Removing references of these people doesn't stop them existing or mean their crimes never happened. If anything they should be kept to remind viewers they exist and what they did.
If the Benidorm episode is repeated in, say, ten years' time and someone who is a child now watches, they could then be told, as a teenager, who Harris is and what he's done.
Obviously things like the HIGNFY episode Rolf presented shouldn't be shown because he'd earn money for it, and he was in it all the way through, but a throwaway comment should stay.
If Hugh Dennis's Saville impressions were removed he would barely feature on MTW.
The very reason that they should not be left.
I cannot imagine how it must be to have your abuser on the TV for most of your life rubbing your nose into the fact you were never believed. The very least they can do is make sure that they are protected now.
Im not talking about programmes related to them, but the ones where you are innocently watching a funny programme, and POW out of the blue you are transported back to a terrible and lonely time.
I cannot imagine how it must be to have your abuser on the TV for most of your life rubbing your nose into the fact you were never believed. The very least they can do is make sure that they are protected now.
Im not talking about programmes related to them, but the ones where you are innocently watching a funny programme, and POW out of the blue you are transported back to a terrible and lonely time.
But as I said earlier HOW DO YOU CHOOSE THE PROGRAMMES THEN ??
I DO understand where you are coming from and yes It's a knockout with Hall will and should never see the light of day again
Likewise Rolfs variety shows Animal Hospital etc
BUT there is always going to be the odd thing that will slip through
As I said and I'm sorry to keep coming back to it Hall in the audience in The Good Old Days
You cannot seriously expect to erase these people from history
Someone will always have a video a film a radio recording
One of these poor kids/adults could be walking past someone who reminds them of their abuser
What then ?
I was in a relationship with a girl who was sexually abused by her father and though the feelings she harboured towards him never left her in time with help and counciling 99% learn to cope and in time trust again
My thoughts and prayers are with these people who were too frightend to come forward or who did and weren't believed
I hope they may find the inner peace and strength they seek
It's completely impossible to exclude everything that might upset someone, somewhere, sometime.
I remember coming home from a very sad funeral of a young friend killed in an accident, switching on the TV to watch some comedy show to try and lighten our mood, only to find it featured .... a funeral. And it was upsetting, but heyho. Every day, everywhere, someone is bereaved and grieving, yet no one suggests that death be banned from TV.
I'm surprise they ever showed anything like Animal Hospital anyway, it might have upset someone who'd just had their pet put to sleep. [/sarcasm]
You can't make a wrong right by editing history. By doing that, all you do is hide. It's already a dubious move to try past actions by present perspectives. But you're certainly not going to help anyone now by pretending certain people never existed in old recordings.
You can't make a wrong right by editing history. By doing that, all you do is hide. It's already a dubious move to try past actions by present perspectives. But you're certainly not going to help anyone now by pretending certain people never existed in old recordings.
You can't make a wrong right by editing history. By doing that, all you do is hide. It's already a dubious move to try past actions by present perspectives. But you're certainly not going to help anyone now by pretending certain people never existed in old recordings.
You can't make a wrong right by editing history. By doing that, all you do is hide. It's already a dubious move to try past actions by present perspectives. But you're certainly not going to help anyone now by pretending certain people never existed in old recordings.
It has more to do with paying them repeat fees on showing old shows but as for comments made by other characters in a show these should stay in.
Coincidentally, I downloaded an episode of the IT Crowd and the episode featured Roy wearing T-shirt with Rolf Harris' face emblazoned on it with the slogan ROFL
It has more to do with paying them repeat fees on showing old shows but as for comments made by other characters in a show these should stay in.
It's easy enough to stop payment of repeat fees to anyone
And as I said before I'm certainly not advocating them showing programmes built around them
And don't forget it's human nature if you ban something it won't stop people watching or finding it ... In fact it probably makes them more determined
It's a hugely sad sickening state of affairs and the repercussions are going to be felt for years but sweeping if all out of history isn't the answer
It needs to be there so as to make sure that please God it won't happen again
Considering his antics, sick behaviour and attempts to hush victims up by paying money - The "king of Pop" has remained relatively unscathed.
Maybe the American authorities are less vigorous in their investigations or Mr Thriller was just too powerful to investigate.
It probably wasn't Mr Thriller who was too powerful to investigate I'd imagine they hit the the brick wall that was Epic records and it's parent companies with the best legal teams money could buy
I'd imagine if they closed down all their film music tv and publishing companies in the states and relocated they would not only throw thousands out of jobs but deprive the American governments billions of dollars in taxes
The antics of the parents who settled with him out of court didn't help either
I recall either the mother or father of the victim allegedly saying they'd walked in to find the victim having a sex act performed on him ... And the parent said nothing and just left the room
If that is true is it any wonder they couldn't convict him ???
And yet despite all this his recordings still sell huge amounts and he is still an integral part of many more people's childhood than Rolf and co will ever be
Coincidentally, I downloaded an episode of the IT Crowd and the episode featured Roy wearing T-shirt with Rolf Harris' face emblazoned on it with the slogan ROFL
At the time that ep was on i thought that shirt was genius (Even now it is)
Mentioning someone positively who is known to have committed certain crimes is probably needed to be cut, But someone mentioning that 'we should write to jim'll fix it' should be left alone for example
There is a line in an episode of gimme gimme gimme that mentions jimmy saville 'sitting on my face' Face being the name of a horse....That one may need to be cut for taste
It's a not a comedy, but there's an old Doctor Who story ("The War Machines ?") where
a girl says the William Hartnell Doctor "looks like that disc jockey" (implied to be Savile, of
course).
It has more to do with paying them repeat fees on showing old shows but as for comments made by other characters in a show these should stay in.
Oh for goodness sake, so they're worried about paying Savile repeat fees? It's cowardice and stupidity, not fear of repeat fees, that prompts such nonsense.
Oh for goodness sake, so they're worried about paying Savile repeat fees? It's cowardice and stupidity, not fear of repeat fees, that prompts such nonsense.
Pay Saville Repeat fees 😳?????
HOW??
They'd have a job now unless they've opened a branch in eternal damnation
As already said if it's a show where they are only mentioned or guesting they COULD be edited out
Why should the other people in the shows miss out because of them ???
From having a niece in the business I can tell you repeat fees certainly don't run into thousands for a supporting artist but given the ever perilous job situation for actors every penny is welcome
It's cowardice and stupidity, not fear of repeat fees, that prompts such nonsense.
Yes, and what is so very worrying about all this is that people are accepting it , and believing that there are valid reasons why these artists and their work should be suppressed. There are not.
Oh for goodness sake, so they're worried about paying Savile repeat fees? It's cowardice and stupidity, not fear of repeat fees, that prompts such nonsense.
How about an equivalent of a 'swear box' for broadcasters who do not omit references to Hall, Savile, Harris, et al? The funds could go to victims of abuse! :kitty:
Surely omitting references to Harris, Hall etc would be the same as saying they never exsisted and sweeping what they did under the carpet? That's got to be worse.
Surely omitting references to Harris, Hall etc would be the same as saying they never exsisted and sweeping what they did under the carpet? That's got to be worse.
Yeah. My post specifically, was (rather clumsily) trying to highlight the futility and stupidity of such actions.
Comments
The very reason that they should not be left.
I cannot imagine how it must be to have your abuser on the TV for most of your life rubbing your nose into the fact you were never believed. The very least they can do is make sure that they are protected now.
Im not talking about programmes related to them, but the ones where you are innocently watching a funny programme, and POW out of the blue you are transported back to a terrible and lonely time.
But as I said earlier HOW DO YOU CHOOSE THE PROGRAMMES THEN ??
I DO understand where you are coming from and yes It's a knockout with Hall will and should never see the light of day again
Likewise Rolfs variety shows Animal Hospital etc
BUT there is always going to be the odd thing that will slip through
As I said and I'm sorry to keep coming back to it Hall in the audience in The Good Old Days
You cannot seriously expect to erase these people from history
Someone will always have a video a film a radio recording
One of these poor kids/adults could be walking past someone who reminds them of their abuser
What then ?
I was in a relationship with a girl who was sexually abused by her father and though the feelings she harboured towards him never left her in time with help and counciling 99% learn to cope and in time trust again
My thoughts and prayers are with these people who were too frightend to come forward or who did and weren't believed
I hope they may find the inner peace and strength they seek
I remember coming home from a very sad funeral of a young friend killed in an accident, switching on the TV to watch some comedy show to try and lighten our mood, only to find it featured .... a funeral. And it was upsetting, but heyho. Every day, everywhere, someone is bereaved and grieving, yet no one suggests that death be banned from TV.
I'm surprise they ever showed anything like Animal Hospital anyway, it might have upset someone who'd just had their pet put to sleep. [/sarcasm]
EXACTLY
My local radio station currently runs a jingle with an australian voice advertising double glazing or something.
There are no prizes for guessing who it sounds like
They seem to be trying.
It has more to do with paying them repeat fees on showing old shows but as for comments made by other characters in a show these should stay in.
Maybe the American authorities are less vigorous in their investigations or Mr Thriller was just too powerful to investigate.
It's easy enough to stop payment of repeat fees to anyone
And as I said before I'm certainly not advocating them showing programmes built around them
And don't forget it's human nature if you ban something it won't stop people watching or finding it ... In fact it probably makes them more determined
It's a hugely sad sickening state of affairs and the repercussions are going to be felt for years but sweeping if all out of history isn't the answer
It needs to be there so as to make sure that please God it won't happen again
It probably wasn't Mr Thriller who was too powerful to investigate I'd imagine they hit the the brick wall that was Epic records and it's parent companies with the best legal teams money could buy
I'd imagine if they closed down all their film music tv and publishing companies in the states and relocated they would not only throw thousands out of jobs but deprive the American governments billions of dollars in taxes
The antics of the parents who settled with him out of court didn't help either
I recall either the mother or father of the victim allegedly saying they'd walked in to find the victim having a sex act performed on him ... And the parent said nothing and just left the room
If that is true is it any wonder they couldn't convict him ???
And yet despite all this his recordings still sell huge amounts and he is still an integral part of many more people's childhood than Rolf and co will ever be
At the time that ep was on i thought that shirt was genius (Even now it is)
Some more words would have been better.
Mentioning someone positively who is known to have committed certain crimes is probably needed to be cut, But someone mentioning that 'we should write to jim'll fix it' should be left alone for example
There is a line in an episode of gimme gimme gimme that mentions jimmy saville 'sitting on my face' Face being the name of a horse....That one may need to be cut for taste
a girl says the William Hartnell Doctor "looks like that disc jockey" (implied to be Savile, of
course).
the worst-reviewed films ever, the Danny Dyer "Run For Your Wife":
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Run_for_Your_Wife_%282012_film%29
So does this mean all copies of RFYW are going to be buried in a
landfill?
Oh for goodness sake, so they're worried about paying Savile repeat fees? It's cowardice and stupidity, not fear of repeat fees, that prompts such nonsense.
Pay Saville Repeat fees 😳?????
HOW??
They'd have a job now unless they've opened a branch in eternal damnation
As already said if it's a show where they are only mentioned or guesting they COULD be edited out
Why should the other people in the shows miss out because of them ???
From having a niece in the business I can tell you repeat fees certainly don't run into thousands for a supporting artist but given the ever perilous job situation for actors every penny is welcome
Yes, and what is so very worrying about all this is that people are accepting it , and believing that there are valid reasons why these artists and their work should be suppressed. There are not.
How about an equivalent of a 'swear box' for broadcasters who do not omit references to Hall, Savile, Harris, et al? The funds could go to victims of abuse! :kitty:
Yeah. My post specifically, was (rather clumsily) trying to highlight the futility and stupidity of such actions.