|
Post by Marie Griffiths on Oct 21, 2020 19:49:09 GMT
|
|
RWels
Member
Posts: 2,862
|
Post by RWels on Oct 21, 2020 22:19:16 GMT
You're not alone, I wondered about that too at one point: If they couldn't start a huge binge. I'm privately convinced that The Cleopatras was simply 30 years too early and that that kind of plot-low television is now the norm. Or maybe even... [ominous music] black and white television, if we get really desperate?? Actually, on second thought, they could colourise it? But it may be one of those ideas that just doesn't strike in the right heads.
|
|
|
Post by Nigel Lamb on Oct 21, 2020 22:57:41 GMT
If they lose the license fee they are less likely to maintain an archive and more likely to sell it off.
|
|
|
Post by garygraham on Oct 22, 2020 0:28:03 GMT
Lots of considerations here. Every genre in the BBC archive has endless uncomfortable moments which the BBC won't screen unedited. That's before you get to all the stars of yesteryear who can't be shown now and formats which the younger generation have little interest in. Studio drama is one. The BBC was silly to kill off that as an art form. We're now in the era of 8k screens and 405 shows look like something from the Stone Age. 625 line video is heading in the same direction. There are tortuous rights issues with old programmes.
I agree with Nigel but tend to think there will be a mass disposal at some point rather than a sale. Last I heard, the video archive was on LTR data tape and the entire archive needs to be migrated to new tapes every 10-15 years because that's the time period over which the tape machines remain backward compatible. Imagine the cost of that and how much of it is stuff which has little commercial value, hardly anyone will ever want to see, and which many socially aware BBC staff probably despise.
|
|
|
Post by richardwoods on Oct 22, 2020 7:33:32 GMT
Lots of considerations here. Every genre in the BBC archive has endless uncomfortable moments which the BBC won't screen unedited. That's before you get to all the stars of yesteryear who can't be shown now and formats which the younger generation have little interest in. Studio drama is one. The BBC was silly to kill off that as an art form. We're now in the era of 8k screens and 405 shows look like something from the Stone Age. 625 line video is heading in the same direction. There are tortuous rights issues with old programmes. I agree with Nigel but tend to think there will be a mass disposal at some point rather than a sale. Last I heard, the video archive was on LTR data tape and the entire archive needs to be migrated to new tapes every 10-15 years because that's the time period over which the tape machines remain backward compatible. Imagine the cost of that and how much of it is stuff which has little commercial value, hardly anyone will ever want to see, and which many socially aware BBC staff probably despise. I would “like” this as I completely agree, but then why should I “like” something that I agree with but dislike. Ah, the modern world, you know it makes perfect sense!!! 😉
|
|
|
Post by Richard Marple on Oct 22, 2020 8:58:42 GMT
Sorry have I wondered into an alt-right forum here?
|
|
|
Post by richardwoods on Oct 22, 2020 9:01:52 GMT
Sorry have I wondered into an alt-right forum here? Isn’t it a shame that folks can’t express opinions without being castigated by either side these days. Very 1984 Richard.
|
|
RWels
Member
Posts: 2,862
|
Post by RWels on Oct 22, 2020 11:57:53 GMT
Sorry have I wondered into an alt-right forum here? Isn’t it a shame that folks can’t express opinions without being castigated by either side these days. Very 1984 Richard. Okay he overreacted a bit, but I think I can guess what sentence set him off. There doesn't have to be a "political" explanation for stuff not being repeated, there are tons of examples in drama and entertainment where that doesn't apply and even some examples where it does but where no-one would argue. So let's not drag any political aspect into it.
|
|
|
Post by richardwoods on Oct 22, 2020 16:48:57 GMT
Isn’t it a shame that folks can’t express opinions without being castigated by either side these days. Very 1984 Richard. Okay he overreacted a bit, but I think I can guess what sentence set him off. There doesn't have to be a "political" explanation for stuff not being repeated, there are tons of examples in drama and entertainment where that doesn't apply and even some examples where it does but where no-one would argue. So let's not drag any political aspect into it. I pretty much agree, it just seems to me that the ability to roll eyes & let something go when someone sees something they don’t like seems to have been lost on both sides of the political divide. Personally I blame the immediacy of social media and perhaps it’s a skill that would help avoid these situations.
|
|
|
Post by Stephen Byers on Oct 22, 2020 17:18:12 GMT
They're showing old films of Fred Dibnah and steam engines on BBC 4 in the early evenings. can't be bad!!
|
|
|
Post by John Green on Oct 22, 2020 17:46:25 GMT
I was thinking more in terms of "Don't come near me; we need to be socially-distanced." (Puts every episode of The Web of Fear into back of van).
|
|
|
Post by garygraham on Oct 22, 2020 19:37:14 GMT
I'm sorry that some people have jumped on this to make the usual hysterical political remarks. To clarify, even the most popular and mainstream programmes from 35 years ago contain sketches and moments that I believe the BBC probably wouldn't show on a main channel now. A few examples:
Victoria Wood: McEconomy - a spoof Scottish consumer programme about saving money which mentions bricks being thrown your window in parts of Scotland; a spoof ad - bras for men; bitchy continuity announcer makes comments about fat and working class people. Of course the joke is her but that was the same defence of Alf Garnett?
French and Saunders - spoof Hollywood awards ceremony. "Ginger Rogers" appears bloated in a wheelchair and takes part in a dance routine which ends up with her being pushed into the side of the stage. The joke is pretty much her being in a wheelchair and that anyone in that situation would expect to "dance". It is truly shocking to watch now.
The Two Ronnies: where to start? The Fat and Short Minstrel Show, arab is told "one of your little friends" is on the side of a marmalade jar, gay fortune teller told "I know what you are", Barker as minister for sex equality dressed half as man and woman mentions the word "poof". Man encouraged to dress as woman at job interview by rival so he won't get the job. Numerous drag scenes which must surely be banned very soon if not already at the BBC.
Open All Hours: stuttering.
Clarence: partially sighted.
The Good Life - Margo in a golly apron; Lenin the cockerel is perhaps "queer"; it's like living next door to gypsies says Margo.
Keeping Up Appearances - Daddy's been kidnapped by gypsies. I thought traditionally they only took children? Says Richard.
The Young Ones - racist policeman uses the words N, C, darkie and chocolate drop.
I have a huge number of VHS tapes which I've been transferring and it is endless. It's almost every programme. So what I'm saying is that at best things are being chopped to bits and viewers aren't seeing shows as they were and at worst programmes are locked away possibly never to be seen again unless the prevailing view changes. I don't watch TV anymore so I'm out of touch. I know that some years ago the BBC was screening stuff in the US or on UK Gold which it wouldn't put on its mainstream channels.
We've had this discussion before and my view is that many programmes could and should be made available with a warning before them. However I suspect the issue is that they simply aren't diverse enough for the BBC which prefers to turn out duff new stuff. And the mission seems to be to change society so why make these programmes available if doing so might work against that?
I wonder how we can learn from history if we're not allowed to see the past? It seems to me that many young people are clueless about what life was like more than 20 years ago and that's unhealthy. Also it seems dishonest for holier-than-thou corporations to actively disguise their past? In 1986 the managing director of BBC TV Bill Cotton could go on national daytime BBC1 and use the N word twice when talking about minstrel shows.
Increasingly this censorship and our current culture is probably a threat to the long term survival of whole programmes or them in their original form as they have no market value. That is why this is relevant to the thread.
I am gay, centre left. I actually voted Corbyn at the last election and recently a gay African asylum seeker who I wrote a letter of support for some years ago was granted leave to remain. So please save the knee jerk reactions.
|
|
|
Post by John Green on Oct 22, 2020 20:14:24 GMT
Just to take your second paragraph; The comment between the two girls on Icarly, "That jogger really needs a bra. Poor man." could be a minefield today, in more ways than one.
As far as I'm concerned, the licence for receiving radiophonic/televisual signals could triple. I got rid of our Cat's Whiskers years ago, and watch DVDs. I'm hoping a little that Network's increased rate of releases (?) is a good sign.
|
|
RWels
Member
Posts: 2,862
|
Post by RWels on Oct 22, 2020 20:36:16 GMT
"The usual hysterical remarks", well, how about Matthew 7:3? If you mentioned twice in one post that it's the fault of the socially aware people who hate the BBC and are out to destroy it, well, then yes, it will come across a little bit like muppet show balcony material. I had a quick look and some of the examples you mention have been repeated in the past decade. The Young Ones has never been censored to my knowledge.
And yes, we have had this discussion before, and one of the things left unanswered was what exactly young people would learn from watching the Minstrel show or hearing the N-word used ironically. And there are quite a few costume, or otherwise historical dramas that have never been repeated either. You can blame "the snowflakes" or you can accept that vintage television is sadly not seen as an valuable asset (no matter how much we all here might think so).
But speaking of knowing the past, surely you remember Mary Whitehouse? It's just that the focus of censorship has now shifted.
|
|
|
Post by garygraham on Oct 22, 2020 21:07:27 GMT
You say things have been repeated. The programmes may have been repeated but were they edited? Is it possible to appreciate the genius of Ronnie Barker if you're never able to see his work as it was originally broadcast or at all?
It isn't about wanting to see the Black and White Minstrel Show on TV. It's the cumulative effect of all of this on our culture. I have a friend who lives in Los Angeles, he has danced on American TV in ads and if you mentioned his name quite a percentage of Americans would know him. One day I mentioned Gene Kelly and he didn't know who that was. He's black and I know that black people are nervous about watching old stuff and what they might be confronted by.
But in the same way I doubt many British young people could name stars of comedy from the 1960s. Which is quite unlike how it was when we grew up, watching Will Hay, Stan Laurel, Abbott and Costello and numerous others.
|
|