Move over Freddy Krueger

Traditionalists tend to define art as pretty pictures used to brighten a room or cover up a piece of scuffed wallpaper. Horses running through the waves, vases of flowers, dogs playing poker. Nothing too controversial or upsetting.

And then there are those who see art as something to challenge convention. Upset the status quo. Ruffle feathers. But not everyone who wants to push the boundaries of art needs to bisect a farm animal and suspend it in a vat of Gatorade, or just shit the bed and fill it full of old knickers.

It might not be first in line for the next Turner prize, but Kevin Sharkey's latest work is certainly drawing its fair share of press attention. The Irish artist has created an image of Elton John proudly nursing his newborn baby. Displaying the kind of Photoshop skills that would have a junior in the Daily Mail art department shaking his head in dismay, Sharkey's work has relocated Elton's not insubstantial head onto the shoulders of a breast-feeding mother.

If the concept of breast-milk ice-cream didn't have you retching into the nearest receptacle, the sight of a hungry baby gently suckling on the Rocket Man's fulsome boob may just tip you over the edge. Sharkey claims that he was inspired by Elton's newfound parental status, saying “It’s set off a new era of gay men having kids. What Elton and David are doing is very admirable.”

Less admirable is the image that's now scorched indelibly onto my retinas. For me, nightmares always involved either snakes (apparently, it's a sexual thing) or the loss of my teeth (fear of failure or abandonment). Now they're likely to be replaced by Elton John, stopping midway through a rendition of Candle In The Wind to slowly unbutton his maternity dress and hoist out a milk-filled moob.

Sharkey isn't concerned about the potential backlash, commenting "I must admit I did have a little laugh to myself while I was doing it but I know Elton has got a good sense of humour.” Maybe he missed the Grand Dame of British music throwing a monumental strop on a tennis court when a bystander made the mistake of looking at him.

One organisation that's perfectly happy with the picture, besides the RNIB (who'll never have to look at it), is the Association of Breastfeeding Mothers, commenting that the artwork raises important issues of breast milk for surrogate parents. A spokeswoman told the press "It is very important that surrogate children have access to breast milk. I don't know if Elton John and David Furnish are doing this but it is very important for little Zac's development." Failing that, they could always pop down to Covent Garden to get the little fella the occasional cone of soft-scoop.

Bashing the Beeb

The first of January is a time for fresh starts, new beginnings and changed behaviours. Most of us probably spent the best part of today nursing sore heads and swearing 'never again', some might even have come up with a resolution or two.

But not everyone is so keen on the concept of self-improvement; they're more than happy to keep doing the same things and pursuing the same predictably unhealthy activities. Take the Taxpayers' Alliance, for example. Despite the fact that it clearly gives them a communal ulcer just thinking about the BBC, they keep on conducting ridiculous studies into spending within the organisation, and churning out press releases for the right wing press to regurgitate verbatim.

Today's attack on the world's most respected public broadcaster, courtesy of the Telegraph, is a searing indictment of profligate spending and wanton recklessness. According to the esteemed broadsheet, BBC executives in Cardiff have been spending "more than £1,000 a day on taxis". In total, BBC Wales spent £595,551 on taxis over the last 18 months, a sum that the paper helpfully converts into "more than 2,800 annual licence fees".

To the organisation's critics, it's of little or no consequence that BBC Wales also managed to produce 1,500 hours of TV programmes, and another 14,000 hours of radio output in the same 18-month period. Not when accusations of 'Champagne socialism' can be thrown about.

The BBC is everyone's favourite media whipping boy - its directive to represent the opinions, perspectives and communities of all the audiences it serves, means that it's destined to be forever damned by anyone who occasionally finds a contrary viewpoint receiving airtime.

And even a comprehensive diversity, representation and inclusion policy isn't enough for some people. The gay community is currently up in arms about the corporation's recent coverage of Elton and David's newborn baby. They're unhappy with the fact that Stephen Green of Christian Voice was invited to take part in a discussion of the couple's December 25th miracle birth.

Green has something of a reputation for being anti-gay, having described gay rugby player Gareth Thomas as a "wicked role model for children" and compared H from Steps to a mass-murderer. To be fair, he did help to kill our fond recollections of Tragedy and Chain Reaction. 

So it will have come as no surprise to anyone that Green wasn't planning to send a gift-wrapped breast pump to the glowing new parents, telling the BBC “This isn’t just a designer baby for Sir Elton John, this is a designer accessory… Now it seems like money can buy him anything, and so he has entered into this peculiar arrangement… The baby is a product of it. A baby needs a mother and it seems an act of pure selfishness to deprive a baby of a mother.”

PinkNews.co.uk is currently advising its readers to complain about his inclusion in the coverage of the Elton story, and for the fact that the BBC neglected to mention some of Green's more extreme views. Whilst their intentions are noble, and their outrage understandable, it's important to remember that the BBC takes its responsibility for objective coverage seriously, even if that means giving airtime to objectional viewpoints. 

There's nothing homophobic about enabling alternative voices to participate in the debate. And demanding that they be silenced or excluded is to reject the very principles on which the BBC was founded. As long as gay marriages, adoptions and surrogacy are discussion points in the media, there will be pro and con arguments demanding to be heard. 

If we use our energies to decry every perceived slight or lapse of judgement, our argument is weakened when something genuinely outrageous occurs. Nobody wants to be the boy who cried homophobic wolf.