The BBC did formally announce a full thirteen plus special series for 2012. This was gratefully received by people who had read the press story of there being less than a full series. The BBC had to retract that formal announcement of a full series in 2012 and clarify that there wouldn't be a full series run in 2012.
The BBC announced 13 episodes for 2012 which soon was changed to 5.
Can someone provide a link to this official announcement that there would be a full series shown in 2012.
As far as I remember all that was announced (in June 2011) was that a full 14 episodes was being produced but there was no mention of it all being shown in 2012.
People just assumed it was going to be.
Also everyone seems to be saying that Series 7b won't air till April, has this been announced? The only mention i've seen is Spring which menas it could be earlier.
Also everyone seems to be saying that Series 7b won't air till April, has this been announced? The only mention i've seen is Spring which means it could be earlier.
Not much earlier.
I'd expect it to start at Easter, like it always used to.
Can someone provide a link to this official announcement that there would be a full series shown in 2012.
As far as I remember all that was announced (in June 2011) was that a full 14 episodes was being produced but there was no mention of it all being shown in 2012.
People just assumed it was going to be.
Also everyone seems to be saying that Series 7b won't air till April, has this been announced? The only mention i've seen is Spring which menas it could be earlier.
They rushed the story out in response to the Private Eye story that less than a full series was going to be shown in 2012. It is unreasonable to expect people to have interpreted it as anything other than a rebuttal of the Private Eye story. However in the face of follow up questions they had to correct the story and confirm that indeed, Private Eye were right to say that 2012 would see very much less than a full run.
Leaving the broadcast years out of the announcement is as clear an example of spinning a story as you are likely to get. Textbook. No serious person believes they accidentally forgot to mention the small matter that the truth confirmed the substance of at least one important part of the Private Eye story they were trying to rebut.
I will refer to it as Series 7 Part 2 because it's just easier seeing as DVDs, websites and everywhere else will be referring to them as such.
I'm a bit disappointed that we're not getting as much Doctor Who as we used to, especially in the anniversary year, but I suppose it can't be helped what with budget cuts and possible difficulties behind the scenes.
Why are people assuming we'll be getting only one anniversary special? I would have thought that we'd get more; three or four maybe.
I'm keeping my fingers crossed there is more than one special. There certainly should be. I'm also closing my eyes and wishing really really hard, that they have some secret episodes or something, already in the can, that they aren't telling us about.
You never know- it could happen? They did say "more Who than ever before"(please don't flame my childlike dreams away, I know it's unlikely now but my left brain isn't telling my right brain that.)
I dunno- maybe they are going to show loads of classic episodes. That would be good too, as there's bound to be something I haven't seen before, but what we really all want is more new episodes.
It's refreshing to read a post from someone who is optimistically hoping for more episodes than seem likely without utterly deluding themselves about what is happening in the real world and what has already actually happened in the real world. Fingers crossed for multiple specials then.
Yeah. Well I know we probably won't get more episodes than the 7b, the special then christmas, BUT I'm still like wanting to be happily surprised by 'something'.
The BBC actually announced 14 episodes for Series 7. Five have aired in September 2012, one will air in December 2012/Christmas Day and the remaining eight are airing in Spring 2013.
Why are people assuming we'll be getting only one anniversary special? I would have thought that we'd get more; three or four maybe.
The nature of the anniversary special has not been officially confirmed. However, people are not just "assuming" it will only be one anniversary special. There has been at least one press article specifically describing it as a single 90 minute episode. Of course the reality might not match this report, but as you can see forum members are not just making this stuff up out of thin air. It is ok to treat press reports with caution. But I hope it can be accepted that forum members have genuine and reasonable cause for their predictions.
As we have seen on this thread some people wish to remain in utter denial of the real world in the face of all evidence (for example, five normal length episodes is somehow the complete opposite of what Private Eye predicted and an on stage announcement of "the genuine reason" for something from the Controller of BBC One at a BBC event is somehow not in any way official.)
The BBC actually announced 14 episodes for Series 7. Five have aired in September 2012, one will air in December 2012/Christmas Day and the remaining eight are airing in Spring 2013.
They announced the 14 episodes in direct response to the Private Eye story claiming that only a small number of episodes were to be broadcast in 2012. They phoned Ian Hislop, the editor of Private Eye to get his side of the story before they released the press release (Private Eye had not yet gone to press, so they had to call him to get the gist.) The only reason the press release was ever created was directly and specifically to undermine the Private Eye story about what was going to be broadcast in 2012. They rather conveniently tried not to mention the inconvenient truth that Private Eye were right in, at the very least, one crucial aspect. However their cover was soon blown. It was spin.
Having somewhat reluctantly revealed this, the Controller of BBC One attempted to explain the reason. This didn't work out too well for all concerned.
Really interesting thread. I have to say that I agree with what's been said by Nebogipfel, stcoop and Granny McSmith. All has not been well. And that is sometimes the way of these things. But the 'spin' and misinformation given to fans has been of carcrash proportions.
And yep. I'm pretty pissed off. Not because I have a sense of entitlement and demand however much DW suits me. But because I feel like I've been mislead. And as a fan that watches religiously and spends a good deal of time and money on the show (relatively of course) I think I and we deserve better.
Talk to me last year and I would have been testifying that all was fine and that Moffat had a big plan to bring us back to Autumn and Winter DW hence the split. But this has not been the case. At all. We have had far less. And honestly? I don't think its good for the show. These short episode runs make it difficult to really engage with the show now- and that's coming from a die hard life long fan. What does it do for the 'casual' viewer?
I understand about budget cuts and production problems and upheaval. Can't be helped. But if that is the case then just tell us. Hell we would all get it. Argue all you want about the quality of stories (I happen to think they are better than ever) but what is undeniable is that the look and production standards of the show have never been better. So hey! Just say 'look. We aren't going to have as many episodes but the ones you do get will be stellar'. And they have been. But it doesn't feel the same as it is. And Moffat bless him is a PR disaster.would I say Sherlock has had a detrimental effect on DW? Asked that a year or so ago and I wouldve screamed no. Now? I'm not so sure.
One thing I am sure of. This random thinly spread uncertain run of episodes we have now could lead to a slow death for the show. I was never a doom monger and I hope this will pass but honestly? I worry for the show post 50th anniversary the way things are going.
Also this sporadic sequence of episodes does the stories themselves no favours. I think Moffat has increasingly relied upon a form of 'shorthand' when it comes to trying to provoke an emotional response and connection with the characters and events that happen. Rather than allowing the viewer to form their own attachment with characters organically through the story telling we are instead told how we should feel through the scripts. So you have Mels- a character entirely established through a few minutes of montage and script explained backstory and because of the sad music and situation presented on screen we are supposed to feel something and care when she 'dies' and yet how can you? There has been no time to develop either negative or positive feelings for her so despite the well written lines and the orchestra swelling you are left feeling somewhat empty. Same with the baby Melody storyline- something that should have been earth shattering for the show is tossed out too quickly for the benefit of the short sharp shock and big twist but afterwards its hard to care. Same with Rorys Dad. Why should we even care? It hits all the right notes while you're watching but ultimately it feels lacking. And the split series has only exacerbated this.
Writing wise and direction wise and acting wise I don't think the show has ever been better. But it's hard to invest too much in it. Even the Ponds exit. Should have been so much more but all the gaps and the missing bits damaged it. Compare with Donnas story as told in S4. You went on a journey with her and the doctor and grew to love or hate her. Over thirteen episodes. And it felt like a complete story we all shared. We might be getting blockbusters every week (yeah. Six of them in a year thanks Steven) but its getting dangerously close to beautiful but ultimately a bit hollow popcorn movie making. And with the biggest year of the shows history coming up it shouldn't feel that way. Stakes should be higher than ever before! I hope SM can pull it off. But who knows.
The nature of the anniversary special has not been officially confirmed. However, people are not just "assuming" it will only be one anniversary special. There has been at least one press article specifically describing it as a single 90 minute episode. Of course the reality might not match this report, but as you can see forum members are not just making this stuff up out of thin air. It is ok to treat press reports with caution. But I hope it can be accepted that forum members have genuine and reasonable cause for their predictions.
As we have seen on this thread some people wish to remain in utter denial of the real world in the face of all evidence (for example, five normal length episodes is somehow the complete opposite of what Private Eye predicted and an on stage announcement of "the genuine reason" for something from the Controller of BBC One at a BBC event is somehow not in any way official.)
I'm guessing you can't see the contradiction.
For some reason you seem jolly invested in getting everybody to agree that your subjective interpretation of the few facts available (which involves ignoring some of them) is the true one, where as the people with a different subjective interpretation of the few facts available (which involves taking everything at face value and assuming nothing) are 'utterly deluding themselves'.
For some reason you seem jolly invested in getting everybody to agree that your subjective interpretation of the few facts available (which involves ignoring some of them) is the true one, where as the people with a different subjective interpretation of the few facts available (which involves taking everything at face value and assuming nothing) are 'utterly deluding themselves'.
I didn't say there was only going to be one Special. I said that forum members have reasonable cause to suspect it because Matt Smith talked in the singular. There may be more than one. Hope so - I've said that before in other threads.
My posts are not based on denying the facts. The fact is the BBC put out a misleading press release. They had to correct it. Cohen blamed Moffat in public. Moffat angrily denied it. I have not ignored anything. It is you who has shown determination to turn on its head every thing the BBC has done which others see as poor communication.
I didn't say there was only going to be one Special. I said that forum members have reasonable cause to suspect it because Matt Smith talked in the singular. There may be more than one. Hope so - I've said that before in other threads.
My posts are not based on denying the facts. The fact is the BBC put out a misleading press release. They had to correct it. Cohen blamed Moffat in public. Moffat angrily denied it. I have not ignored anything. It is you who has shown determination to turn on its head every thing the BBC has done which others see as poor communication.
No, it's obviously poor communication, as the confusion shows.
The press release wasn't misleading. What people chose to assume about scheduling is their own choice.
You have ignored the proposal that Danny Cohen's comment was a joke. It is this ommission on your part that leads you to conjour up a whole internal battle at the BBC. If you include that, no contradictions and no evidence of any fight.
Moffat's anger was therefore clearly at BBC News for taking a joke at face value.
See - nothing ignored, everything works. Why introduce speculation?
No, it's obviously poor communication, as the confusion shows.
The press release wasn't misleading. What people chose to assume about scheduling is their own choice.
You have ignored the proposal that Danny Cohen's comment was a joke. It is this ommission on your part that leads you to conjour up a whole internal battle at the BBC. If you include that, no contradictions and no evidence of any fight.
Moffat's anger was therefore clearly at BBC News for taking a joke at face value.
See - nothing ignored, everything works. Why introduce speculation?
It wasn't a joke. This is an invention. He said in a straight tone of voice "that is the genuine reason". He repeated himself for emphasis.
You have ignored the proposal that Danny Cohen's comment was a joke. It is this ommission on your part that leads you to conjour up a whole internal battle at the BBC. If you include that, no contradictions and no evidence of any fight.
Because it wasn't a joke. He was at a meeting in his offical capacity as the Controller of BBC1, answering questions about the channel from (IIRC) a Christian group. The idea that he'd answer all the other questions put to him truthfully and then randomly decide to make a joke when asked about one of his biggest series is utterly ridiculous.
The onus is on you to provide evidence that he was joking rather than on anyone else to prove that he wasn't. And if you're going to bring up Moffat's reponse, as the famous quote (almost) goes, "Well, he would say that, wouldn't he."
Private Eye said that the second half of series 6 wouldn't be ready in time for the end of 2011. (They were wrong.) They also said that there were only going to be four specials in 2012. (Also wrong.)
The BBC subsequently announced that full series 7 had been commisoned. They later clarified that "a good chunk" of them would show in 2012.
This sort of nonsense gets my goat. I'm sick of correcting it. No they didn't. They said that there was concern that the DVD range for the latter part of season 6 wouldn't be ready for the Christmas market.
As for the "Four Specials" issue. Read it again. They said that BBC Wales had *proposed* to make four specials. They also made it pretty clear that BBC execs weren't happy about this.
On top of that, have a look in the last but one issue of DWM, where it's stated that The Power of Three was a late addition to series 7a, which was only going to be four episodes and Christmas, and you can't really dismiss the Private Eye article like that. Who knows what was originally proposed and negotiated?
Re: Budgetary constraints. I don't believe there have been any. According to released figures, at the moment Doctor Who makes approximately 4 times as much money for the corporation as it costs. It made substantially less (obviously) during the gap year in both overseas sales, and merchandise.
I'm sure that the BBC would be happy to fund a full series. I'm convinced that the problems are Moffat is having difficulty producing 14 episodes per year, and all this split for narrative reasons, for a move to Autumn (pah! Season 7b is probably airing in May and June!), and everything else coming from Moffat is very poorly executed spin.
Just because Danny Cohen says something, that doesn't make it right. It is possible that Danny Cohen was simply wrong. If his opinion is later refuted, or shown to be incorrect, it does not necessarily follow that he was either a) joking, or b) lying. Nor should the mistake (or otherwise) be extrapolated to the entirety of the BBC, or appear to be evidence of a massive coverup conspiracy.
Just because Danny Cohen says something, that doesn't make it right. It is possible that Danny Cohen was simply wrong. If his opinion is later refuted, or shown to be incorrect, it does not necessarily follow that he was either a) joking, or b) lying. Nor should the mistake (or otherwise) be extrapolated to the entirety of the BBC, or appear to be evidence of a massive coverup conspiracy.
Where exactly are these people talking about a "coverup conspiracy", as opposed to all-too-typical BBC incompetence and spin?
If you asked Danny Cohen a question about the next series of 'Cash In The Attic' he probably wouldn't have an answer for you off the top of his head. Ask him about one of his top rated and most important series and you can be damn sure he knows what's going on with it.
The only person to ever challenge what he said is Moffat, a man with a vested interest in not looking like he's lost the BBC a ton of money by not being able to produce a series of Doctor Who every year.
Because it wasn't a joke. He was at a meeting in his official capacity as the Controller of BBC1, answering questions about the channel from (IIRC) a Christian group. The idea that he'd answer all the other questions put to him truthfully and then randomly decide to make a joke when asked about one of his biggest series is utterly ridiculous.
The onus is on you to provide evidence that he was joking rather than on anyone else to prove that he wasn't. And if you're going to bring up Moffat's response, as the famous quote (almost) goes, "Well, he would say that, wouldn't he."
Sadly my mind probe is being fixed, so I can't prove it was a joke.
I can only infer it from the facts that (a) people have said it was a joke and (b) if it was a joke, then every other statement on the issue also makes sense.
I posted this a while ago one of the other many threads there has been about the same subject that always seem to descend into the same arguments, but here it is again:
I don't think anyone is being deliberately deceptive but rather that there is some 'miscommunication' between BBC Wales, Main BBC and BBC Worldwide and between them have done a pretty bad job of putting some positive spin on a bad situation. Take a look at these things:
This first clip is of Danny Cohen speaking about the future of Doctor Who shortly after the Private Eye article was published in June last year. Granted he was caught off guard because I think he was at a conference about faith and religion (?) so he wasn't expecting to be questioned on Doctor who, but just listen to his words, especially when he says:
"That's the genuine reason, it's because Steven Moffat is the creative force behind Doctor Who a the moment and he also rather magically at the same time created and got to air Sherlock."
I really don't see how anyone can take Danny Cohen's comments as a joke if you listen to them, but I try to post as many links as facts rather than state opinion, but people can interpret as they wish...
Just because Danny Cohen says something, that doesn't make it right. It is possible that Danny Cohen was simply wrong. If his opinion is later refuted, or shown to be incorrect, it does not necessarily follow that he was either a) joking, or b) lying. Nor should the mistake (or otherwise) be extrapolated to the entirety of the BBC, or appear to be evidence of a massive coverup conspiracy.
Are we at least in agreement that when Danny Cohen says something in his official capacity it is official, incorrect or not?
Clearly one of them is right, and one wrong. Moffat said it has absolutely nothing to do with Sherlock.
Nobody is claiming a massive conspiracy. That's partly our point. The BBC have , yet again, managed to make for themselves a complete mess of things. It's nothing to do with what people may or may not be saying on forums. It is nearly all from their own words and press releases. Instigated by a story in Private Eye (ie journalists who spoke to people involved with the show, not forum members) that looks increasingly likely to have had some truth in it.
I can only infer it from the facts that (a) people have said it was a joke and (b) if it was a joke, then every other statement on the issue also makes sense.
You also have to look at the people claiming he was joking. Moffat, Ed Russell (whose job is to protect the brand image of the series) and DWM editor Tom Spilsbury (aka Moffat's Brown-Noser In Chief.)
The same trio who kept insisting that David Yates wasn't involved in developing a Doctor Who film, even after several interviews in which he said he was.
This sort of nonsense gets my goat. I'm sick of correcting it. No they didn't. They said that there was concern that the DVD range for the latter part of season 6 wouldn't be ready for the Christmas market.
As for the "Four Specials" issue. Read it again. They said that BBC Wales had *proposed* to make four specials. They also made it pretty clear that BBC execs weren't happy about this.
On top of that, have a look in the last but one issue of DWM, where it's stated that The Power of Three was a late addition to series 7a, which was only going to be four episodes and Christmas, and you can't really dismiss the Private Eye article like that. Who knows what was originally proposed and negotiated?
Re: Budgetary constraints. I don't believe there have been any. According to released figures, at the moment Doctor Who makes approximately 4 times as much money for the corporation as it costs. It made substantially less (obviously) during the gap year in both overseas sales, and merchandise.
I'm sure that the BBC would be happy to fund a full series. I'm convinced that the problems are Moffat is having difficulty producing 14 episodes per year, and all this split for narrative reasons, for a move to Autumn (pah! Season 7b is probably airing in May and June!), and everything else coming from Moffat is very poorly executed spin.
I did wonder if the episodes that were broadcast this year were originally intended to be specials, because, apart from The Power of Three, they all had the look of specials, all could have easily been a bit longer and would even explain the gaps between visits to Amy and Rory between each episode. I actually would have preferred four specials, spread throughout the year instead of the five episodes that we had.
Comments
Can someone provide a link to this official announcement that there would be a full series shown in 2012.
As far as I remember all that was announced (in June 2011) was that a full 14 episodes was being produced but there was no mention of it all being shown in 2012.
People just assumed it was going to be.
Also everyone seems to be saying that Series 7b won't air till April, has this been announced? The only mention i've seen is Spring which menas it could be earlier.
Not much earlier.
I'd expect it to start at Easter, like it always used to.
They rushed the story out in response to the Private Eye story that less than a full series was going to be shown in 2012. It is unreasonable to expect people to have interpreted it as anything other than a rebuttal of the Private Eye story. However in the face of follow up questions they had to correct the story and confirm that indeed, Private Eye were right to say that 2012 would see very much less than a full run.
Leaving the broadcast years out of the announcement is as clear an example of spinning a story as you are likely to get. Textbook. No serious person believes they accidentally forgot to mention the small matter that the truth confirmed the substance of at least one important part of the Private Eye story they were trying to rebut.
I'm a bit disappointed that we're not getting as much Doctor Who as we used to, especially in the anniversary year, but I suppose it can't be helped what with budget cuts and possible difficulties behind the scenes.
Why are people assuming we'll be getting only one anniversary special? I would have thought that we'd get more; three or four maybe.
You never know- it could happen? They did say "more Who than ever before"(please don't flame my childlike dreams away, I know it's unlikely now but my left brain isn't telling my right brain that.)
I dunno- maybe they are going to show loads of classic episodes. That would be good too, as there's bound to be something I haven't seen before, but what we really all want is more new episodes.
The nature of the anniversary special has not been officially confirmed. However, people are not just "assuming" it will only be one anniversary special. There has been at least one press article specifically describing it as a single 90 minute episode. Of course the reality might not match this report, but as you can see forum members are not just making this stuff up out of thin air. It is ok to treat press reports with caution. But I hope it can be accepted that forum members have genuine and reasonable cause for their predictions.
As we have seen on this thread some people wish to remain in utter denial of the real world in the face of all evidence (for example, five normal length episodes is somehow the complete opposite of what Private Eye predicted and an on stage announcement of "the genuine reason" for something from the Controller of BBC One at a BBC event is somehow not in any way official.)
They announced the 14 episodes in direct response to the Private Eye story claiming that only a small number of episodes were to be broadcast in 2012. They phoned Ian Hislop, the editor of Private Eye to get his side of the story before they released the press release (Private Eye had not yet gone to press, so they had to call him to get the gist.) The only reason the press release was ever created was directly and specifically to undermine the Private Eye story about what was going to be broadcast in 2012. They rather conveniently tried not to mention the inconvenient truth that Private Eye were right in, at the very least, one crucial aspect. However their cover was soon blown. It was spin.
Having somewhat reluctantly revealed this, the Controller of BBC One attempted to explain the reason. This didn't work out too well for all concerned.
And yep. I'm pretty pissed off. Not because I have a sense of entitlement and demand however much DW suits me. But because I feel like I've been mislead. And as a fan that watches religiously and spends a good deal of time and money on the show (relatively of course) I think I and we deserve better.
Talk to me last year and I would have been testifying that all was fine and that Moffat had a big plan to bring us back to Autumn and Winter DW hence the split. But this has not been the case. At all. We have had far less. And honestly? I don't think its good for the show. These short episode runs make it difficult to really engage with the show now- and that's coming from a die hard life long fan. What does it do for the 'casual' viewer?
I understand about budget cuts and production problems and upheaval. Can't be helped. But if that is the case then just tell us. Hell we would all get it. Argue all you want about the quality of stories (I happen to think they are better than ever) but what is undeniable is that the look and production standards of the show have never been better. So hey! Just say 'look. We aren't going to have as many episodes but the ones you do get will be stellar'. And they have been. But it doesn't feel the same as it is. And Moffat bless him is a PR disaster.would I say Sherlock has had a detrimental effect on DW? Asked that a year or so ago and I wouldve screamed no. Now? I'm not so sure.
One thing I am sure of. This random thinly spread uncertain run of episodes we have now could lead to a slow death for the show. I was never a doom monger and I hope this will pass but honestly? I worry for the show post 50th anniversary the way things are going.
Writing wise and direction wise and acting wise I don't think the show has ever been better. But it's hard to invest too much in it. Even the Ponds exit. Should have been so much more but all the gaps and the missing bits damaged it. Compare with Donnas story as told in S4. You went on a journey with her and the doctor and grew to love or hate her. Over thirteen episodes. And it felt like a complete story we all shared. We might be getting blockbusters every week (yeah. Six of them in a year thanks Steven) but its getting dangerously close to beautiful but ultimately a bit hollow popcorn movie making. And with the biggest year of the shows history coming up it shouldn't feel that way. Stakes should be higher than ever before! I hope SM can pull it off. But who knows.
For some reason you seem jolly invested in getting everybody to agree that your subjective interpretation of the few facts available (which involves ignoring some of them) is the true one, where as the people with a different subjective interpretation of the few facts available (which involves taking everything at face value and assuming nothing) are 'utterly deluding themselves'.
And I'll see your 'one website guessing a 90 minute special based on absolutely no evidence' and raise you the showrunner saying "Why talk in the singular?"
People may weight these sources as they see fit.
I didn't say there was only going to be one Special. I said that forum members have reasonable cause to suspect it because Matt Smith talked in the singular. There may be more than one. Hope so - I've said that before in other threads.
My posts are not based on denying the facts. The fact is the BBC put out a misleading press release. They had to correct it. Cohen blamed Moffat in public. Moffat angrily denied it. I have not ignored anything. It is you who has shown determination to turn on its head every thing the BBC has done which others see as poor communication.
No, it's obviously poor communication, as the confusion shows.
The press release wasn't misleading. What people chose to assume about scheduling is their own choice.
You have ignored the proposal that Danny Cohen's comment was a joke. It is this ommission on your part that leads you to conjour up a whole internal battle at the BBC. If you include that, no contradictions and no evidence of any fight.
Moffat's anger was therefore clearly at BBC News for taking a joke at face value.
See - nothing ignored, everything works. Why introduce speculation?
It wasn't a joke. This is an invention. He said in a straight tone of voice "that is the genuine reason". He repeated himself for emphasis.
Because it wasn't a joke. He was at a meeting in his offical capacity as the Controller of BBC1, answering questions about the channel from (IIRC) a Christian group. The idea that he'd answer all the other questions put to him truthfully and then randomly decide to make a joke when asked about one of his biggest series is utterly ridiculous.
The onus is on you to provide evidence that he was joking rather than on anyone else to prove that he wasn't. And if you're going to bring up Moffat's reponse, as the famous quote (almost) goes, "Well, he would say that, wouldn't he."
This sort of nonsense gets my goat. I'm sick of correcting it. No they didn't. They said that there was concern that the DVD range for the latter part of season 6 wouldn't be ready for the Christmas market.
As for the "Four Specials" issue. Read it again. They said that BBC Wales had *proposed* to make four specials. They also made it pretty clear that BBC execs weren't happy about this.
On top of that, have a look in the last but one issue of DWM, where it's stated that The Power of Three was a late addition to series 7a, which was only going to be four episodes and Christmas, and you can't really dismiss the Private Eye article like that. Who knows what was originally proposed and negotiated?
Re: Budgetary constraints. I don't believe there have been any. According to released figures, at the moment Doctor Who makes approximately 4 times as much money for the corporation as it costs. It made substantially less (obviously) during the gap year in both overseas sales, and merchandise.
I'm sure that the BBC would be happy to fund a full series. I'm convinced that the problems are Moffat is having difficulty producing 14 episodes per year, and all this split for narrative reasons, for a move to Autumn (pah! Season 7b is probably airing in May and June!), and everything else coming from Moffat is very poorly executed spin.
Where exactly are these people talking about a "coverup conspiracy", as opposed to all-too-typical BBC incompetence and spin?
If you asked Danny Cohen a question about the next series of 'Cash In The Attic' he probably wouldn't have an answer for you off the top of his head. Ask him about one of his top rated and most important series and you can be damn sure he knows what's going on with it.
The only person to ever challenge what he said is Moffat, a man with a vested interest in not looking like he's lost the BBC a ton of money by not being able to produce a series of Doctor Who every year.
Sadly my mind probe is being fixed, so I can't prove it was a joke.
I can only infer it from the facts that (a) people have said it was a joke and (b) if it was a joke, then every other statement on the issue also makes sense.
I don't think anyone is being deliberately deceptive but rather that there is some 'miscommunication' between BBC Wales, Main BBC and BBC Worldwide and between them have done a pretty bad job of putting some positive spin on a bad situation. Take a look at these things:
This first clip is of Danny Cohen speaking about the future of Doctor Who shortly after the Private Eye article was published in June last year. Granted he was caught off guard because I think he was at a conference about faith and religion (?) so he wasn't expecting to be questioned on Doctor who, but just listen to his words, especially when he says:
"That's the genuine reason, it's because Steven Moffat is the creative force behind Doctor Who a the moment and he also rather magically at the same time created and got to air Sherlock."
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=84-BoPUBqUU
Then look at Steven Moffat's response to that:
http://www.beehivecity.com/televisio...-moffat093456/
Then look at this quote from Lizo Mzimba (entertainment correspondent at the BBC) trying to diffuse the situation:
https://twitter.com/lizo_mzimba/stat...32315118088192
I really don't see how anyone can take Danny Cohen's comments as a joke if you listen to them, but I try to post as many links as facts rather than state opinion, but people can interpret as they wish...
Are we at least in agreement that when Danny Cohen says something in his official capacity it is official, incorrect or not?
Clearly one of them is right, and one wrong. Moffat said it has absolutely nothing to do with Sherlock.
Nobody is claiming a massive conspiracy. That's partly our point. The BBC have , yet again, managed to make for themselves a complete mess of things. It's nothing to do with what people may or may not be saying on forums. It is nearly all from their own words and press releases. Instigated by a story in Private Eye (ie journalists who spoke to people involved with the show, not forum members) that looks increasingly likely to have had some truth in it.
You also have to look at the people claiming he was joking. Moffat, Ed Russell (whose job is to protect the brand image of the series) and DWM editor Tom Spilsbury (aka Moffat's Brown-Noser In Chief.)
The same trio who kept insisting that David Yates wasn't involved in developing a Doctor Who film, even after several interviews in which he said he was.
I did wonder if the episodes that were broadcast this year were originally intended to be specials, because, apart from The Power of Three, they all had the look of specials, all could have easily been a bit longer and would even explain the gaps between visits to Amy and Rory between each episode. I actually would have preferred four specials, spread throughout the year instead of the five episodes that we had.