±«Óãtv

This is now, what? ...the fourth programme that Dooley has fronted exposing child labour/ abuse in conflict zones for the ±«Óãtv?

While I wish her every success in her burgeoning broadcasting career (better than flogging perfume at Luton airport, which I understand was her previous occupation) I cannot help but wonder what kind of contribution these programmes are really making to the development debate.

I dont doubt Dooley's passion and sense of injustice about what she has encountered, but is it really appropriate to send someone like her, with clearly such limited knowledge of the subject, to report from places like the DRC, Nepal and West Africa?

The fact is that Zaire/ Congo has been in a state of huge internal conflict/ full blown war since independence.
And, like most African nations, the country is NOT intrinsically poor. It's home to one of the world's biggest deposits of coltan, the mineral used in mobile phone production, as well as some of the continents biggest timber and rubber reserves. (The Belgians didnt go there for the climate)

But it's suffered from the ruinous reign of a series of despots, most recently President Mobutu Sese Soko, one of Africa's most corrupt and kleptocratic rulers.
He bankrolled the genocide in Rwanda, while at the same time ripping off vast inflows of international aid, the like of which Ms Dooley is already promoting here in her blog. (More charity from the West being the perpetual answer to Africa's problems, of course.)

These situations are NEVER simple and more money is ALMOST never the answer.
Sorry Stacey, but we cant save these people - more to the point they dont really want us to.
It's fifty years now since independence. Africa has to get it's own house in order, and we have to let them.

I am watching this program on ±«Óãtv3. I have never taken part in any Blog or chat or similar, but this time I just could not help myself.

I do not agree with this format. I do not agree with what this TV presenter says, and I think that the way she treats these children is not adecuate. Her patronising attitude, and her excessive sensibility is an embarrasment for herself and the ±«Óãtv.
How can she ask those children: "How many of you have killed someone?" I just have no words to describe the total lack of tact and respect that that shows. Why they should be ready to answer such a thing as if they were being asked how many of them has had ice cream before????
And then is when she just starts to cry in front of the boy who is telling her the monstruosities that he has been forced to comete. Do not cry. If it herts to you, try to figure how they must be feeling.
I do not like this.
Thank you for the oportunity to say it.

I was just watching this program, and i think that Stacey Dooley is doing a absolutly a wonderful thing for those people in the program.
I would just like to say that while i was watching this i got a bit emotional, i really really felt for some of these children and what they have gone through.
I think what Stacey Dooley and the bbc are doing is amazing by making this issue more known.
I would love the chance to help people from situations like this.
:) xxx

I just finished to watch "Kids with Guns: Stacey Dooley Investigates" on ±«Óãtv 3... I got tears... By the same ages, Catholic Missionaries made me studying, learning Latin, becoming a real man... those children have been made soldiers... It is really our responsibility as Congolese to make change happened... Unfortunately, it seems that the change makers have not enought supports. There is something that need to be done: to train new Congolese change makers; new Congolese leaders... The decision for USA to train 800 soldiers in DRC will not solve the Congo problem. We need to train 800 new leaders; 800 new persons who can run the country... Unfortunately... where could we find this new godfather... for the change...

I think Stacey, you have done a fantastic job and you are brave, courageous, empathetic and compassionate. That is why you are so good. I like your honesty and humanity. There will always be people complaining saying "this is so complex" from behind their desks, there are always people who want to decide who can speak and who cannot, whilst they themselves do nothing. The world is full of policy makers with Phds. You speak directly to ordinary people and bring something into our living room that we perhaps would rather not know about but when we know we cannot ignore. My step children are 6,11 and 14. Harrowing what these children have gone through. Well done for bringing it to us. Thanks.

I had never heard of Stacey Dooley and I think that ±«Óãtv3 is aimed at rather younger viewers than myself, so when I saw the trailer for this programme I wondered how sending such a young (on the face of it - ordinary) girl to the Congo would make a good and honest programme. But, I have to say that I thought Stacey did a really great job with her unorthodox style. She was just being herself - sweet, empathetic and curious - I thought she brought out the young people so well - being kind (and of-course young and pretty!) people were curious and interested in her too, and this came through well in the programme. I know quite a bit about this subject, but I saw it in a different way - so refreshing not to have a white middle-class balding male talking-head fronting such a prgramme. To the people who think she did not show respect for the children - I disagree - I think she did and they knew that she respected them. Stacey is anything but ordinary and she brought to light a subject that many people watching probably knew nothing about.

Great job Stacey, and you are to be congratulated for your bravery in going there in the first place. I wish I could help one of these children. I would love to buy them something to help them start a business or whatever!

Best wishes

Being from the Congo, I 'd like to say that stacey did a good job and I believe she's the 1st person to report about child soldiers in the D R Congo.

I mean, I grew up in Bukavu (east of congo/ Sud Kivu)and I remember during the conflict which started in 1996, I can still see the rebels lead by Kabila the father when they entered Bukavu via Rwanda, came into our school to kidnap youth and i remember hearing gun shots, teachers cutting short the lesson and running away, everyone shouting "Sauve qui peut" (save yourselves) i remember leaving my kits behind and running with my best friend, as we ran, i remember seing soldiers chasing pupils and me and my friend kept running without looking back. it was plain "chaos" the "mighty" congo was in war no-one was prepared even the police or the army, u could see The congolese soldiers taking off their uniforms and droping their guns without a fight.

as we ran a bullet hit my friend on his back and fell on the ground with blood on his shirt, I went back and dragged him to a banana field at the back of the school and he cried i don't wanna die nd i did the same, i sat der holding him in my arms full of blood and he said take me home when it's over. anywho I don't think money is what we'll help resolve this problem, because the budget that will be given for charities will end up in the corrupt pockets of the government.

I think one european countries should put a veto on weapons purchased by countries torn up by war and two don't provide financial aid to those countries until they can prove, they're able to use their own resources effectively to help their population.

the congo has a lot of resources to survive without foreign aids, but it just sad that those in power only think about themselves

I agree with the last persons comments. I found this programme unbelieveably patronising and almost embarrasing to watch. What was Tracy thinking when she burt into tears in front of hardened young men who have raped and killed.What did she think she was doing when she touched them the way she did?? again in a patronising way that must have been very confusing for them. This clearly shows a lack of understanding of the culture she was is ,let alone the experiences of these young men.Her 'terror' at the 'unruliness' of the young men when favouritism was shown was again an example of her unsuitability for this programme.

I agree with the comments above from Pamela and others that Stacey is not the appropriate person to document such an intricate and political mine field topic of the Congo.

The true dangers of the Congo were not highlighted and exposed in this documentary. Rape, pillaging, child kidnapping, internal warfare, weapons, poverty and a country ruled by fear is what this is really about.

The fact the charities are working with the army is a sign there is some good work being carried out BUT Stacey should have really exposed how this "Business" works i.e. the army takes on 5,10, 50, 100 children away from their families and other factions and gives back 2 as a diplomatic act to keep the charities happy. They might also require a bribe to get these children back. THERE IS ALWAYS a cost!

These children who are kidnapped for soldiers are tortured, starved, raped and forced to do unspeakable acts! This did not really come across. The girl they had on the programme who had her own business was a success story but for many they are raped 100s - 1000s of times during abduction periods as "SOLDIERS", this is the REALITY!

±«Óãtv3 is supposed to be cutting edge and I congratulate them on some of the previous programme of underlying problems in the world they bring to light BUT this was a poor use of license fees to show an IGNORANT individual talking about a subject she does not know about, clearly has not researched and has made a light situation of.

Investigative Journalism is about presenting a factual and balanced view of situations and this clearly does not tick these boxes.

I, as a person who had no real previous knowledge of child soldiers, found the programme very moving. I'm guessing that the programme was aimed at people like me as they used someone who was naive but open to experiences. No matter what your opinion, it can't do any harm to highlight this issue, create conversations and stir up empathy in ordinary folk.
I found the comment about Stacey crying infront of one of the children really interesting: it was, maybe, innappropriate in terms of how he must have felt (and I felt uncomfortable at that point), but there is also a huge amount of dissociation going on for the children and maybe she showed him that this is not normal, this is not what you have to do anymore.
I feel that this programme was mostly a positive venture.

Wow,I mean,I do understand why some people,especially the more clued up about it,might feel that Stacy is not really the appropriate presenter to send into the Congo but come on...
At least she is doing something.One comment said that the,"Africans have to get their own house in order",Ok well I guess your right,but doing these kind of programmes can only help the situation by letting people see what is going on.
I think it takes a brave person to go and even stand amongst these people and I personally feel Stacy(who as the commenter said,used to work selling perfume)is to be commended for taking it on.
I do think that she could be prepped better by the ±«Óãtv as to how to dress when surrounded by teenage boys who have just spent time doing what these boys have,and I understand that these programmes need tears for the sentiment to fly,but,perhaps they overdid it a bit.We don't really want to see Stacy crying so much.It seems a bit inappropriate in front of the boys who have gone through all this that she is crying,even if we are crying at home.
I can see that Stacy is going to go far doing this kind of thing and I wish her all the best.She is obviously a very compassionate person and the world needs people like her.If there were a few more then perhaps the world would be a bit closer to resolving some of these issues.

Great Documentary!

Reading some of these comments, I disagree with most. In context, this documentary was only concentrating on one aspect of the ongoing issues that are trying to be resolved in Congo. Yes, and even though it has been a while since Independence in Africa, it is an issue that does need to be highlighted again and again, otherwise people will be distracted by their own lives and forget. It is an ongoing issue in Congo and the UK is structured so that these issues do not happen here (or shouldn't), whether it is working to the best of its ability or not is a longer and different conversation. This is why, as a nation, we should assist in higlighting these issues and providing help when we can. Stacey does highlight the issue and as always in these conflicts, that have been occuring around the world for many many year, it is always the children that suffer. Always!

The children that Stacey interviewed in the documentary have adhered to unimaginable atrocities and it wouldn't be wrong to say that they potentially could be numb to emotion. To have a compassionate and emotional person like Stacey interviewing them and getting upset only demonstrates how adverse the situation is and how different it is for these children. Emotion is best communicated through expressing it and the emotion highlight that what these children have gone through IS NOT NORMAL...

If this documentary's aim was to highlight the issues in Congo to a new audience then I think, that is what it has achieved. It also acts as a reminder to us all that there is a life beyond blogs, facebook, X Factor, etc.

I totally agree that this documentary ticks the box of highlighting some of the issues of the Congo in regards "Children with guns" but if this was the true purpose then it would have been shown on ±«Óãtv1 or ±«Óãtv2.

Stacey makes a mockery of this subject by understating the true extent of the travesty of the situation in the Congo! If you want to really get your message out there, ±«Óãtv need to use their primary vehicles and a programme like Panorama.

A crying, patronising girl that has done no research on her topics is like giving someone on the street the position of international ambassador without any training or on the job experience. A few tears might move people to think but a person that can speak with knowledge and emotion can move nations!

I would just make the point that, as with most ±«Óãtv reporting on Africa, this programme took a very particular line.
More to the point, it's car crash TV which I'd argue dehumanises Africans and treats them little better than frightening curiosities - not like us.

These people deserve to be treated with respect.

The DRC has been in conflict since the mid sixties, both internally, and from fighting proxy wars with it's neighbours. Wars that have sucked in most of the other countries of South and Central Africa. But there was only the most fleeting references made to this last night.

Why not interview someone from SADC or the African Union about DRC? They've had to deal with this mess for years now.
But there is no consideration given to the role of other Africans in all this. Yet again "we" - the West/ the UN / the charities - have to "rescue" them.
Presumably because they are all too stupid to help themselves?
(In fact, the UN has a hopeless track record in Congo and couldnt stop a mass rape just a couple of miles from their base in South Kivu this summer)

I'd also question whether "Stacey Dooley Investigates" is actually sticking to ±«Óãtv 's editorial guidelines by intervening in contributors lives in the way it does. Patricks' village took him back but it may have easily gone the other way.

Remember the farcical episode last year, when she "rescued" a young boy from a textiles factory in Kathmandu and returned him, at great effort and cost, to his family? And to the uncle that actually sold him to the factory owner in the first place!!!
They were clearly not happy to have the child back, they simply couldnt afford to look after him
This is massively overstepping the mark for a current affairs documentary and, as I remember, led to a barrage of complaints from British Indians who were appalled by the cultural insensitivity of what they had just witnessed.

Dooley herself seems completely unprepared for the circumstances in which she is put by the film crew, and at times doesnt even seem to register the seriousness of her situation, like when she met the Rwandan army officers in the Bush.

But it's not over yet. Next week our heroine takes on the sex traders of South East Asia
Whats next Fiona Lloyd Davies? How about taking Ms Dooley on a quick sashay around the opium fields of Helmand and Kandahar, to pat the Small Brown People on the head, before speeding off in her armoured 4x4?

The terribly sad thing about all this is that there is a desperate need for some honest reporting about the developing world.
We've ignored countries like Afghanistan and Somalia for years and look where it's got us.
But all we get is this double-handed mawkishness that makes grandiose claims about documenting "real people ..real lives" but ultimately doesnt leave anyone much better informed.

I must admit to being very unhappy with the standard of presentation for such a difficult subject. Breaking down and crying is human but to do it in front of a bewildered child who had been responsible for deaths who cannot understand what she is saying or understand that he is not responsible for her behaviour is unforgiveable. She constantly refered to her fear of the guns and the boys and contributed nothing to the debate. It's a pity that the money used for this project could have been spent more wisely with proper presentation and investigation.
I suppose if you want just emotion then she is the ideal presenter.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

I think Stacey Dooley & her team do an excellent job, bringing problems to the world's attention. It's essential that we face up to these problems, even if it makes us feel uncomfortable. Statistics (e.g. the number of people killed in a civil war) don't help us understand how serious these problems are; emotional responses (such as Stacey's tears) are effective. I hope all of Stacey's investigation (past & future) will be available as a collection on the ±«Óãtv website (I teach 'development studies' in UK universities; I will encourage my students to watch them).

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

First, thank you 'DavidUshersongz' for telling us your story. Anyone who hasn't read that post, do so. I would be honoured to hear more of your thoughts on what we can do in the UK as ordinary people, beyond learning about the situation.

Two, I have to say SHAME on the production team of this documentary. I am glad to see DRC finally on tv, but WHY DO WE HAVE STACEY DOOLEY SPEAKING FOR THE INTERVIEWEES, EVERYTIME?!! These people have a voice and a mind, an opinion and a message, and yet the ±«Óãtv edit out peoples' direct voice on anything over 5 seconds, and put Stacey Dooley's words in their mouth. Can we not read subtitles or speak French?!!!!!

Could have been a very good peice, turned awful by the production team. Stacey Dooley is who she is, and she will bring a new audience and raise awareness, so respect to her on one level. BUT SHAME ON YOU ±«Óãtv THREE - Africans and 'Third World' peoples have a voice too - let's hear them.

Zaki

I'm sick of seeing reporters showing what we already know. How about taking photo's of the men that frequent such places!

Despite what is shown this will continue as long as there is supply and demand. The girls do this otherwise they starve. The men exploit it.

I live in Thailand near the Cambodian border, everyone knows it happens and will continue to happen until action is taken.

‘Je m'appelle Stacey’ ±«Óãtv

I viewed with interest your documentary on child prostitution and exploitation in Phom Phen, Cambodia. However the real exploitation here begins with Ms Dooley and the ±«Óãtv talent scouts. The casting team deserve ‘tea and medals’ for this one. What a wonderful mix of naivety and passion they’ve found in Ms Dooley. Watching this documentary made me cringe. This is far too serious a subject for such inexperienced eyes. Perhaps casting the innocent Ms Dooley is itself, meant to satire the exploitation of youth in developing countries. There is nothing clever, cutting edge or revealing in this.

Underage prostitution and exploitation of women is bad enough. The almost evangelical fervour that the ±«Óãtv pursues such stories is worse! How clean cut the reporter Stacey Dooley looks in comparison to the dirty squalor all around her. How wonderfully staged. Sanctimonious middle class moralising do-gooder. Her questions to the brothel proprietor about the ‘respectfulness’ of the establishment were ludicrous. Has Ms Dooley lived under a Marxist Agrarian regime that exterminated 1/3 of the population? Was she born in one of the poorest countries of the developing world? Her churlish fake smiles during the interview barely hide her obvious abhorrence for such establishments. A thinly veiled attempt to lure the proprietor into admission of guilt. Someone please turn on the lights. Has little Ms Marker not done her homework? Surely the ±«Óãtv production crew could lend her a hand. A few miles down the road is a memorial filled with human skulls. Around the corner is a prison where generations of Cambodians were exterminated – not during WWII – but in the 70’s. One in 3 middle aged Cambodian citizens you see in the street helped murder their family (including their own parents).

Sweet smiling wide eyed Ms Dooley can cross examine the proprietor all she likes but there’s little chance she’ll get the answer she wants. No matter- the film crew will be happy. They’ll have the gritty wide angled views to fill plasma screen TV’s back home with Ms Dooley's crocodile tears an added extra. Another hard hitting documentary from the ‘wilds’ of South East Asia brought to you by the ±«Óãtv. “Journalism’ hmmm – I don’t think so. Its rather difficult growing up with investigative journalism from John Simpson and Frank Gardner and then being feed this ‘reality style TV’ detritus.

What exactly is Ms Dooley’s plan to replace such establishments with? How about the numerous middle aged British paedophiles that frequent such establishments in Pnom Phen before returning home to comfortable and moral Britain. Why not put them in front of the lens? Ms Dooley sleeps comfortably at night with a roof over her head and food in her belly (just like the rest of us) because half of our brothers and sisters in the world ‘go without’. The ‘slave trade’ is alive and well – but it’s not Mr Phom Phen benefitting the most. You don’t need the English Reformation or bible reading about planks and specks to see the hypocrisy here.

My advice to the very well presented Ms Dooley, take a Gap Yah somewhere else next time with some French lesions thrown in, before attempting something you can’t summarise on a postage stamp. My advice to the ±«Óãtv is to stop exploiting child reporters in the ‘developed’ world for cheap ‘big brother’ style reality documentaries. Leave journalism to journalists! The format is ludicrous and insulting to the ‘performer’, your audience and the subjects, not to mention your existing team of highly experienced foreign correspondents.

John Richards, Australia

While I agree that maybe Stacey presented not the most educated programme on conflict in Congo it does raise awareness. The programme is targeted at a younger audience, rather than a typical '±«Óãtv audience' so to speak, thereby allowing the viewers to go on and research and find out about what really does happen in the Congo.

It was sensitively produced and left out a lot of the more harrowing and troubling things about the DRC but ultimately it is raising awareness and encouraging viewers to learn and maybe feel like they also, if they so wanted, could challenge other issues, either in the DRC or elsewhere. Stacey herself says that she realises she cannot make a difference and the issues in the DRC at the moment are not going to be changed by one persons actions but she does what she sees fit - allowing one girl to become independant.

Rather than slate the programme for not being educative maybe you should encourage others to view it and yourself carry out the purpose of the programme - that is - to raise awareness.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

I am an African International Student and work with some friends in the UK who are former child soldiers from Congo, I appreciate the work that you are doing but coudn't help cringe at some of the things you are groomed to do as a presenter, I understand you are young and inexperienced to cover conflict zones in places like the DRC, but if a program like this is aimed to give any awareness you and your producers need to find a way of giving out the message without making the viewers feel more sorry for you than the subjects you are covering, sometimes those boys looked like they were supposed to console you. Felt like you were on a sponsored safari, always on the shot even when you dint have to be...and your touchy touchy feely attitude...you need to learn when to touch a subject you are interviewing...there were just soo many things wrong with this I doubt I wanna watch the one on Cambodia....

All the money wasted in this production and the military escorts could have gone to the charities that actually deal with the subjects....You still have alot of homework to do....unorthodox doesn't always work....

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

If you think you can do a better job go ahead right a head and prove your point if DavidUsherSongz who is from Congo and thinks she did a good job then who are you to say she didn't? I've the documentaries shes done and I think she did a great job. Good for you Stacy!