Originally Posted by H of De Vil:
“I agree
I think the frustration we share with him, only highlights how passionate we are about Corrie and it being in a healthy state. Having endured 3 years of mind knumbing crud under Blackburn, i think its fair to express out angry at him, given he is still being hired on soaps, despite a past trail of destuction.
If I was an ITV boss, I wouldn't let him anywhere near one of my soaps again. Its clear to see how much his tenure has impacted the soap. Its pissed off 2-3m viewers.
I don't want him never to work again, that is not what I'm saying, but not on a soap, where he clearly doesn't work, especially moving from one to another.”
“I agree
I think the frustration we share with him, only highlights how passionate we are about Corrie and it being in a healthy state. Having endured 3 years of mind knumbing crud under Blackburn, i think its fair to express out angry at him, given he is still being hired on soaps, despite a past trail of destuction.
If I was an ITV boss, I wouldn't let him anywhere near one of my soaps again. Its clear to see how much his tenure has impacted the soap. Its pissed off 2-3m viewers.
I don't want him never to work again, that is not what I'm saying, but not on a soap, where he clearly doesn't work, especially moving from one to another.”
ITV can't have been that concerned about SB otherwise they would have taken him off the show prematurely - as happened to Kim Crowther. Which rather suggests that those above him - Kieran Roberts, John Whiston and Jane Hudson - were either happy with what he was doing or, alternatively, were as powerless as he was to control the writers on Coronation Street.
He may well have had his name on the credits as producer throughout the period with which you have issues - and I'm not saying you're wrong in your concerns - but who controls Coronation Street is not quite as clear cut as it may appear …




