I don't often take you on Ting but I couldn't let this go. Are you saying that RTD and SM care nothing about producing interesting scripts and great stories because all that matters is their paycheck. If this is what you believe you are belittling not only them but a lot of other people. I don't simply do my job for the money - it brings me a great deal of joy on occasions as well as stress. I would imagine that there are other people out their who do the job they do for more reasons than pay. I for one am grateful that they care about their audience and have enough pride in their work to make wonderful and entertaining programmes.
Decided to catch up with DS today, and ended up reading the Torchwood threads mostly....and I see that things don't chnage with your inconsistant opinions do they Ting???
In one post you say RTD should keep his opinions to himself, in another post, you defend the right to air your views.
You claim that RTD shouldn't make comments on things he doesn't understand and are not reasoned arguments, despite the fact it was a very small obviously generalising comment by someone who isn't a politician and therefore isn't going to beat around the bush, much like Moffat claimed last year that if the Tories won then all we would get is Sh*t TV, and you end up in your "reasoned" argument describing his work as crap.
You say that TW doesn't belong to him...yet somehow accuse him of selling it off to the Americans....
You say its a British show, and that it is us that should watch it first, that the BBC should pander to us....but the moment anyone brings the comment of the general public, or how Doctor Who is written with the avearge mainstream audience in mind, you decide to make it all about you alone, and say why should you care about what those people think.....
So the question I pose to you Ting is why should the BBC care what you think, when majority of the paying public is happy that the are getting the show, not when exactly it is on? The fact that the BBC can obviously see that the British public is getting what they want, and have no issue with it....why should they listen to you? Just like they shouldn't or don't need to listen to me to stop spending moeny on soaps...why becuase there are more who are happy watching it.
You often talk about how the fans of the wilderness years kept the franchise going...of who RTD was also part of...yeah yeah you didin't like his book....so bloody what....he was still one of those who wrote and brought....but what you seem to forget is that the show didn't start of that way....it wasn't the audios and the books that made the show...it was the TV show, those forums that came about have had majority of people who grew up with the TV show, not the books first, as I have said to you, the Doctor Who books were hardly in the HG Wells range in the Sci-fi world. The gap between the end of the series in 1989 and the beginning of the new in 2004/5 was just a small era....so ofcourse the show would still exist in some form or another......but if it continued in that range....eventually, maybe 20, or thirty, or even 50 years down the line it would have vanished.....but due to the hard work carried out by RTD and Moff, the show will go on with an even larger number than before. Its not a case of whether someone else's enjoyement should or shouldn't enhance your own enjoyemnt....but as a fan, especially for a die-hard fan....it would be more important for the show to continue...yes the RTD years were not of your flavour....but the fact that they were they flavour of the majority is why now Moff has his chance to create something that has been to your flavour. Yes the Books stopped, but thanks to the new show, the Old books sales would only increase, as would audio stories, becuase there is a new generation interested in them duw to the show coming back on TV....just like you only could have gott into them because you as young lad got into the TV show first. For someone who works for their local community a lot and seems to get very peeved off when your community doesn't get what its rights are...it makes absolute no sense that you wouldn't want to show to survive even if part of it wasn't to your taste. Is this how you behave when you have get rights for your local community...by throwing your toys out of the pram???
RTD did create the show(Torchwood that is), we know that the BBC are the company behind it, we know that they didn't put all the money into the fourth series, and have had no issue with RTD taking it over to the US to get it more funding, we know that the BBC, being a more mainstream channel would have more difficulties changing schedules of their programmes for a show that wasn't that long ago completed, compared to a small cable channel in America that can plan its dates as it did as earlier as year before, we know that there will be cuts, and despite that it will be the British public who will watch the most of it...and its is more obvious that those cuts will be about sex scenes and graphic voilence, while American TV like Starz tend to cut story moments and happy to keep the sex and voilence for the sake of commercials. You know all that is logical sencse, but most of your arguments have been very inconsistant, and really childlike.
You spend time in some threads claiming that its our show...but then you also say you don't care about joe blogs down the corner of you thinks.....
Please just stick to one thing Ting.....and then even if we disagree, it at least it would be a more reasoned argument...the kind you felt RTD didn't make.....
Which is precisely why he-and indeed both of them-as men with an enormous amount of sway over the general public due to their high public profile, should not be making such sweeping generalisations about matters outside their field of expertise. Davies and Moffat were both driven to make these comments by their dedication to their own industry, but that is a blinkered, narrow view point. No Government, no Local Authority, no statutory body, makes cuts to services without good reason-it would be sheer foolishness, since it means angering the people you need to vote for you. But where public money is involved, no one sector exists in isolation. And frankly, television is not the Government's biggest priority when it comes to allocating funding. It can't be. It's just not that important in the overall scheme of things. If they don't understand this, they need to stay quiet, not make inflammatory comments about matters they know nothing about. It's just irresponsible.
Possibly. But it's still my view. And if I'd rather Kevin from Barnsley wasn't a factor, at least I still have my priorities in order enough to put the irrelevant little snot's needs before those of his counterpart, Kevin from Baltimore. Bloody Torchwood.:p
And your bloody minded "stop playing with my trainset" view is literally no more important than Kevin's or mine or anyone elses. I'm sure RTD isn't losing a wink of sleep over your views.
To be honest nor do I, I just think you are rather petulant and that makes me sad because it's views like yours that lead show runners to be a bit dismissive of fandom. I don't blame them for that because if I had to listen to the views of someone who only wants to pick pick pick away because they aren't in change - I'd probably dismiss the lot of us as eejits as well. Which is a shame because most people are glad it's coming back and really looking forward to it. Shame you can't let people enjoy things without being the voice of DOOM!
But even having said that I can see that DW was never meant to be niche. It is Saturday teatime family drama. It shouldn't be confined to half empty convention centres and the dusty backrooms of comic shops. Its not for tedious geeks like me only to pore over and spend hours debating every minute detail. Its for everyone and most.of all the kids to enjoy. Schoolkids running around the playground pretending to be cybermen is far more in the true spirit of Doctor Who than a bunch of middle aged men on anorks arguing about the relative merits of the political allegory in the Happiness Patrol.
Absolutely right. They couldn't make something just for the fans anyway, not unless it was a co-production jointly financed by the BBC and another TV company, or consisting of much shorter seasons and/or shorter episodes, and shown later on a weekday on BBC2. But it's interesting you mention The Happiness Patrol, because I think it's around when they were making that story that the people working on Doctor Who had the least idea what it was about.
Its a very unfortunate comment from RTD. I have a lot of respect for him and the work he did in restoring our favourite programme to the mainstream. Or should I say "had"? Since after this very alienating statement, it no longer exists.
Its unfortunate because there can be no reasoning or debate after such a statement. Only threads like this. Its the comment of a demagogue. If you believe the government are evil then you don't have to listen to their position or your own. You can happily oppose all they do, safe in the knowledge that they are evil so you must be good.
Its a very unfortunate comment from RTD. I have a lot of respect for him and the work he did in restoring our favourite programme to the mainstream. Or should I say "had"? Since after this very alienating statement, it no longer exists.
How does that comment affect the quality or perceived quality of his work as a producer/executive producer and writer?
So why did you say that your respect for him and his work no longer exists? Or did you mean to say that your respect for him (but not for that of his work) no longer exists?
Its unfortunate because there can be no reasoning or debate after such a statement. Only threads like this. Its the comment of a demagogue. If you believe the government are evil then you don't have to listen to their position or your own. You can happily oppose all they do, safe in the knowledge that they are evil so you must be good.
So why did you say that your respect for him and his work no longer exists? Or did you mean to say that your respect for him (but not for that of his work) no longer exists?
So why did you say that your respect for him and his work no longer exists? Or did you mean to say that your respect for him (but not for that of his work) no longer exists?
My enjoyment of his work on Who is unchanged but my respect for him now reflects the respect he has shown for my voting decision.
This thread is full of people, who maintain their right to give an opinion, but who don't want to give the same respect to other people.
He didn't suggest that all immigrants should be killed, or that people over 65 should be killed. He ventured an opinion on the current government. Welcome to a dictatorship if you don't want him to do that.
I'd rather people are allowed to give their opinion. At least it means we are still living in a free democracy.
My enjoyment of his work on Who is unchanged but my respect for him now reflects the respect he has shown for my voting decision.
I had no such respect for his work. I do respect Steven Moffat's. But regardless of that, I am disgusted at the attitude displayed by both of them, in Davies' most recent interview and in Moffat's similar comments made months ago. They display a total ignorance of the subject they are discussing and a totally naive and blinkered world view. Both of them appear concerned with one thing and one thing only: the BBC, and the fact that the Government isn't giving it shed loads of money. That, it seems, is the number one priority in the eyes of these two highly paid television producers, but they are totally failing to see the bigger picture. Cuts, whether you agree with them or not, are being made everywhere. Not, as RTD seems to believe, because the Prime Minister is secretly the Hooded Claw and feeds off human misery, but because they are needed. As I said earlier, no Government makes cuts which will alienate the voters unless they have to, because it would be a suicidally stupid thing to do from a career point of view. The BBC wanted to raise the liccence fee: we are living in a country where many people are having serious difficulty affording petrol to drive to work, and the Government has yet to find an economically viable way of addressing that rather pressing matter, is it really feasible for them to ask those same people to pay more for the BBC when they're trying to reduce their outgoings? The BBC also want Government subsidies: the Government are telling Local Authorities they can't afford to give them the money they need to subsidize public transport, is it really realistic for them to give more money to the BBC to create a new series of Sky Diving Reality Chefs? But none of that matters to Russ and Steve, the big picture doesn't exist, only their own industry matters. And worse, their ill considered comments will make a distressingly large number of the general public share that blinkered view, because they too are not seeing the bigger picture! The Government is not 'evil'. The Government itself is not collectively anything, it is a collection of individuals doing a difficult joib trying to balance the needs and wants of a society full of different and opposing factions. Some of the decisions it makes are right, some are wrong. Some, we won't be able to judge until a few years down the line. But either way, whatever RTD seems to believe, Ernst Stavro Blofeld is not a member of the cabinet.
I had no such respect for his work. I do respect Steven Moffat's. But regardless of that, I am disgusted at the attitude displayed by both of them, in Davies' most recent interview and in Moffat's similar comments made months ago. They display a total ignorance of the subject they are discussing and a totally naive and blinkered world view. Both of them appear concerned with one thing and one thing only: the BBC, and the fact that the Government isn't giving it shed loads of money. That, it seems, is the number one priority in the eyes of these two highly paid television producers, but they are totally failing to see the bigger picture. Cuts, whether you agree with them or not, are being made everywhere. Not, as RTD seems to believe, because the Prime Minister is secretly the Hooded Claw and feeds off human misery, but because they are needed. As I said earlier, no Government makes cuts which will alienate the voters unless they have to, because it would be a suicidally stupid thing to do from a career point of view. The BBC wanted to raise the liccence fee: we are living in a country where many people are having serious difficulty affording petrol to drive to work, and the Government has yet to find an economically viable way of addressing that rather pressing matter, is it really feasible for them to ask those same people to pay more for the BBC when they're trying to reduce their outgoings? The BBC also want Government subsidies: the Government are telling Local Authorities they can't afford to give them the money they need to subsidize public transport, is it really realistic for them to give more money to the BBC to create a new series of Sky Diving Reality Chefs? But none of that matters to Russ and Steve, the big picture doesn't exist, only their own industry matters. And worse, their ill considered comments will make a distressingly large number of the general public share that blinkered view, because they too are not seeing the bigger picture! The Government is not 'evil'. The Government itself is not collectively anything, it is a collection of individuals doing a difficult joib trying to balance the needs and wants of a society full of different and opposing factions. Some of the decisions it makes are right, some are wrong. Some, we won't be able to judge until a few years down the line. But either way, whatever RTD seems to believe, Ernst Stavro Blofeld is not a member of the cabinet.
My enjoyment of his work on Who is unchanged but my respect for him now reflects the respect he has shown for my voting decision.
Fair enough, as we are all entitled to, and air, our views on politics and the people in politics, especially in relation to our work or industry, regardless as to whether we are mere forum members, blokes in pubs, or executive producers/writers. We may not agree with everything that is said (on a forum, in a pub, or in an interview in a media section of a paper), but we accept that they all have every right to say it.
Fair enough, as we are all entitled to, and air, our views on politic and the people in politics, regardless as to whether we are mere forum members, blokes in pubs, or executive producers/writers.
The difference is, most of us are not airing our not very well thought out views to several million people while holding a position which gives us considerable influence over them.
Fair enough, as we are all entitled to, and air, our views on politics and the people in politics, especially in relation to our work or industry, regardless as to whether we are mere forum members, blokes in pubs, or executive producers/writers. We may not agree with everything that is said (on a forum, in a pub, or in an interview in a media section of a paper), but we accept that they all have every right to say it.
Newspaper columnists do it every day (in electronic and paper print), as do many other people on radio and TV, in blogs and on websites and forums.
As for being "not very well thought out", that is your opinion perhaps coloured by your own political and economic viewpoints. Others may disagree (which is their right), especially if the actions of a Government materially affect them, their job, or their ability to do their job, or are contrary to their beliefs (which is again their right).
while holding a position which gives us considerable influence over them.
How does RTD influence you or I? You don't respect his views or his work, and you won't be watching Torchwood Miracle Day "even if they paid you", so how does what he say have any influence?
How does RTD influence you or I? You don't respect his views or his work, and you won't be watching Torchwood Miracle Day "even if they paid you", so how does what he say have any influence?
Unfortunately, in our current celebrity obsessed climate in which simply having one's name known is seen as somehow indicative of being important, anyone in a postion like Davies or Moffat does have influence over the public. It isn't necessarily a deserved influence, it isn't necessarily logical that they should have it, but they do-and they know it. And that means they have a responsibility to exercise a certain amount of restraint.
I'm sorry to take this thread into the continuous never ending political side of an interview that is mostly nothing to do with that point, but I just feel I need to add a few comments. So apologies.
First point I wanted to talk about how RTD's views don't show respect for another persons vote. I don't agree with this at all. For one RTD takes a Jibe out of the Tories, not those who voted for them. I too hate that party, but I still respect another persons right to vote for them, just like those who are annoyed with labour, and have cursed them under their breath, doesn't mean that they hate everyone who voted for them. Why because everyone votes with different reasons, even those who vote for parties like the BNP are not all inheritely racist, some are just pissed off with the main parties. RTD talks about the members, and he finds them evil, I would call them liars...but again, just like RTD, I am not commenting on the voters. Big difference. So yeah disagree all you want with him or me, but to lose respect for comment that even the likes of Cameron would take light heartedly. Like Lach said, he didn't demand someone's death, just expressed in his usual exaggerated expressive words. That interview even says that he is using humour.
Second point is about whether he has the right to comment on this subject matter because he isn't looking at the bigger picture. I say why should he, when he is being asked to comment on his own industry. Again using my own views, as sad as the cuts at the BBC make me, its not what gets me angry, its the treatment of the mental health services. While I agree with RTD, you will only ever hear me passionatly talk about at political related discussion is the mental health services. so going back to Moff and RTD...to expect them to talk about anything other than the cuts in thier industry is showing naivete. They are probably are aware of the bigger picture, but are not asked. They are hardly saying to shut down schools and hospitals so they can make a tv show!
Third point is influence. If either could sway the vote, considerong that they have been saying this for a long time, add DT also encouraging people not to vote Tories since 2005, we still would have Labour in power. And people related to the show having a negative view on the Tory party is nothing new, unless people finally succumbed to the hypnotising ways of the Kandyman in 1997
Celebrities may influence a couple odd people here or there, about what to wear, where to go, what music is cool....but overall I don't feel many celebrities have an influnce on the vote.... can't think of the last time a party won because of one...yeah sure political parties show off their celebrity backing...but no one had been claimed as being the reason to win. They have as much political influence as much as a politician can get you listening to the Arctic Monkeys!
I'm sorry to take this thread into the continuous never ending political side of an interview that is mostly nothing to do with that point, but I just feel I need to add a few comments. So apologies.
First point I wanted to talk about how RTD's don't show respect for another persons vote. I don't agree with this at all. For one RTD takes a Jibe out of the Tories, not those who voted for them. I too hate that party,
Which rather undermines your argument, since you are applying a sweeping and needlessly emotive statement to a collection of individuals with differing views, just as he did.
but I still respect another persons right to vote for them, just like those who are annoyed with labour, and have cursed them under their breath, doesn't mean that they hate everyone who voted for them. Why because everyone votes with different reasons, even those who vote for parties like the BNP are not inheritely racist, some are just pissed off with the main parties. RTD talks about the members, and he finds them evil, I would call them liars
And again: why? And do you honestly believe that being affiliated to one specific party makes someone inherently more or less likely to be truthful?
...but again, just like RTD, I am not commenting on the voters. Big difference. So yeah disagree all you want with him or me, but to lose respect for comment that even the likes of Cameron would take light heartedly. Like Lach said, he didn't demand someone's death, just expressed in his usual exaggerated expressive words. That interview even says that he is using humour.
Which is clearly a very subjective thing.
Second point is about whether he has the right to comment on this subject matter because he isn't looking at the bigger picture. I say why should he, when he is being asked to comment on his own industry. Again using my own views, as sad as the cits at the BBC make me, its not what gets me angry, its the treatment of the mental health services. While I agree with RTD, you will only ever hear me passionatly talk about at political related discussion is the mental health services. so going back to Moff and RTD...to expect them to talk about anything other than the cuts in thier industry is showing naivete. They are probably are aware of the bigger picture, but are not asked. They are hardly saying to shut down schools and hospitals so they can make a tv show!
But again, that's the whole point! The NS, the BBC, none of these things exist in isolation! If you want to actually understand what's going on and why certain decisions are made, you have to take a broader view than that. Because no Government can afford to take a narrow one.
Third point is influence. If either could sway the vote, considerong that they have been saying this for a long time, add DT also encouraging people not to vote Tories since 2005
Which I consider equally irresponsible and an abuse of position.
, we still would have Labour in power. And people related to the show having a negative view on the Tory party is nothing new, unless people finally succumbed to the hypnotising ways of the Kandyman in 1997
Speaking as a Conservative who rather liked that story because it was extremely clever, I'm a little conflicted on this point...:D
Unfortunately, in our current celebrity obsessed climate in which simply having one's name known is seen as somehow indicative of being important, anyone in a postion like Davies or Moffat does have influence over the public. It isn't necessarily a deserved influence, it isn't necessarily logical that they should have it, but they do-and they know it. And that means they have a responsibility to exercise a certain amount of restraint.
So they should hold back on their true feelings and opinions just because they're in the public eye???
Which rather undermines your argument, since you are applying a sweeping and needlessly emotive statement to a collection of individuals with differing views, just as he did. And again: why? And do you honestly believe that being affiliated to one specific party makes someone inherently more or less likely to be truthful? Which is clearly a very subjective thing. But again, that's the whole point! The NS, the BBC, none of these things exist in isolation! If you want to actually understand what's going on and why certain decisions are made, you have to take a broader view than that. Because no Government can afford to take a narrow one. Which I consider equally irresponsible and an abuse of position.Speaking as a Conservative who rather liked that story because it was extremely clever, I'm a little conflicted on this point...:D
Which rather undermines your argument, since you are applying a sweeping and needlessly emotive statement to a collection of individuals with differing views, just as he did.
No it doesn't undermine my argument...because the poster took an issue with RTD not respecting his vote...when that has nothing to do with what he said. Yes RTD did sum up the Tories as evil, but his comments are more targetd at their policies, and two particular people...which he has the right to say even if you or thousands don't agree. When people have an issue with a political party...no one goes around saying...oh Bob From the Fry your Chicken is fine, but Allan from Fry your Chicken is annoying!!! No you would just sum up the whole party as being the things you feel they are. Like if I was to decsribe the last government I would say that "Labour were very dissapointing, and have made many people lose faith in them" or the worst I would mention Tony Blair/Gordon Brown....I wouldn't go into each inidividual party memeber....with politics, when you are talking generally as RTD was doing so....he made a sweeping comment, as is common. I am sure if he had said that the Tories were wonderful, and doing a great job, when equally there could be a town unhappy with the choices their local MP has been involved in, because he generally turned out to be a sh*t MP...he wouldn't have mentioned that becuase overall he would have felt they were doing great, and I just can't imagine you have a problem with a positive and equally emotive sweeping comment. Forget that, like I said in my first post in this thread...even you made a sweeping remark about his work.....you hate the decisions he has made....why haven't you ever taken the time to consider why he may have made those choices...instead of claiming that he can't write....after all you have hardly the same expertise and experience of writing for a big TV show like he does.....so why the hell do you make sweeping criticism of his work...if RTD has no right to comment on something he is supposedly not an expert in...than neither do you in terms of his work....
And again: why? And do you honestly believe that being affiliated to one specific party makes someone inherently more or less likely to be truthful?
No...again refering to what I said above...when you talk about a particualr party...you don't go through the details of every MP and their mortives....but if they have chosen to work for a party where you feel the policies are not right, you generally comment on the party....I was justt generally speaking about my views on the tories, one of many views....in fact I feel the same about all the parties....I feel they are liars...I really don't know who to trust....but I prefer some of the policies of the Labour Party, than I do of the Tories...and that is my right as is yours for your support of the Tories....
Which is clearly a very subjective thing. But again, that's the whole point!
I didn't exactly say that you are not allowed to lose respect....I said I disagreed...which I am sure you will give me the right to do no??
The NS, the BBC, none of these things exist in isolation! If you want to actually understand what's going on and why certain decisions are made, you have to take a broader view than that. Because no Government can afford to take a narrow one.
I didn't say they did...and like I basically said niether do either Moff or RTD....they are not saying that only the BBC is facing cuts are they? Or that everything else should be cut and not the BBC....again they are talking about their own industry...which they have every right to.....you say what you say is becuase you agree with the cuts, you feel that they need to....well that too is subjective, some of us feel that they are cutting the wrong things...and we are all going to be sensitive about our own industry more....again disagree, feel that all the cuts are something they have do....and argue your case....but accept that not all will agree with you either....its a fact of life....when it comes to politics, not everyone will agree, some will have controversial views, and some will not have an opinion at all....its called being human....
Which I consider equally irresponsible and an abuse of position.
First you prove to me that the moment someone becomes famous it is put into their contract that they must not be allowed to share a poilitical view as its irresponsible...I will give you that....fair enough if they were using their power to get out of jail....but to air an opinion...
Speaking as a Conservative who rather liked that story because it was extremely clever, I'm a little conflicted on this point...:D
Comments
Well said!
**applauds** This forum misses you!
Seconded.
And your bloody minded "stop playing with my trainset" view is literally no more important than Kevin's or mine or anyone elses. I'm sure RTD isn't losing a wink of sleep over your views.
To be honest nor do I, I just think you are rather petulant and that makes me sad because it's views like yours that lead show runners to be a bit dismissive of fandom. I don't blame them for that because if I had to listen to the views of someone who only wants to pick pick pick away because they aren't in change - I'd probably dismiss the lot of us as eejits as well. Which is a shame because most people are glad it's coming back and really looking forward to it. Shame you can't let people enjoy things without being the voice of DOOM!
Absolutely right. They couldn't make something just for the fans anyway, not unless it was a co-production jointly financed by the BBC and another TV company, or consisting of much shorter seasons and/or shorter episodes, and shown later on a weekday on BBC2. But it's interesting you mention The Happiness Patrol, because I think it's around when they were making that story that the people working on Doctor Who had the least idea what it was about.
Its unfortunate because there can be no reasoning or debate after such a statement. Only threads like this. Its the comment of a demagogue. If you believe the government are evil then you don't have to listen to their position or your own. You can happily oppose all they do, safe in the knowledge that they are evil so you must be good.
Disappointing.
None.
That was how I read it.
I put forward two options, so which is the one that you took to be what was meant?
Sorry-the second one.
My enjoyment of his work on Who is unchanged but my respect for him now reflects the respect he has shown for my voting decision.
He didn't suggest that all immigrants should be killed, or that people over 65 should be killed. He ventured an opinion on the current government. Welcome to a dictatorship if you don't want him to do that.
I'd rather people are allowed to give their opinion. At least it means we are still living in a free democracy.
I had no such respect for his work. I do respect Steven Moffat's. But regardless of that, I am disgusted at the attitude displayed by both of them, in Davies' most recent interview and in Moffat's similar comments made months ago. They display a total ignorance of the subject they are discussing and a totally naive and blinkered world view. Both of them appear concerned with one thing and one thing only: the BBC, and the fact that the Government isn't giving it shed loads of money. That, it seems, is the number one priority in the eyes of these two highly paid television producers, but they are totally failing to see the bigger picture. Cuts, whether you agree with them or not, are being made everywhere. Not, as RTD seems to believe, because the Prime Minister is secretly the Hooded Claw and feeds off human misery, but because they are needed. As I said earlier, no Government makes cuts which will alienate the voters unless they have to, because it would be a suicidally stupid thing to do from a career point of view. The BBC wanted to raise the liccence fee: we are living in a country where many people are having serious difficulty affording petrol to drive to work, and the Government has yet to find an economically viable way of addressing that rather pressing matter, is it really feasible for them to ask those same people to pay more for the BBC when they're trying to reduce their outgoings? The BBC also want Government subsidies: the Government are telling Local Authorities they can't afford to give them the money they need to subsidize public transport, is it really realistic for them to give more money to the BBC to create a new series of Sky Diving Reality Chefs? But none of that matters to Russ and Steve, the big picture doesn't exist, only their own industry matters. And worse, their ill considered comments will make a distressingly large number of the general public share that blinkered view, because they too are not seeing the bigger picture! The Government is not 'evil'. The Government itself is not collectively anything, it is a collection of individuals doing a difficult joib trying to balance the needs and wants of a society full of different and opposing factions. Some of the decisions it makes are right, some are wrong. Some, we won't be able to judge until a few years down the line. But either way, whatever RTD seems to believe, Ernst Stavro Blofeld is not a member of the cabinet.
All true.
The difference is, most of us are not airing our not very well thought out views to several million people while holding a position which gives us considerable influence over them.
Newspaper columnists do it every day (in electronic and paper print), as do many other people on radio and TV, in blogs and on websites and forums.
As for being "not very well thought out", that is your opinion perhaps coloured by your own political and economic viewpoints. Others may disagree (which is their right), especially if the actions of a Government materially affect them, their job, or their ability to do their job, or are contrary to their beliefs (which is again their right).
How does RTD influence you or I? You don't respect his views or his work, and you won't be watching Torchwood Miracle Day "even if they paid you", so how does what he say have any influence?
Unfortunately, in our current celebrity obsessed climate in which simply having one's name known is seen as somehow indicative of being important, anyone in a postion like Davies or Moffat does have influence over the public. It isn't necessarily a deserved influence, it isn't necessarily logical that they should have it, but they do-and they know it. And that means they have a responsibility to exercise a certain amount of restraint.
First point I wanted to talk about how RTD's views don't show respect for another persons vote. I don't agree with this at all. For one RTD takes a Jibe out of the Tories, not those who voted for them. I too hate that party, but I still respect another persons right to vote for them, just like those who are annoyed with labour, and have cursed them under their breath, doesn't mean that they hate everyone who voted for them. Why because everyone votes with different reasons, even those who vote for parties like the BNP are not all inheritely racist, some are just pissed off with the main parties. RTD talks about the members, and he finds them evil, I would call them liars...but again, just like RTD, I am not commenting on the voters. Big difference. So yeah disagree all you want with him or me, but to lose respect for comment that even the likes of Cameron would take light heartedly. Like Lach said, he didn't demand someone's death, just expressed in his usual exaggerated expressive words. That interview even says that he is using humour.
Second point is about whether he has the right to comment on this subject matter because he isn't looking at the bigger picture. I say why should he, when he is being asked to comment on his own industry. Again using my own views, as sad as the cuts at the BBC make me, its not what gets me angry, its the treatment of the mental health services. While I agree with RTD, you will only ever hear me passionatly talk about at political related discussion is the mental health services. so going back to Moff and RTD...to expect them to talk about anything other than the cuts in thier industry is showing naivete. They are probably are aware of the bigger picture, but are not asked. They are hardly saying to shut down schools and hospitals so they can make a tv show!
Third point is influence. If either could sway the vote, considerong that they have been saying this for a long time, add DT also encouraging people not to vote Tories since 2005, we still would have Labour in power. And people related to the show having a negative view on the Tory party is nothing new, unless people finally succumbed to the hypnotising ways of the Kandyman in 1997
So they should hold back on their true feelings and opinions just because they're in the public eye???
Utter nonsense.
Tosh!
No it doesn't undermine my argument...because the poster took an issue with RTD not respecting his vote...when that has nothing to do with what he said. Yes RTD did sum up the Tories as evil, but his comments are more targetd at their policies, and two particular people...which he has the right to say even if you or thousands don't agree. When people have an issue with a political party...no one goes around saying...oh Bob From the Fry your Chicken is fine, but Allan from Fry your Chicken is annoying!!! No you would just sum up the whole party as being the things you feel they are. Like if I was to decsribe the last government I would say that "Labour were very dissapointing, and have made many people lose faith in them" or the worst I would mention Tony Blair/Gordon Brown....I wouldn't go into each inidividual party memeber....with politics, when you are talking generally as RTD was doing so....he made a sweeping comment, as is common. I am sure if he had said that the Tories were wonderful, and doing a great job, when equally there could be a town unhappy with the choices their local MP has been involved in, because he generally turned out to be a sh*t MP...he wouldn't have mentioned that becuase overall he would have felt they were doing great, and I just can't imagine you have a problem with a positive and equally emotive sweeping comment. Forget that, like I said in my first post in this thread...even you made a sweeping remark about his work.....you hate the decisions he has made....why haven't you ever taken the time to consider why he may have made those choices...instead of claiming that he can't write....after all you have hardly the same expertise and experience of writing for a big TV show like he does.....so why the hell do you make sweeping criticism of his work...if RTD has no right to comment on something he is supposedly not an expert in...than neither do you in terms of his work....
No...again refering to what I said above...when you talk about a particualr party...you don't go through the details of every MP and their mortives....but if they have chosen to work for a party where you feel the policies are not right, you generally comment on the party....I was justt generally speaking about my views on the tories, one of many views....in fact I feel the same about all the parties....I feel they are liars...I really don't know who to trust....but I prefer some of the policies of the Labour Party, than I do of the Tories...and that is my right as is yours for your support of the Tories....
I didn't exactly say that you are not allowed to lose respect....I said I disagreed...which I am sure you will give me the right to do no??
I didn't say they did...and like I basically said niether do either Moff or RTD....they are not saying that only the BBC is facing cuts are they? Or that everything else should be cut and not the BBC....again they are talking about their own industry...which they have every right to.....you say what you say is becuase you agree with the cuts, you feel that they need to....well that too is subjective, some of us feel that they are cutting the wrong things...and we are all going to be sensitive about our own industry more....again disagree, feel that all the cuts are something they have do....and argue your case....but accept that not all will agree with you either....its a fact of life....when it comes to politics, not everyone will agree, some will have controversial views, and some will not have an opinion at all....its called being human....
First you prove to me that the moment someone becomes famous it is put into their contract that they must not be allowed to share a poilitical view as its irresponsible...I will give you that....fair enough if they were using their power to get out of jail....but to air an opinion...
That is because you didn't watch it properly...:p