A prank to make Tom Cruise feel small did nothing to dampen his dignity.

MAYBE Tom Cruise could change the world. Or at least the bit of it that involves cheap and nasty television programmes that trade on other people's discomfiture and embarrassment.

Tom Cruise was set up by a so-called comedy show. While the actor was attending the War of the Worlds film premiere, a crew asked for an interview and then squirted him with water from a pretend microphone, soaking him.

Oh how funny. What a laugh.

Tom Cruise was brilliant. He was angry but restrained. He didn't look embarrassed. He certainly didn't try to laugh as if he thought it was funny when he clearly didn't.

Instead he looked at the jokers and simply asked: "Why did you do that? What's so funny about that?" and - the really hard question - "Do you like making less of people?"

And the answer, of course, should have been yes.

Because so many so shows of the reality TV kind rely on making less of people. On setting them up to look foolish while compete idiots roll around thinking it hysterical.

Ali G. Candid Camera. Gotcha. Endless shows where the idea is to make people look like idiots. And if they don't immediately start falling about with laughter, then they're made to look even bigger idiots.

For those of us who outgrew practical jokes somewhere between kindergarten and the infants' class, the success of such shows has been just baffling. Then there are all those reality shows where there are tricks and trials and we can sit in the comfort of our own homes and mock.

The same crew tried the same trick with Sharon Osbourne, who played them at their own game - dashing into a restaurant and returning with a bucket of water which she threw over them. Which they probably loved as it would have made good TV.

Once Tom Cruise had sponged his suit down with great grace, he continued chatting to fans and signing autographs. But he's right, It IS all about making less of people. If a few more stars reacted as he did, we might see an end to that way of getting cheap laughs and cheap television.

But then, of course, programme makers might actually have to put some ideas, imagination and effort into their work. So don't hold your breath.

SO just where, exactly, is the choice in all this? The latest plan for a ten-hour school day has something going for it - though the practicalities, standard of school care, choice of options and even the buses home seem scarcely to have been considered. The chances are that the long school day will work brilliantly in some areas and be a total disaster in others.

Many parents will be glad to be able to work normal office hours knowing that their children are safe and cared for. But why should they? What happened to choice? Why are mothers being pushed out to work by the Government?

Many women work because they want to. Many more women work because they have to. Surveys repeatedly show that most mothers would like to spend less time at work and more time at home. But huge mortgages, soaring council tax and other bills mean they have little option.

And all the state support seems to be for mothers who go out to work. Precious little for those who choose to stay at home.

So yes, the ten-hour day could be a big boost. No different from what fee paying schools have been doing for years. But before we send every parent out to work, could we do something please for those who want to stay at home? Tax allowances at the very least, or greater benefits for parents of under fives or under sevens.

This must be the first time in the history of the world that mothers who want to look after their own children have been made to feel unnatural.

I SPENT the evening in a pub with chain-smokers recently and when I got home, had to shower and wash my hair before I went to bed as I stank of their smoke. As did my clothes.

Never mind the threat to health - a total smoking ban could save the rest of us a fortune in cleaning bills.

Published: 22/06/2005