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
I think something like this is a perfect example of something that shouldn't be edited out of any future repeats as it's totally insubstantial and inconsequential.
I don't think we should start censoring TV. We all know that Savile et al committed horrible crimes; nobody's going to watch a cuddly reference to Rolf Harris and think he's a nice bloke. And as others have said, upsetting incidents that reflect something that went on in a person's life happen all the time, even in comedy shows.
I think there are parallels to the Nazis; not in the severity of the crimes but in the fact that we have a group of entertainers all working for the same organisation in roughly the same era. Something about that culture, whether it's turning a tactful blind eye or being indifferent, allowed those entertainers to commit their crimes and essentially lead a double life. Of course the individuals are personally culpable but the BBC can't ignore the fact that their past members turned a blind eye to it.
I don't think we should start censoring TV. We all know that Savile et al committed horrible crimes; nobody's going to watch a cuddly reference to Rolf Harris and think he's a nice bloke. And as others have said, upsetting incidents that reflect something that went on in a person's life happen all the time, even in comedy shows.
I think there are parallels to the Nazis; not in the severity of the crimes but in the fact that we have a group of entertainers all working for the same organisation in roughly the same era. Something about that culture, whether it's turning a tactful blind eye or being indifferent, allowed those entertainers to commit their crimes and essentially lead a double life. Of course the individuals are personally culpable but the BBC can't ignore the fact that their past members turned a blind eye to it.
Oh dear, not this again. So you GENUINELY believe that this dark cloud of debauchery floated over White City in the 1970s whilst the sun of pure decency lit up all ITV studios? REALLY? There was Savile (who avoided physically being inside the BBC whenever he could, but let's not that spoil the story) and his mates (who weren't his mates, but let's not let that spoil the story, either) acting like they were in a Felllini movie non-stop, and there were all those beacons of moral probity over at LWT, Thames, Carlton and Granada, reading St Augustine and the Bible in between filming. Yup, that's right. I can't believe you're that naive. The more interesting story is why one company is being obsessively investigated, whilst the other one is strangely ignored.
Oh dear, not this again. So you GENUINELY believe that this dark cloud of debauchery floated over White City in the 1970s whilst the sun of pure decency lit up all ITV studios? REALLY? There was Savile (who avoided physically being inside the BBC whenever he could, but let's not that spoil the story) and his mates (who weren't his mates, but let's not let that spoil the story, either) acting like they were in a Felllini movie non-stop, and there were all those beacons of moral probity over at LWT, Thames, Carlton and Granada, reading St Augustine and the Bible in between filming. Yup, that's right. I can't believe you're that naive. The more interesting story is why one company is being obsessively investigated, whilst the other one is strangely ignored.
Okay, a wider TV culture then. I'm not saying that ITV were innocent but there was a known collection of people all linked with the BBC and all promoted as popular entertainers. Whether there was a similar culture at ITV has not been fully investigated; as you say, that should come under some scrutiny.
My point is that a culture of turning a blind eye allows criminals to enact their crimes. The fact that the prolific offenders are all linked to the BBC suggests that there was a culture within that organisation that meant that these people weren't vetted properly and complaints weren't sufficiently dealt with. By censoring these figures (I don't mean simply choosing not to repeat things that feature them but making edits or pulling things from the schedule), they're basically erasing them from history and pretending that there wasn't a time when these figures were presented to us as 'beloved' entertainers.
Okay, a wider TV culture then. I'm not saying that ITV were innocent but there was a known collection of people all linked with the BBC and all promoted as popular entertainers. Whether there was a similar culture at ITV has not been fully investigated; as you say, that should come under some scrutiny.
.
There's always been a known collection of people linked with ITV companies. Aside from actors on Corrie (a tabloid exception to the rule since the days of Peter Adamson/Len Fairclough), none of them appear to have interested Mark Williams Thomas, the Daily Mail or the Murdoch press. I wonder why. All that talk about the culture of the times, and yet no investigation of ITV studios and/or personalities. And what also needs more thought is how these places were supposed to be patrolled. Was Bill Cotton supposed to be poking his nose into each dressing room as he made his daily tour? Was someone at reception meant to be watching on closed circuit TV as all the actors got undressed? It's presented now as if this was all terribly straightforward when it was anything but - and the journalists know that only too well.
The fact that the prolific offenders are all linked to the BBC suggests that there was a culture within that organisation that meant that these people weren't vetted properly and complaints weren't sufficiently dealt with.
Which of these "prolific offenders" do you believe had no links with ITV?
So on the basis Savile is wiped from history, what about scenes from 'Fix It' such as the scouts trying to eat on the rollercoaster. He never appeared on any of them apart from one where he went with a boy to see where Jesus would have lived.
Who the hell would ever repeat It's a Knockout or Animal Hospital anyway? They were utterly evanescent.
Can't agree with that as It's A Knockout is one of the TV memories from my past and Stuart Hall's infectious laughing was part of that, however, they will of course never be repeated, but because of Hall's involvment, not because it is evanescent
Haven't read the whole thread but there was a scene involving Jimmy Savile in an episode of Life on Mars. Sam is watching TOTP and his aunty speaks to him from the TV, the episode is presented by Savile. No doubt they'll cut this out of repeats which are currently showing on Sony TV I would have thought.
Just buy the DVDs then you wont have to worry. I bet the price of The Two Doctors DVD has skyrocketed in price due to a Jim ll Fixit clip featuring Sir Jimmy & Colin Baker interacting!
A lot of shows would get affected even TOWIE had one of the cast dressed as Saville about 2 weeks before it came out what he did. Personally I say leave it alone I know what they did but you should not have to apologise for stuff that was done before it was known.
Which of these "prolific offenders" do you believe had no links with ITV?
Of course they had links to other organisations- I know Rolf Harris did some stuff with ITV (hence the Benidorm issue, I imagine)- but they were famously associated with the BBC so naturally their name will crop up.
Censoring television is ridiculous. We know now that the TV personas of Savile et al are far from reality; obviously people don't want their faces constantly popping up in their cheery personas but we can't pretend there was a time when people didn't mistake their persona for their real-life behaviour.
That was, (IIRC) filmed about 2013, when the Savile allegations were well-known.
Are the Savile and Harris gags seperate? Harris was on trial in 2013, but he
hadn't been found guilty then.
The Savile impersonations were in the context of what is now known about him and the fact that Brydon describes him as a nice man in his autobiography! The Harris impression was just a straight impression and clearly done before the allegations were made, but broadcast after they were, interestingly. I can see that getting cut from repeats.Coogan said in an interview afterwards that "all the people we impersonate are being investigated by Operation Yewtree!"
The Savile impersonations were in the context of what is now known about him and the fact that Brydon describes him as a nice man in his autobiography! The Harris impression was just a straight impression and clearly done before the allegations were made, but broadcast after they were, interestingly. I can see that getting cut from repeats.Coogan said in an interview afterwards that "all the people we impersonate are being investigated by Operation Yewtree!"
It would make no sense to keep the Savile impressions but cut the Harris one. It's hardly a kids show so i'd be surprised if they edited any repeats.
It would make no sense to keep the Savile impressions but cut the Harris one. It's hardly a kids show so i'd be surprised if they edited any repeats.
It wouldn't surprise me though. It's only quick and doesn't really add anything. Plus, as I say, the Savile ones are actually talking about the allegations. Neither is in the film version.
I think something like this is a perfect example of something that shouldn't be edited out of any future repeats as it's totally insubstantial and inconsequential.
They could obscure the picture on the t-shirt as they sometimes do with company logos on the BBC.
I would imagine that there is someone at the BBC busily engaged in checking all the old quiz shows that they repeat (Eggheads, Pointless, Perferction etc) to make sure none of the questions refer to Saville, Harris or Hall. There was a round on the repeat of Pointless yesterday about artists who had only one number 1 hit. This was made a couple of years ago and could easily have had Harris as one of the answers. Presumably if it had the entire series would be rendered useless as it would be impossible to edit one answer out and difficult to dump one show when it relies on continuity in the form of the rollover of prize money and contestants appearing on two consecutive shows.
I would imagine that there is someone at the BBC busily engaged in checking all the old quiz shows that they repeat (Eggheads, Pointless, Perferction etc) to make sure none of the questions refer to Saville, Harris or Hall. There was a round on the repeat of Pointless yesterday about artists who had only one number 1 hit. This was made a couple of years ago and could easily have had Harris as one of the answers. Presumably if it had the entire series would be rendered useless as it would be impossible to edit one answer out and difficult to dump one show when it relies on continuity in the form of the rollover of prize money and contestants appearing on two consecutive shows.
I made excatly the same point to my wife yesterday while watching Pointless.
Guess they may just chop the one programme and hope no-one would really notice.
The most stupid bit of censorship I've heard of is where the BBC won't allow repeats of a couple of series of Bergerac because the building used to film scenes of the police HQ was a former childrens' home which was at the centre of a child abuse scandal a few years ago.
Comments
I think something like this is a perfect example of something that shouldn't be edited out of any future repeats as it's totally insubstantial and inconsequential.
I think there are parallels to the Nazis; not in the severity of the crimes but in the fact that we have a group of entertainers all working for the same organisation in roughly the same era. Something about that culture, whether it's turning a tactful blind eye or being indifferent, allowed those entertainers to commit their crimes and essentially lead a double life. Of course the individuals are personally culpable but the BBC can't ignore the fact that their past members turned a blind eye to it.
Oh dear, not this again. So you GENUINELY believe that this dark cloud of debauchery floated over White City in the 1970s whilst the sun of pure decency lit up all ITV studios? REALLY? There was Savile (who avoided physically being inside the BBC whenever he could, but let's not that spoil the story) and his mates (who weren't his mates, but let's not let that spoil the story, either) acting like they were in a Felllini movie non-stop, and there were all those beacons of moral probity over at LWT, Thames, Carlton and Granada, reading St Augustine and the Bible in between filming. Yup, that's right. I can't believe you're that naive. The more interesting story is why one company is being obsessively investigated, whilst the other one is strangely ignored.
Okay, a wider TV culture then. I'm not saying that ITV were innocent but there was a known collection of people all linked with the BBC and all promoted as popular entertainers. Whether there was a similar culture at ITV has not been fully investigated; as you say, that should come under some scrutiny.
My point is that a culture of turning a blind eye allows criminals to enact their crimes. The fact that the prolific offenders are all linked to the BBC suggests that there was a culture within that organisation that meant that these people weren't vetted properly and complaints weren't sufficiently dealt with. By censoring these figures (I don't mean simply choosing not to repeat things that feature them but making edits or pulling things from the schedule), they're basically erasing them from history and pretending that there wasn't a time when these figures were presented to us as 'beloved' entertainers.
There's always been a known collection of people linked with ITV companies. Aside from actors on Corrie (a tabloid exception to the rule since the days of Peter Adamson/Len Fairclough), none of them appear to have interested Mark Williams Thomas, the Daily Mail or the Murdoch press. I wonder why. All that talk about the culture of the times, and yet no investigation of ITV studios and/or personalities. And what also needs more thought is how these places were supposed to be patrolled. Was Bill Cotton supposed to be poking his nose into each dressing room as he made his daily tour? Was someone at reception meant to be watching on closed circuit TV as all the actors got undressed? It's presented now as if this was all terribly straightforward when it was anything but - and the journalists know that only too well.
Can't agree with that as It's A Knockout is one of the TV memories from my past and Stuart Hall's infectious laughing was part of that, however, they will of course never be repeated, but because of Hall's involvment, not because it is evanescent
If the BBC had their way they would just burn the master tapes.
Just buy the DVDs then you wont have to worry. I bet the price of The Two Doctors DVD has skyrocketed in price due to a Jim ll Fixit clip featuring Sir Jimmy & Colin Baker interacting!
Of course they had links to other organisations- I know Rolf Harris did some stuff with ITV (hence the Benidorm issue, I imagine)- but they were famously associated with the BBC so naturally their name will crop up.
Censoring television is ridiculous. We know now that the TV personas of Savile et al are far from reality; obviously people don't want their faces constantly popping up in their cheery personas but we can't pretend there was a time when people didn't mistake their persona for their real-life behaviour.
That was, (IIRC) filmed about 2013, when the Savile allegations were well-known.
Are the Savile and Harris gags seperate? Harris was accused in the Autumn
of 2013, but he hadn't been found guilty then.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d1Lx8QvxVNc
There was also a Chris Morris radio sketch about Savile, which Morris
was forced to apologise for:
https://soundcloud.com/ultraculture/chris-morris-on-jimmy-saviles
http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/prank-master-chris-morriss-announcement-of-the-death-of-michael-heseltine-on-radio-1-was-just-one-among-many-notorious-japes-his-satire-is-big-with-the-media-but-how-popular-is-it-with-listeners-1377835.html
Given I'm a fan of VLS and Morris, I'm surprised I wasn't aware of these skits
until after the old monster had died.
It would make no sense to keep the Savile impressions but cut the Harris one. It's hardly a kids show so i'd be surprised if they edited any repeats.
It wouldn't surprise me though. It's only quick and doesn't really add anything. Plus, as I say, the Savile ones are actually talking about the allegations. Neither is in the film version.
They could obscure the picture on the t-shirt as they sometimes do with company logos on the BBC.
He probably was a nice man when Rob met him. You cant base everyone s point on the same thing.
I made excatly the same point to my wife yesterday while watching Pointless.
Guess they may just chop the one programme and hope no-one would really notice.