|
|
Post by John Green on Sept 11, 2020 22:45:30 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Peter Stirling on Sept 12, 2020 22:46:27 GMT
A nice little tale there of keeping the show going on in the face of adversity.
TV staff were amongst the highest paid in the country then, so once again it was one of those dreadful union leaders stirring things up(even doctors went on strike in a hospital in that period).In the early 80s all those union leaders mysteriously disappeared and were never heard of again, (Scargill was the swansong).
|
|
|
|
Post by John Green on Jul 13, 2021 22:37:48 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by stephencummings on Jul 31, 2021 7:33:56 GMT
A nice little tale there of keeping the show going on in the face of adversity. TV staff were amongst the highest paid in the country then, so once again it was one of those dreadful union leaders stirring things up(even doctors went on strike in a hospital in that period).In the early 80s all those union leaders mysteriously disappeared and were never heard of again, Instead we had dreadful Tory politicians putting millions out of work. |
|
|
|
Post by Richard Marple on Jul 31, 2021 11:01:09 GMT
Ironically it was union militancy that got the Tories into power in 1979.
|
|
|
|
Post by timmunton on Aug 1, 2021 5:19:32 GMT
A nice little tale there of keeping the show going on in the face of adversity. TV staff were amongst the highest paid in the country then, so once again it was one of those dreadful union leaders stirring things up(even doctors went on strike in a hospital in that period).In the early 80s all those union leaders mysteriously disappeared and were never heard of again, Instead we had dreadful Tory politicians putting millions out of work. Quite so. Give me the so-called "dreadful" union leaders any day, please. There may have been the odd excess by them but generally their demands were reasonable. Arthur Scargill being a good case in point - if you go beyond his rather high pitched & often monotonous vocal manner, the substance of what he said was generally correct (& later proved to be so by subsequent closures without the creation of different good quality jobs; social devastation). I always find it a bit strange here & elsewhere on the net when people in many ways appeciative of the post war pre-Thatcher days, seem to sometimes strongly dislike the working social democracy and post war settlement back then. Hopefully they are not also nostalgic for the corporal punishment, more widespread accepted racism/sexism etc. back then (though the latter things due, in part, to the ongoing dismantlement of the post-war settlement seem to be making a comeback. Although in many ways these things were only ever suppressed rather than resolved). |
|
|
|
Post by timmunton on Aug 1, 2021 5:27:23 GMT
Ironically it was union militancy that got the Tories into power in 1979. Hmmm...and there was me thinking it had a lot more to do with an essentially phoney "Labour isn't working" campaign with images of the jobless; who grew exponentially when the Tories got in. Not to mention gross media manipulation and a little thing they tried to hang on Labour called the global oil crisis. Callaghan admittedly wasn't much cop (though far better than the alternative) - having started to bring in early neo-liberal measures from about 1976. |
|
|
|
Post by timmunton on Aug 1, 2021 5:52:51 GMT
It's worth saying that it would be more than reasonable for the moderators to delete the posts on this thread containing political content, including my own. As there are other places on the net to discuss such things and it is generally off-topic re. the subject matter of this forum.
What I would like to say is that having read this forum for about 10 years (though as a member for only 6 years), my awareness is that the vast majority of the time it is those who are expressing what can broadly be called right-wing views who initiate things by being the first to bring their personal political views into the conversation (eg. see Peter Stirling's post above).
If they're going to do this and their comments remain, it doesn't seem unreasonable that those of us with broadly leftish views then respond.
Incidentally if unremoved and unchallenged it would leave the impression that the forum is largely of a right-wing view point - which may or may not be the case, though I would expect it to have a fairly broad range of views, as does general society.
Mea culpa in part, in that once or twice I have initially raised such issues (rather than responded), but I think in the context where I could see certain political stuff hidden in plain sight in certain programmes ie. the New Labour Blairite-ish vibe to a lot of 2005 + Doctor Who.
I'm not trying to crowbar that in again here, just to give an example where it's possible I'm doing the same thing. Although I would like to think those comments by me were more trying to make explicit what seemed to me to be implicit, but not much commented on, in those programmes.
|
|
|
|
Post by John Green on Aug 1, 2021 11:04:37 GMT
Yes, I think it's best to avoid politics unless it's essential. Not least because, nowadays, there often seems an unwillingness to agree to disagree.
(As a pedant, I can't help noticing that nothing ever gets called 'Right' (as in 'on the Right') any more. It's always 'Right-wing'.)
Back to old telly programmes. In my case watching Mrs. Thursday. I'm on the second episode of series 2, 'Change Over the Counter', which is about working conditions and the minimum wage in the retail industry.
Oops!
|
|
|
|
Post by richardwoods on Aug 1, 2021 13:21:16 GMT
I agree, but both left & right wing political posts should be seen as equally inappropriate & both be deleted. I think however that with today’s political scene there’s always going to be a problem with trigger points though on a forum that is primarily nostalgic in nature for missing & recovered TV programs, particularly from the 60’s & 70’s. Who’d be a moderator!
|
|
|
|
Post by Paul Vanezis on Aug 2, 2021 7:02:09 GMT
OK.
Let's get a few things straight here. Discussion of politics is not out of bounds under the forum rules. John Green has posted a link of interest to people here, although arguably it should be in The Nexus. I may move it. But discussing the politics of the time in reaction to his original post is entirely legitimate.
One person on the forum has reported posts on this thread twice; each time the reason given has been one word, "political". Each time it has been moderated 'No action'.
I rarely have to remind people to read the forum rules, but please do that before you waste the moderators time reporting things that YOU think are unacceptable.
We moderate with a light touch here, but firm on specifics as outlined by Mark Brown when he started this forum "Keep postings on topic and keep it civil.". It's on the banner page at the top of the main forum. In addition to that, there is a stickied post by Mark at the top of the main forum which is there for newbies. One of his headings says "NO ODIOUS OPINIONS PLEASE - IF YOU HAVE THEM, KEEP THEM TO YOURSELF."
Having a left or right of centre opinion is not odious. The key here is being civil to each other and not being a nob. No extreme views, no little Englanders, Putinites, Priti-vision or Trumpists. That would be off-topic and going off-topic is the death nell of any discussion forum. It's also likely to rile those with opposing views, and then we get arguments and then posts are reported and then I'm unhappy because the mods have to waste their personal time sorting it out. So be careful how you phrase things. In the last week I've had to prune an entire thread post by post because of a seemingly personal dispute between two members. At the same time a third party comes in and starts using the word 'socially aware' as an insult. In context, socially aware is a perfectly legitimate word to use. But not when it is used with the intent to demean. That is not allowed.
So in short, stick to the rules and be nice to each other.
Paul
|
|
|
|
Post by John Green on Aug 2, 2021 11:27:00 GMT
From the Youtube comments:
"No programmes were coming from London. Channel Television had to source all their emergency schedules from independent sources, as Channel Television did not have video tape facilities, it all had to be aired on 16 mm or 35 mm film, meaning a lack of resources, so schedules were trimmed to a basic 6 hour daily schedule." And:
"Once the Channel team got to grips with it things went pretty smoothly, despite there being lots of old cans of film around, some of which snapped in the telecine machine!".
Back in those days, a screwdriver, a bit of sticky-back plastic (or failing that, Sellotape), and you were well away.
|
|
|
|
Post by Peter Stirling on Aug 2, 2021 12:04:23 GMT
I agree, but both left & right wing political posts should be seen as equally inappropriate & both be deleted. I think however that with today’s political scene there’s always going to be a problem with trigger points though on a forum that is primarily nostalgic in nature for missing & recovered TV programs, particularly from the 60’s & 70’s. Who’d be a moderator! Well I don't think political or controversial subjects (Rolf Harris etc) should be deleted (if they form part of the topic) there seems to be a Prisoner/1984 element to that, and hope that as civilised human beings we can accept that someone else has an opposing view to our own and not regard them as dehumanised monsters that we cannot communicate with anymore about the common goal (which in this case) the pursuit and raising awareness of forgotten archive material, that would be sad. However I do realise that we live in a different age now and sensitivities are high (TPTV showing Catweazle and 'The Amazing Mr Blunden' with a PG warning for example) and in my own case I will use the delete button more frequently now if I think I have strayed. |
|
|
|
Post by richardwoods on Aug 2, 2021 13:28:40 GMT
I agree, but both left & right wing political posts should be seen as equally inappropriate & both be deleted. I think however that with today’s political scene there’s always going to be a problem with trigger points though on a forum that is primarily nostalgic in nature for missing & recovered TV programs, particularly from the 60’s & 70’s. Who’d be a moderator! Well I don't think political or controversial subjects (Rolf Harris etc) should be deleted (if they form part of the topic) there seems to be a Prisoner/1984 element to that, and hope that as civilised human beings we can accept that someone else has an opposing view to our own and not regard them as dehumanised monsters that we cannot communicate with anymore about the common goal (which in this case) the pursuit and raising awareness of forgotten archive material, that would be sad. However I do realise that we live in a different age now and sensitivities are high (TPTV showing Catweazle and 'The Amazing Mr Blunden' with a PG warning for example) and in my own case I will use the delete button more frequently now if I think I have strayed. I was being a bit tongue in cheek really. The trigger here seems to me as usually being when one person’s nostalgia for the “good old days” turns or develops into something that is viewed by another person as right wing grandstanding. I’ll be completely honest, in the current volatile climate I’m not sure. |
|
|
|
Post by timmunton on Aug 21, 2021 15:34:18 GMT
OK. Let's get a few things straight here. Discussion of politics is not out of bounds under the forum rules. John Green has posted a link of interest to people here, although arguably it should be in The Nexus. I may move it. But discussing the politics of the time in reaction to his original post is entirely legitimate. One person on the forum has reported posts on this thread twice; each time the reason given has been one word, "political". Each time it has been moderated 'No action'. I rarely have to remind people to read the forum rules, but please do that before you waste the moderators time reporting things that YOU think are unacceptable. We moderate with a light touch here, but firm on specifics as outlined by Mark Brown when he started this forum "Keep postings on topic and keep it civil.". It's on the banner page at the top of the main forum. In addition to that, there is a stickied post by Mark at the top of the main forum which is there for newbies. One of his headings says "NO ODIOUS OPINIONS PLEASE - IF YOU HAVE THEM, KEEP THEM TO YOURSELF." Having a left or right of centre opinion is not odious. The key here is being civil to each other and not being a nob. No extreme views, no little Englanders, Putinites, Priti-vision or Trumpists. That would be off-topic and going off-topic is the death nell of any discussion forum. It's also likely to rile those with opposing views, and then we get arguments and then posts are reported and then I'm unhappy because the mods have to waste their personal time sorting it out. So be careful how you phrase things. In the last week I've had to prune an entire thread post by post because of a seemingly personal dispute between two members. At the same time a third party comes in and starts using the word 'socially aware' as an insult. In context, socially aware is a perfectly legitimate word to use. But not when it is used with the intent to demean. That is not allowed. So in short, stick to the rules and be nice to each other. Paul Thanks Paul for clarifying the forum's view on political discussion. What you say ìs nice & clear, is very reasonable & makes good sense. Cheers. If in the future newcomers or whoever are not clear on this, your post here would be an excellent place to refer them to. Thanks also to the thoughtful posts of the other people posting on this - it makes good reading and adds to a sense of community. |
|
