Originally posted by DED
PHIL BLOOM
NUDE ON TV SHOCKED CALVINIST HOLLAND
Source: ANP (Walter Paap 1967)
Holland’s smallest TV and broadcasting organisation VPRO this week shocked Dutch television-viewers when it presented a completely nude girl in it’s
controversial teenage-show ‘Hoepla’. The girl, 21-years-old photographic model Phil Bloom, some weeks ago caused a storm of comment and indignation
when she appeared completely nude in the first instalment of the ‘Hoepla-show’. However, on that occasion she had been shown through a veil. This
time nothing was left to the imagination of the viewers and Phil appeared stark naked before the eye of the camera (....) VPRO-manager Mr. van Houte
indicated in an interview that his organisation – after the stormy reception of the first instalment of its ‘Hoepla’ show - had decided to proceed
with the show because it did not want to give in to what he described as an organised newspapercampaign againt VPRO’s programme policy. He said: ‘The
nude girl in the ‘Hoepla’ show was decent’. At no time did she behave suggestively or erotically, but she had remained completely motionless. Mr. van
Houte said the girl did not appeal to lower sexual instincts but only showed the beauty of the nude female body. He said: ‘ A nude girl can be
beautiful, this is what we wanted to show and that is what we did’ ! (....) The “nude on TV’ has posed several questions: Will the number of nude
appearances increase? And what is the attitude of the law? For the law says that indecent exposure is an offence, punishable by imprenment not
exceeding a period of two years and a fine not exceeding 300 guilders. Are Phil Bloom and the VPRO guilty of indecent exposure? Dutch television
viewers are convinced that they will be in for another shock, but when and how are still under wraps. But so far Phil and her employers seem to have
booked a victory.....


|