|
|
Post by T Morgan on Jan 23, 2022 0:12:01 GMT
Isn't the head of Radio 4 / Extra a 'foreigner'? Can't expect any foreigners to appreciative the subtleties of Brit. comedy and humour. I assume this is sarcasm... but what is your point exactly? |
|
|
|
Post by T Morgan on Jan 23, 2022 0:18:10 GMT
This is very useful information to have when you need the details. So what is the difference between bans and cuts? These used to have cuts, but they are skipped now completely? Ha, perhaps they read the previous thread. But as before, I wish it was just worded neutral, and not pepppered with stuff like "oh even a fictional accent will alert the thought police". This is speculation, and also, it will only lead, AGAIN, to the recurring discussion. Repeats with cuts seem like an acceptable compromise to me. Whatever the BBC (or others) do, there'll always be someone not happy about the way they handled it. Yes, SOMETIMES social justice warriors will go much too far and miss the point; but on the other side of the spectrum, the statlers and waldorfs* will insist that it's 1984 all over again and the police will soon come and search door to door and take the banned DVDs from your shelf (never mind that some complaints aren't new at all). * Statler and Waldorf are the two oldtimers on the muppet show. I'm not actually sure why Ed Brown posted this thread, as I had already started a topic on this subject previously, which drew a large amount of replies. Perhaps he (?) missed it. I've bumped it to the top now. Admittedly, the list has since been updated. Yes, fair point about the wording of the list of cuts not being "neutral", but surely the compiler is entitled to their opinion, and we can still draw what we want from the list. Personally, I don't think that repeats with cuts is an "acceptable compromise". I don't think it's necessary to compare anyone complaining about this stuff to two old men in The Muppets, which just demeans us. Perhaps there is no need for scaremongering or exaggeration about the police coming to knock on your door and take the DVDs from your shelf, but perhaps many people do find it somewhat chilling to have old shows tampered with in this way. It does appear that there is a trend for censorship at the moment, and it isn't all just manufactured by "the right wing press", or whoever you wish to blame for getting "outraged", falling for the "bait", etc etc. |
|
|
|
Post by T Morgan on Jan 23, 2022 0:23:07 GMT
Well, at least it gives all of you something to get upset about. I think it's fair to say that 99.3% of the population care less about missing/wiped TV shows than we do. That's their option. There are shows on TV now, not least the ones with men dressing as women/sluts, which I find rather nasty. At present, mine is a minority view. If that changes, it could affect the future availability of drag shows, but I wouldn't personally want them cut or banned. Censorship, as much as anything, is to do with power-balances. Nobody's tried blowing up Karl Marx' headstone, despite the millions who've died under Communism-and that more recently than the Atlantic slave-trade. Were anyone to essay the iconoclasm, I suspect that there would be loud voices on the Left saying that such destruction was caddish. I'm curious as to why you find the shows nasty - I've never seen Ru Paul's Drag Race, but I don't think the whole set-up is my cup of tea. It sounds like it has a rather snarky undertone to it. That said, I do love a good panto dame. And yes, good point that most people aren't interested in cuts the way we might be. The original versions of these comedy shows could easily end up being replaced by the cut versions. Are You Being Served was cut for repeats in the late 1990s. These versions then ended up on the UK R2 DVDs, and it wasn't until 2entertain had released several series already that they started using the correct, uncut originals. Those were still available, but the versions being made available to the UK public at that time were the cut, effectively "censored" versions. I imagine the originals are still unavailable to those living in the UK who don't want to pay to import the R1 box set and get a region-free DVD player. I personally would rather see or hear an original broadcast as it was, in full, not miss out on anything. |
|
RWels
Member
Posts: 2,910
|
Post by RWels on Jan 23, 2022 0:54:14 GMT
Well, at least it gives all of you something to get upset about. Are we not allowed to be upset about it? You seem determined to detract from anyone being suspicious or "indignant" about such cuts being made. Yes, the tabloids do feed on "outrage", but that doesn't necessarily mean that it's always a complete overreaction to a non-story. I'm glad this one has finally been covered by the media, anyway. This is a very general coverage but some of these individual cases had definitely been mentioned before (and discussed here). It's completely up to you - but I suggest that these examples don't really present the strongest case to be upset about. Removal of actual pedophiles, cutting of the n-word, of smoking even. A warning about the use of strong language. Yes I AM detracting from people who are ""indignant"". It's just that after the 150th discussion, these so-called culture wars began to feel disruptive to the forum in my opinion. They make for such repetitive reading and they're often reported in such dramatic, godwinian language... For some of the complainers, it seems a purely emotional matter and they get rather carried away. But no-one ever offers a solution, or anyway, none that is realistically viable. If I come here and there are new threads, I expect them to have something to say about TV/radio. A newly rediscovered episode perhaps. Unknown information. So yeah, excuse me if I detract from such notions but now you know why. (Plus, well not to be pedantic, but if you may be upset and say so, then I may in turn be annoyed and do the same.) |
|
RWels
Member
Posts: 2,910
|
Post by RWels on Jan 23, 2022 1:07:23 GMT
This is very useful information to have when you need the details. So what is the difference between bans and cuts? These used to have cuts, but they are skipped now completely? Ha, perhaps they read the previous thread. But as before, I wish it was just worded neutral, and not pepppered with stuff like "oh even a fictional accent will alert the thought police". This is speculation, and also, it will only lead, AGAIN, to the recurring discussion. Repeats with cuts seem like an acceptable compromise to me. Whatever the BBC (or others) do, there'll always be someone not happy about the way they handled it. Yes, SOMETIMES social justice warriors will go much too far and miss the point; but on the other side of the spectrum, the statlers and waldorfs* will insist that it's 1984 all over again and the police will soon come and search door to door and take the banned DVDs from your shelf (never mind that some complaints aren't new at all). * Statler and Waldorf are the two oldtimers on the muppet show. I'm not actually sure why Ed Brown posted this thread, as I had already started a topic on this subject previously, which drew a large amount of replies. Perhaps he (?) missed it. I've bumped it to the top now. Admittedly, the list has since been updated. Yes, fair point about the wording of the list of cuts not being "neutral", but surely the compiler is entitled to their opinion, and we can still draw what we want from the list. Personally, I don't think that repeats with cuts is an "acceptable compromise". I don't think it's necessary to compare anyone complaining about this stuff to two old men in The Muppets, which just demeans us. Perhaps there is no need for scaremongering or exaggeration about the police coming to knock on your door and take the DVDs from your shelf, but perhaps many people do find it somewhat chilling to have old shows tampered with in this way. It does appear that there is a trend for censorship at the moment, and it isn't all just manufactured by "the right wing press", or whoever you wish to blame for getting "outraged", falling for the "bait", etc etc. You have not read all the previous discussions - not that you missed much. But at some point, it was claimed without any evidence that these kind of cuts would soon be made permanently to the master tapes themselves. So yes, facts and fictions are not always kept separate. In a thread against censorship, you suggest I shouldn't compare people with popular (!) Muppet Show characters? It's a relatively mild analogy. Nastier things have been said. You may feel that no cuts should be made - but suppose you can't have that, the choice is still between edited repeats or no repeats at all. Other people would be upset if they do hear the N-word, so the broadcasters can just never do it right. |
|
|
|
Post by T Morgan on Jan 23, 2022 1:21:06 GMT
Surely, it's up to us what we are upset about, and a great many people probably aren't happy about the BBC cutting their shows like this. Some, like you, don't care, and that's their choice. There is, however, a decent civilised discussion to be had about the merits of cutting archive programming for repeat, and the censorship that may or may not be involved. You may wish to downplay it and call us all Waldorf and Statler; others may wish to take it seriously, although I do think the argument has been led astray into a general "culture ways" tangent, which isn't really helpful, IMO. Pray tell, what *is* the strongest case to be upset about for us?
I suspect that the audience for these old radio shows generally don't care about what may be considered offensive; they're not the audience most likely to be offended. The BBC could opt not to repeat programmes with dubious content at all, rather than rewriting history in this manner. As you have said, if the material is available and out there, all is not lost. However, these programmes are now being presented in a way which suggests that is how they were first heard. Personally, I am troubled by censorship. I can understand why much of this material might be considered offensive to modern sensibilities, but it seems somewhat underhand to be cutting material like this for an audience who are more likely to be annoyed they aren't getting the originals.
I don't think the BBC routinely cutting their old radio shows had been covered by the mainstream media or press in recent years.
Also, as I've said, I'm not sure why Ed Brown posted this topic, which was a repeat of an old one I had posted. Perhaps Ed missed that. But I do think your tone can come across as patronising and insulting towards those whose views you cannot understand or empathise with. Yes, there is perhaps a lot of "dramatic, godwinian" language, but replying to someone who thinks it's a big deal isn't helped by saying it's nothing to get worked up about and they're being silly anyway.
Maybe I shouldn't have posted about the cuts in the first place, as I'm not sure how related they are to the forum's general mission statement, but it seems to have been of interest, and in any case, Ed posted about the cuts again.
|
|
|
|
Post by T Morgan on Jan 23, 2022 1:26:24 GMT
I'm not actually sure why Ed Brown posted this thread, as I had already started a topic on this subject previously, which drew a large amount of replies. Perhaps he (?) missed it. I've bumped it to the top now. Admittedly, the list has since been updated. Yes, fair point about the wording of the list of cuts not being "neutral", but surely the compiler is entitled to their opinion, and we can still draw what we want from the list. Personally, I don't think that repeats with cuts is an "acceptable compromise". I don't think it's necessary to compare anyone complaining about this stuff to two old men in The Muppets, which just demeans us. Perhaps there is no need for scaremongering or exaggeration about the police coming to knock on your door and take the DVDs from your shelf, but perhaps many people do find it somewhat chilling to have old shows tampered with in this way. It does appear that there is a trend for censorship at the moment, and it isn't all just manufactured by "the right wing press", or whoever you wish to blame for getting "outraged", falling for the "bait", etc etc. You have not read all the previous discussions - not that you missed much. But at some point, it was claimed without any evidence that these kind of cuts would soon be made permanently to the master tapes themselves. So yes, facts and fictions are not always kept separate. In a thread against censorship, you suggest I shouldn't compare people with popular (!) Muppet Show characters? It's a relatively mild analogy. Nastier things have been said. You may feel that no cuts should be made - but suppose you can't have that, the choice is still between edited repeats or no repeats at all. Other people would be upset if they do hear the N-word, so the broadcasters can just never do it right. You do keep repeating the Muppets analogy though, and I don't think you intend it as a compliment, rather, as a slur. Perhaps some might find that comparison offensive. Just because "nastier things have been said", that's hardly a get-out. I don't think you're going to see eye to eye with me on this though. I think the point is the way the BBC have been making these cuts is rather sly. No warnings, no mention of edits being made. I'm actually not one of these people who thinks that everything needs to be constantly repeated. I do think the originals should be readily accessible or available in some form, though. A lot of the cuts vary in how offensive they would be considered; some might consider the content "relatively mild". |
|
RWels
Member
Posts: 2,910
|
Post by RWels on Jan 23, 2022 10:36:03 GMT
You have not read all the previous discussions - not that you missed much. But at some point, it was claimed without any evidence that these kind of cuts would soon be made permanently to the master tapes themselves. So yes, facts and fictions are not always kept separate. In a thread against censorship, you suggest I shouldn't compare people with popular (!) Muppet Show characters? It's a relatively mild analogy. Nastier things have been said. You may feel that no cuts should be made - but suppose you can't have that, the choice is still between edited repeats or no repeats at all. Other people would be upset if they do hear the N-word, so the broadcasters can just never do it right. You do keep repeating the Muppets analogy though, and I don't think you intend it as a compliment, rather, as a slur. Perhaps some might find that comparison offensive. Just because "nastier things have been said", that's hardly a get-out. I don't think you're going to see eye to eye with me on this though. I think the point is the way the BBC have been making these cuts is rather sly. No warnings, no mention of edits being made. I'm actually not one of these people who thinks that everything needs to be constantly repeated. I do think the originals should be readily accessible or available in some form, though. A lot of the cuts vary in how offensive they would be considered; some might consider the content "relatively mild". But aren't most or all of these available uncut on their CD/DVD box sets, though? I suspect you are entirely serious about the slur, but I'll tell you anyway why I stand behind it 100%. Mind you, this does not apply to everyone and every comment, but: The emphasis seems to be on complaining in loud and dramatic language. It's trench warfare with the same lack of gains. Only rarely is anything discussed on a case by case basis (which, if you think about it, is kind of dismissive towards examples that may actually have a point). It's also almost never acknowledged that the BBC would get criticised whatever they do. The implicit wish seems to be, that nothing should ever be cut at all - a situation which has never existed in the past and which just isn't realistic. So the question is, what do you (in the broader sense) WANT? I don't mind hearing about cuts and whether people think they are warranted or not. But preferably in normal language and without personal attacks if others happen to disagree or simply are less alarmed. It's the "it won't be long before the PC police will come to confiscate my discs" type of emotional post that starts to get my goat after a while. Then I just can't help but picture these two guys in my mind:  |
|
|
|
Post by John Wall on Jan 23, 2022 10:42:18 GMT
There has been some coverage recently of non crime hate incidents - people have had the police knocking on their doors because of things they’ve posted on social media that have been the subject of vexatious complaints. It went all the way to the Supreme Court iirc.
We live in an increasingly censorious society and if we don’t push back it’ll get worse.
|
|
|
|
Post by Richard Marple on Jan 23, 2022 12:02:27 GMT
OK I find it a bit funny how the topic turned to victorian male prostitutes because none of the links seem to cover that subject. Nobody's tried blowing up Karl Marx' headstone, despite the millions who've died under Communism-and that more recently than the Atlantic slave-trade. Were anyone to essay the iconoclasm, I suspect that there would be loud voices on the Left saying that such destruction was caddish. Uhm, you may want to check some facts. People did try to blow that up. Also Marx isn't that popular with elements of the left wing for being an Anti Semite & a lot of organisations claiming to be Marxist actually being Fascist in all but name. |
|
|
|
Post by timmunton on Jan 23, 2022 21:04:57 GMT
Re. Marx - as far as I know he didn't kill anyone & many would argue he wouldn't have supported the state murders which occured under a lot of the "Communist" states, if he had been alive to see these.
If it's communist statues which are relevant these would need to be of the likes of Lenin, Stalin, Mao, Ceausescu, Gottwald or whoever - those who did do bloody deeds. As far as I know most of these have been removed in the relevant countries.
And I'd be surprised if we have many/any statues of such people in public streets in the UK.
If it's just on philosophical grounds then a Marx statue would be no more appropriate to topple (probably less) than statues of say Nietzsche or a lot of the Greek philosophers who agreed with slavery & saw women as being inferior etc.
|
|
|
|
Post by T Morgan on Jan 24, 2022 1:11:05 GMT
You do keep repeating the Muppets analogy though, and I don't think you intend it as a compliment, rather, as a slur. Perhaps some might find that comparison offensive. Just because "nastier things have been said", that's hardly a get-out. I don't think you're going to see eye to eye with me on this though. I think the point is the way the BBC have been making these cuts is rather sly. No warnings, no mention of edits being made. I'm actually not one of these people who thinks that everything needs to be constantly repeated. I do think the originals should be readily accessible or available in some form, though. A lot of the cuts vary in how offensive they would be considered; some might consider the content "relatively mild". But aren't most or all of these available uncut on their CD/DVD box sets, though? I suspect you are entirely serious about the slur, but I'll tell you anyway why I stand behind it 100%. Mind you, this does not apply to everyone and every comment, but: The emphasis seems to be on complaining in loud and dramatic language. It's trench warfare with the same lack of gains. Only rarely is anything discussed on a case by case basis (which, if you think about it, is kind of dismissive towards examples that may actually have a point). It's also almost never acknowledged that the BBC would get criticised whatever they do. The implicit wish seems to be, that nothing should ever be cut at all - a situation which has never existed in the past and which just isn't realistic. So the question is, what do you (in the broader sense) WANT? I don't mind hearing about cuts and whether people think they are warranted or not. But preferably in normal language and without personal attacks if others happen to disagree or simply are less alarmed. It's the "it won't be long before the PC police will come to confiscate my discs" type of emotional post that starts to get my goat after a while. Then I just can't help but picture these two guys in my mind: Perhaps most of these old programmes are available on CD, DVD or even digital download platforms. However, not all of them. Off the top of my head, I had a feeling Much Binding in the Marsh wouldn't be available - it isn't. There was a cassette release some years ago, but it didn't include the episode which was cut for the repeat. The Hancock's Half Hour CD collection is deleted and expensive secondhand. I'm not sure that there have been any re-issues of The TV Lark, The Arthur Haynes Show or Beachcomber By the Way. The more high-profile shows will have been re-issued, and some are probably on Audible or other audiobook sites. Anyway, I am perfectly happy to discuss these cuts in a calm and rational way. And yes, I am entirely serious about the slur. Worse things are written, but you did say "without personal attacks"... which I think the Muppets comparison falls into. |
|
|
|
Post by T Morgan on Jan 24, 2022 1:18:28 GMT
For those interested, the Mail on Sunday published this story in print yesterday - headlined "We're sorry... but we can't read that again - BBC cuts its non-PC classic radio comedies". Inevitably, some will dismiss this simply because of the source, but it does quote an academic on this subject:
That's how I feel: it's rewriting history.
|
|
|
|
Post by Stuart Douglas on Jan 24, 2022 10:08:55 GMT
This has got nothing to do with missing episodes, so I'm closing it. And I've added a line to the rules - any posts which exist primarily to whine about reasonable awareness that nont everyone is or political correctness gone mad will just be deleted. This is a forum for discussing missing episodes, try to remember that. There are plenty fo other places you can go to moan about the good old days, if you feel the need.
|
|
