This piece which appeared on the BBC site last week touched on a lot of issues that I feel very strongly about.

I’m only going to deal with one in particular here, but it’s also worth noting that I feel vindicated by the description of a climate of “managed fear” where “children” are constantly texting parents to re-assure them they’re safe. I feel it’s an extension of the problem our society has with its constant obsession with paedophiles. And we all know what Hannah thinks about that. Humph. A second issue raised that I have strong views on is the place of “good” news stories in today’s media agenda, but more on that another time.

The main thrust of the article is about the perception of “children” by the public and the media. Research has shown the most common portrayals of “young people” in news stories are as victims, celebrities or criminals. All three categories have the potential to be degrading to “young people” (given the “value” attached to “celebrity” these days…) and none are hugely useful labels for society as a whole.

In my professional life lately, I have written a number of broadly positive stories about “young people.” This included a feature where I went on a police drive around to meet the local hoodie population who, if you believed certain local councillors are to be found regularly shagging in local greenery and are constantly plastered. Yes, some of the people I met were slightly drunk, but none of them were being hugely anti-social. Three lads even broke into an impromptu dance routine for us, playing an mp3 file on one of their mobiles. Happen in London, it would not.

There are certain sections of Ludlow who like to think there is an anti-social behaviour problem here. If you ask me, they have no idea. Ludlow is a paradise compared to numerous larger places. Yet, negative coverage of “the young” nationwide has had a trickle down effect on perceptions of “the yoof” here and though there are some troublemakers, the majority are guilty of nothing more than wanting something to do.

So, where I can counter this with positive stories about “young people”, I do.

Now, you are probably noticing the proliferation of quotation marks as I have attempted to describe that section of the population which is not adult. The problem is this: it is incredibly difficult to write about anyone under 21 without sounding patronising/stupid/just plain wrong.

In my experience, and I was one once, young people don’t call themselves “young people.” At the age of 23, with a full-time job, I would happily refer to myself as a young professional. But I tie myself in knots when trying to refer to people younger than myself.
Children - only covers people upto the age of 12
Teenagers - only covers people aged 13 - 19
Kids - patronising
Youngsters - even more so
Youth - has connotations of referring only to males and, at a push, Nazi brainwashing
Young people - too generic, too constructed, I’m technically a young person, (I know I am, everyone I meet over 60, and there’s quite a few of those around here, tells me I am) but I’m not convinced that term is meant to apply to me.

You see, back then (and now, if I’m honest), I didn’t think of myself as a young person. I was (and am) Hannah. Hannah likes watching Have I Got News For You and reading Discworld novels. Hannah likes going to the theatre and to the cinema and watching live bands. And concerts. Hannah has a diverse range of interests not linked to her age.

I think what I’m trying to see is that we need to start seeing people who aren’t legally adults as people, before we see them as anything else. Yes, some of their needs will be specifically related to their age, but they are human first and foremost. And they should be treated as such rather than demonised on the one hand or hedged around with patronising jargon on the other.