's in imminent store for them?

Some images just don't leave you, and that is why it is vital to protect children properly and practically, not in some knee-jerk, condescending manner.

If you leave your kid in his bedroom with an internet connection and his own TV, then he is going to find some interesting stuff.

Which is precisely why the sensible parent makes sure he is not left alone to his own devices.

Because, let's be honest, only a fool would suggest that children can handle anything they watch. They can't. And, indeed, nor can most adults, which is why we have to be careful about what we permit ourselves to see.

The individual takes responsibility for himself; the parent takes responsibility for himself and his kids, and doesn't ask society to do a job that it is manifestly unsuited to.

In the meantime, let the rest of us, as adults, make informed decisions about what we watch without having our favourite shows neutered on the basis that some kid might get hold of it.

True Blood, TG4, Saturday, 12.40am

- Ian O'Doherty

Irish Independent