Sparky
Producer
Status? Would that be Credit or in Society?
Posts: 2,784
Online Status:
|
Post by Sparky on Nov 26, 2019 15:47:07 GMT
Not that I believe or really read the papers...
It appears the BBC are censoring what shows they put up on Britbox.
Even Only Fools and Horses has been censored....
And I thought Britbox was going to be interesting......
|
|
|
Post by Arthur Pringle on Nov 26, 2019 19:40:35 GMT
I think broadcasters feel obliged to censor anything, however minor, that they think might generate complaints. Take talkingpicturestv, they got into hot water after 1 or 2 people ( and it was literally 1 or 2 ) complained to the Broadcasting Standards people about racial slurs heard in shows dating back as far as the 50's, now they censor the most ridiculous things imaginable including nudity in films from the 40's!
Speaking of which I saw an episode of On The Buses on ITV4 last week, they cut a brief shot of a baby's privates. Incredible.
I blame most of this moral panic on the press, they act as publicists for the tiny minority of people who register complaints. All the media require is a few idiots on twitter to make a few comments & they're away, shitstirring for Britain. The Broadcasting Complaints Commission also need to start exercising some common sense instead of pandering to every complaint they receive, however petty.
|
|
Sparky
Producer
Status? Would that be Credit or in Society?
Posts: 2,784
Online Status:
|
Post by Sparky on Nov 26, 2019 20:03:28 GMT
I think broadcasters feel obliged to censor anything, however minor, that they think might generate complaints. Take talkingpicturestv, they got into hot water after 1 or 2 people ( and it was literally 1 or 2 ) complained to the Broadcasting Standards people about racial slurs heard in shows dating back as far as the 50's, now they censor the most ridiculous things imaginable including nudity in films from the 40's!
Speaking of which I saw an episode of On The Buses on ITV4 last week, they cut a brief shot of a baby's privates. Incredible.
I blame most of this moral panic on the press, they act as publicists for the tiny minority of people who register complaints. All the media require is a few idiots on twitter to make a few comments & they're away, shitstirring for Britain. The Broadcasting Complaints Commission also need to start exercising some common sense instead of pandering to every complaint they receive, however petty.
Congratulations with the 3000 (and 1) posts Arthur. To reiterate what Sam said - many great and informative posts!
Censorship raised its head in another discussion elsewhere on the forum earlier this year. I do fully agree with you - a lot of it is down to the Press. But again - common sense needs to be applied. As I said in a previous debate on Censorship - the shows concerned are archive - and reflect attitudes of the time. So really should be left alone.
But there will always be the PC/Do gooder brigade trying to preach to one and all.
|
|
Three Litre
Producer
Oscar 24
Posts: 3,419
Online Status:
|
Post by Three Litre on Nov 26, 2019 20:18:13 GMT
I think broadcasters feel obliged to censor anything, however minor, that they think might generate complaints. Take talkingpicturestv, they got into hot water after 1 or 2 people ( and it was literally 1 or 2 ) complained to the Broadcasting Standards people about racial slurs heard in shows dating back as far as the 50's, now they censor the most ridiculous things imaginable including nudity in films from the 40's!
Speaking of which I saw an episode of On The Buses on ITV4 last week, they cut a brief shot of a baby's privates. Incredible.
I blame most of this moral panic on the press, they act as publicists for the tiny minority of people who register complaints. All the media require is a few idiots on twitter to make a few comments & they're away, shitstirring for Britain. The Broadcasting Complaints Commission also need to start exercising some common sense instead of pandering to every complaint they receive, however petty.
Congratulations with the 3000 (and 1) posts Arthur. To reiterate what Sam said - many great and informative posts!
Censorship raised its head in another discussion elsewhere on the forum earlier this year. I do fully agree with you - a lot of it is down to the Press. But again - common sense needs to be applied. As I said in a previous debate on Censorship - the shows concerned are archive - and reflect attitudes of the time. So really should be left alone.
But there will always be the PC/Do gooder brigade trying to preach to one and all.
Yes, well done AP. You're up to 825 Sparky, which is equivalent to about 2457 the amount you write! Regarding censorship, its a bizarre when there's a lot more graphic violence on TV now than when Jack punched or shot someone back in '75. That's allowed but the other totally harmless stuff is deemed a risk!
|
|
Sparky
Producer
Status? Would that be Credit or in Society?
Posts: 2,784
Online Status:
|
Post by Sparky on Nov 26, 2019 21:03:14 GMT
Congratulations with the 3000 (and 1) posts Arthur. To reiterate what Sam said - many great and informative posts!
Censorship raised its head in another discussion elsewhere on the forum earlier this year. I do fully agree with you - a lot of it is down to the Press. But again - common sense needs to be applied. As I said in a previous debate on Censorship - the shows concerned are archive - and reflect attitudes of the time. So really should be left alone.
But there will always be the PC/Do gooder brigade trying to preach to one and all.
Yes, well done AP. You're up to 825 Sparky, which is equivalent to about 2457 the amount you write! Regarding censorship, its a bizarre when there's a lot more graphic violence on TV now than when Jack punched or shot someone back in '75. That's allowed but the other totally harmless stuff is deemed a risk! Sweeney was quite radical stuff in it's day - the Police had never been portrayed like this on TV before. I still think it is quite radical. Though it reflected attitudes that were rife then.
It was a way that Police and Villians on TV had not been portrayed before.
Euston Films were constantly at loggerheads with Mary Whitehouse over the dialogue/violence.
If you look at Life on Mars - that accurately represented attitudes of that time (Time of the Sweeney)- and there were many a jibe from Gene/Chris/Ray alone that could be considered very un-PC.
I didn't hear any complaints about those series. Unless anyone else did?
|
|
Sparky
Producer
Status? Would that be Credit or in Society?
Posts: 2,784
Online Status:
|
Post by Sparky on Nov 27, 2019 9:34:14 GMT
I forgot to add to my last post (was at the time refereeing a kids spat over who hit who...)
I mentioned "Life On Mars" particularly as it was written in recent times when attitudes had changed since the 70s. As I said Gene/Ray/Chris dialogue was littered with many Un-Pc references, slang terms, sexism etc. I'm not saying that attitude is right - but it reflected a time, and what the general conversation in a pub, workplace would be like then. I don't remember any episodes being censored in later repeats.
I'd be more than interested to see what they considered as too risky in Only Fools and Horses. I would expect there were a couple of references between Del and Denzil that may have been. But in my opinion, nothing too serious. If I remember rightly, in such cases - it was always Denzil that had the last laugh anyway.
Going back a few years to "Love Thy Neighbour" - it's writer Vince Powell was asked about the blatant Racism contained in the program- he said, all he did for research was sit in a couple of local pubs and listen to the general conversation. But again, it was Rudolph Walkers character that always got the last laugh.
I assume Britbox would censor stuff like "George & Mildred", "Porridge" and any other sitcom that may be deemed slightly risky?
|
|
|
Post by Sam Tyler on Nov 27, 2019 12:12:55 GMT
I'd be more than interested to see what they considered as too risky in Only Fools and Horses. I would expect there were a couple of references between Del and Denzil that may have been. But in my opinion, nothing too serious. If I remember rightly, in such cases - it was always Denzil that had the last laugh anyway.
I don't recall anything too contentious regarding Denzil but I do recall there being an issue raised previously regarding an episode with the granddad in it. It can be found through a search on the web. I found it on an Evening Standard page >>> HERE << but I'd advise against opening the link as the page takes an age to load with the usual crap and unnecessary content that newspaper sites feel the need to smother their pages with.
However the key content is, and I quote:
Obviously topics such as racism will always be a hot potato with many arguments for and against Political Correctness or going overboard with Political Correctness so I think this is an opportune moment to remind all members that we enjoy a varied membership here on 4:3TV and that further posts must be considered in response.
Sam.
|
|
|
Post by Dirty Epic on Nov 27, 2019 12:33:56 GMT
I'm certainly not going to debates the rights and wrongs of certain things (PC etc.), however my opinion is if you are buying the content which in effect you are with Britbox you have a right to see things uncensored and if you've half knowledge of what you're wanting to watch you'll accept the flaws and issues with these programmes even if you don't agree with them - sometimes I don't but doesn't stop me enjoying something that's good/I like.
For instance if you stream music from say apple, Spotify, Deezer etc. you'd not be given the censored versions of songs if the songs you like have swearing in them so IMHO the same argument applies here.
As for Britbox reckon it'll eventually get subsumed into say a amazon/Netflix arrangement which BBC, ITV etc. content will be sold to them and the end user buys from amazon/Netflix etc. In some respects this streaming industry is simply another way to milk more money from consumers for things they've already got and should see repeated on conventional TV anyway.
|
|
|
Post by Sam Tyler on Nov 27, 2019 13:06:24 GMT
I totally agree with you there Dirty, I dislike seeing things that have been censored or overdubbed to 'protect' me from any offensive content. Whatever I watch I prefer to be the 'warts and all' originals. It would take a lot for me to be offended by anything that the TV companies put out. I'm sure I've posted it elsewhere on the forum but take a look at Harry Enfield's "Badfellas" on Youtube (I can't access it right now). I think it sums up the whole censorship issue for me. As for Britbox .... In some respects this streaming industry is simply another way to milk more money from consumers for things they've already got and should see repeated on conventional TV anyway. This is part of the issue with the likes of Britbox for me. If the content is all BBC and ITV archive material, haven't we all as TV License holders already paid for these productions through our old licenses? If the TV companies can broadcast repeats for free on the mainstream channels, why do we need to subscribe to access the same?
Or am I being too simplistic about it?
Sam.
|
|
Sparky
Producer
Status? Would that be Credit or in Society?
Posts: 2,784
Online Status:
|
Post by Sparky on Nov 27, 2019 13:10:51 GMT
I'm certainly not going to debates the rights and wrongs of certain things (PC etc.), however my opinion is if you are buying the content which in effect you are with Britbox you have a right to see things uncensored and if you've half knowledge of what you're wanting to watch you'll accept the flaws and issues with these programmes even if you don't agree with them - sometimes I don't but doesn't stop me enjoying something that's good/I like.
For instance if you stream music from say apple, Spotify, Deezer etc. you'd not be given the censored versions of songs if the songs you like have swearing in them so IMHO the same argument applies here.
As for Britbox reckon it'll eventually get subsumed into say a amazon/Netflix arrangement which BBC, ITV etc. content will be sold to them and the end user buys from amazon/Netflix etc. In some respects this streaming industry is simply another way to milk more money from consumers for things they've already got and should see repeated on conventional TV anyway. Exactly. You know what you are watching. There are those who subscribe to Porn Channels - and then complain that the material is offensive. (Why subscribe in the first place?).
If you are watching programmes made in a different era, common sense would or should tell you that attitudes have changed and content what may have been amusing/non offensive back then, could well be now. If anything, it shows how the world has changed.
I agree with the fact that we have already paid for the BBC programmes - through our Licence Fees. And that consumers are being milked. The BBC are quick to complain that such channels are "expensive" to set up and run. I don't see how - considering such channels don't require and studio space or production staff.
We should see the material shown on Conventional TV.
|
|