Black Lives Matter and the American Protests

First topic message reminder :

Because this issue is seeping into other threads, why not talk about it here instead? I don't really have anything particularly pithy to say, so write your own bloody topic intros.

No 7&1/2 wrote:You havent read that very carefully then navy. I didnt say it would only be racists annoyed at the removal of the statue. It's certainly got them riled up though. You love to see it.

Apologies, but I think careful language is very important around this topic. I don't disagree that annoying demonstrable racists has some attraction, but I'm not sure that enflaming, say, the EDL is a wise objective.

What would be your solution duty? Times change and some people grow. 2 optional most used are either removal or a warning that there are racist elements etc?

Duty281 wrote:https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-52990714
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-52983319
https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2020/jun/09/cops-tv-show-cancelled-police-protests

Anything made before the new enlightenment will have to be airbrushed from history.

They aren't being airbrushed from history. Little Britain and Gone with the Wind still exist. They are still available to watch for those that wish to seek them out. Little Britain DVD box sets can probably be found in just about any charity shop in Britain. Those distributors are just choosing not to actively promote the content on their streaming services.

With regards to Little Britain I think it's pertinent to note that Lucas and Walliams have both stated innumerable times that they would make the show very differently now and regret certain characters and portrayals. Lucas in particular said something recently along the lines of being embarrassed by them using crude stereotypes to get lazy laughs.

What could I say about the edl that would make it past the swear filter? I'll just go with i dont give a rats arse if the edl get upset that slaver statues are getting vandalised. As said previously that law breaking has now led to some great responses. As through history someone breaking the law and potentially taking one for the team has led to a very nice outcome that most people would applaud.

Duty281 wrote:https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-52990714
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-52983319
https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2020/jun/09/cops-tv-show-cancelled-police-protests

Anything made before the new enlightenment will have to be airbrushed from history.

Yep. Suspect we'll see more of this.

I don't mind, as long as all such issues are addressed. We'll have a Commission to investigate all comments/actions by all historically commemorated figures and expunge them from anything commemorative. Absolutely film/TV that's questionable should be destroyed. All Hollywood 'Westerns', for example, should go for a start as they're always depicting the savagery etc of the indigenous people and their extermination etc. The Zulu films can go too. All films that have anything to do w/ the 'glorification' of the British Empire. All Laurel and Hardy. All the classic Tom and Jerry cartoons. Rinse, repeat ad nauseam.

navyblueshorts wrote:

Duty281 wrote:https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-52990714
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-52983319
https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2020/jun/09/cops-tv-show-cancelled-police-protests

Anything made before the new enlightenment will have to be airbrushed from history.

Yep. Suspect we'll see more of this.

I don't mind, as long as all such issues are addressed. We'll have a Commission to investigate all comments/actions by all historically commemorated figures and expunge them from anything commemorative. Absolutely film/TV that's questionable should be destroyed. All Hollywood 'Westerns', for example, should go for a start as they're always depicting the savagery etc of the indigenous people and their extermination etc. The Zulu films can go too. All films that have anything to do w/ the 'glorification' of the British Empire. All Laurel and Hardy. All the classic Tom and Jerry cartoons. Rinse, repeat ad nauseam.

They aren't gone or destroyed though. These streaming services and channels are just choosing not to actively push the content on their platforms.

No 7&1/2 wrote:What would be your solution duty? Times change and some people grow. 2 optional most used are either removal or a warning that there are racist elements etc?

Accept that certain things are of their time, add a warning that this programme may include content that some may find offensive/racist/homophobic etc., and trust people to make adult decisions on what they watch.

Duty281 wrote:https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-52990714
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-52983319
https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2020/jun/09/cops-tv-show-cancelled-police-protests

Anything made before the new enlightenment will have to be airbrushed from history.

You could always start a petition to get repeats of Love Thy Neighbour back on air.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't racism something to get more upset about than a film temporarily not being available on a particular channel?

king_carlos wrote:

navyblueshorts wrote:

Duty281 wrote:https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-52990714
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-52983319
https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2020/jun/09/cops-tv-show-cancelled-police-protests

Anything made before the new enlightenment will have to be airbrushed from history.

Yep. Suspect we'll see more of this.

I don't mind, as long as all such issues are addressed. We'll have a Commission to investigate all comments/actions by all historically commemorated figures and expunge them from anything commemorative. Absolutely film/TV that's questionable should be destroyed. All Hollywood 'Westerns', for example, should go for a start as they're always depicting the savagery etc of the indigenous people and their extermination etc. The Zulu films can go too. All films that have anything to do w/ the 'glorification' of the British Empire. All Laurel and Hardy. All the classic Tom and Jerry cartoons. Rinse, repeat ad nauseam.

They aren't gone or destroyed though. These streaming services and channels are just choosing not to actively push the content on their platforms.

Yeah; I get that. At the moment. It'll be interesting where this sort of thing ends up. People have a habit of over-reacting beyond what's reasonable in order to show that they're, in this case, not racist. Understandable maybe.

And in some cases they do duty and some cases they simply remove them as time moves on and where once something was seen as acceptable now it isnt. I dont see it as a big deal really just simply inevitable. If people want to look up and laugh along to bernard manning telling black guys to get on their elephants and go home I'm sure if they search hard enough they can find it.

king_carlos wrote:

Duty281 wrote:https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-52990714
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-52983319
https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2020/jun/09/cops-tv-show-cancelled-police-protests

Anything made before the new enlightenment will have to be airbrushed from history.

They aren't being airbrushed from history. Little Britain and Gone with the Wind still exist. They are still available to watch for those that wish to seek them out. Little Britain DVD box sets can probably be found in just about any charity shop in Britain. Those distributors are just choosing not to actively promote the content on their streaming services.

With regards to Little Britain I think it's pertinent to note that Lucas and Walliams have both stated innumerable times that they would make the show very differently now and regret certain characters and portrayals. Lucas in particular said something recently along the lines of being embarrassed by them using crude stereotypes to get lazy laughs.

Airbrushed meaning as in concealed from view, not as in removed from existence. Little Britain will still be there for people who actively seek it, but the BBC/streaming companies will pretend it never existed. It won't feature on compliation shows, archives, won't be mentioned on panel shows or quiz programmes etc. And we will see a lot more of this.

For what it's worth, I found Little Britain about as funny as having testicular cancer, but I'm concerned at the direction things are going in. Because it won't stop at films and tv.

So you disagree with any form of censorship then duty.

JuliusHMarx wrote:

Duty281 wrote:https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-52990714
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-52983319
https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2020/jun/09/cops-tv-show-cancelled-police-protests

Anything made before the new enlightenment will have to be airbrushed from history.

You could always start a petition to get repeats of Love Thy Neighbour back on air.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't racism something to get more upset about than a film temporarily not being available on a particular channel?

You can be upset at both things.

Duty281 wrote:

JuliusHMarx wrote:

Duty281 wrote:https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-52990714
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-52983319
https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2020/jun/09/cops-tv-show-cancelled-police-protests

Anything made before the new enlightenment will have to be airbrushed from history.

You could always start a petition to get repeats of Love Thy Neighbour back on air.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't racism something to get more upset about than a film temporarily not being available on a particular channel?

You can be upset at both things.

Yes, but can you?

No 7&1/2 wrote:So you disagree with any form of censorship then duty.

It's never normally a good thing.

JuliusHMarx wrote:

Duty281 wrote:

JuliusHMarx wrote:

Duty281 wrote:https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-52990714
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-52983319
https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2020/jun/09/cops-tv-show-cancelled-police-protests

Anything made before the new enlightenment will have to be airbrushed from history.

You could always start a petition to get repeats of Love Thy Neighbour back on air.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't racism something to get more upset about than a film temporarily not being available on a particular channel?

You can be upset at both things.

Yes, but can you?

Yes.

Normally. So you do agree with some censorship as long as you agree with it. Theres the issue then. The makers acknowledge that theres aspects of little Britain that they've made mistakes with and now consider racist. So do plenty of others. I think there is some people generally getting uncomfortable in the uk that they dont think it was racist and now feel that it's possible that they are racist (even if only a little). Remving little Britain now makes them consider what they were laughing at and confront some home truths perhaps?

No 7&1/2 wrote:Normally. So you do agree with some censorship as long as you agree with it. Theres the issue then. The makers acknowledge that theres aspects of little Britain that they've made mistakes with and now consider racist. So do plenty of others. I think there is some people generally getting uncomfortable in the uk that they dont think it was racist and now feel that it's possible that they are racist (even if only a little). Remving little Britain now makes them consider what they were laughing at and confront some home truths perhaps?

Depends what you mean by censorship because it is so broad as a topic. I'm opposed to books, films and television programmes (popular entertainment, if you like) being censored for the reason that they display attitudes or language that is now considered outdated. Which is pretty much where we were in terms of discussion.

But some forms of censorship - e.g. illegal pornography such as child abuse - I'm not opposed to.

Duty281 wrote:

king_carlos wrote:

Duty281 wrote:https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-52990714
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-52983319
https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2020/jun/09/cops-tv-show-cancelled-police-protests

Anything made before the new enlightenment will have to be airbrushed from history.

They aren't being airbrushed from history. Little Britain and Gone with the Wind still exist. They are still available to watch for those that wish to seek them out. Little Britain DVD box sets can probably be found in just about any charity shop in Britain. Those distributors are just choosing not to actively promote the content on their streaming services.

With regards to Little Britain I think it's pertinent to note that Lucas and Walliams have both stated innumerable times that they would make the show very differently now and regret certain characters and portrayals. Lucas in particular said something recently along the lines of being embarrassed by them using crude stereotypes to get lazy laughs.

Airbrushed meaning as in concealed from view, not as in removed from existence. Little Britain will still be there for people who actively seek it, but the BBC/streaming companies will pretend it never existed. It won't feature on compliation shows, archives, won't be mentioned on panel shows or quiz programmes etc. And we will see a lot more of this.

For what it's worth, I found Little Britain about as funny as having testicular cancer, but I'm concerned at the direction things are going in. Because it won't stop at films and tv.

How often was Little Britain mentioned on panel shows or shown in compilations though? It's aged about as well as my face. Which for context, these days looks like a small confused face drawn on a hefty and exuberant scrotum.

With regards to Gone with the Wind HBO have said it will return to the platform with discussion about it's historical context. Presumably meaning that they will include a disclaimer or also release a documentary of sorts looking at the racial implications of past film making.

I understand reservations about censorship but I don't believe this is it. It's simply media platforms choosing to not push racially insensitive content from the past. The airbrushing film and TV comments are also misguided with regards to Gone with the Wind given that the longstanding criticism of the film has been for it airbrushing history with regards to the slave trade.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-52990714 wrote:"The movie had the very best talents in Hollywood at that time working together to sentimentalise a history that never was," continued the Oscar-winning screenwriter of 12 Years A Slave.

An excellent quote there from 12 Years A Slave screenwriter John Ridley with regards to Gone with the Wind.

So you would be happy for jokes about getting on your elephant to go home. Using racist language such as p*k* and w*g to get some laughs. Brilliant. At least I know where you stand. I dont agree. It's this sort of thing that these matches stand against. I'm on their side.

Censored presumably means legislation to make them illegal?
Broadcasting companies in the private sector should surely be allowed to choose their own legal content?

No 7&1/2 wrote:So you would be happy for jokes about getting on your elephant to go home. Using racist language such as p*k* and w*g to get some laughs. Brilliant. At least I know where you stand. I dont agree. It's this sort of thing that these matches stand against. I'm on their side.

Good point, we'll have to bin Only Fools and Horses and Life on Mars, too.

I'm opposed to censorship of popular entertainment because of where it leads. And I'm more than happy to take that stance.

king_carlos wrote:

Duty281 wrote:

king_carlos wrote:

Duty281 wrote:https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-52990714
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-52983319
https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2020/jun/09/cops-tv-show-cancelled-police-protests

Anything made before the new enlightenment will have to be airbrushed from history.

They aren't being airbrushed from history. Little Britain and Gone with the Wind still exist. They are still available to watch for those that wish to seek them out. Little Britain DVD box sets can probably be found in just about any charity shop in Britain. Those distributors are just choosing not to actively promote the content on their streaming services.

With regards to Little Britain I think it's pertinent to note that Lucas and Walliams have both stated innumerable times that they would make the show very differently now and regret certain characters and portrayals. Lucas in particular said something recently along the lines of being embarrassed by them using crude stereotypes to get lazy laughs.

Airbrushed meaning as in concealed from view, not as in removed from existence. Little Britain will still be there for people who actively seek it, but the BBC/streaming companies will pretend it never existed. It won't feature on compliation shows, archives, won't be mentioned on panel shows or quiz programmes etc. And we will see a lot more of this.

For what it's worth, I found Little Britain about as funny as having testicular cancer, but I'm concerned at the direction things are going in. Because it won't stop at films and tv.

How often was Little Britain mentioned on panel shows or shown in compilations though? It's aged about as well as my face. Which for context, these days looks like a small confused face drawn on a hefty and exuberant scrotum.

With regards to Gone with the Wind HBO have said it will return to the platform with discussion about it's historical context. Presumably meaning that they will include a disclaimer or also release a documentary of sorts looking at the racial implications of past film making.

I understand reservations about censorship but I don't believe this is it. It's simply media platforms choosing to not push racially insensitive content from the past. The airbrushing film and TV comments are also misguided with regards to Gone with the Wind given that the longstanding criticism of the film has been for it airbrushing history with regards to the slave trade.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-52990714 wrote:"The movie had the very best talents in Hollywood at that time working together to sentimentalise a history that never was," continued the Oscar-winning screenwriter of 12 Years A Slave.

An excellent quote there from 12 Years A Slave screenwriter John Ridley with regards to Gone with the Wind.

This may not be it, but it could be the start of it.

Well there you go. Duty would like to see racist jokes back on mainstream tv. You wonder why people march.

Duty281 wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:So you would be happy for jokes about getting on your elephant to go home. Using racist language such as p*k* and w*g to get some laughs. Brilliant. At least I know where you stand. I dont agree. It's this sort of thing that these matches stand against. I'm on their side.

Good point, we'll have to bin Only Fools and Horses and Life on Mars, too.

I'm opposed to censorship of popular entertainment because of where it leads. And I'm more than happy to take that stance.

It's not been censored. It's not banned or prohibited. You can buy Gone With the Wind.

Duty281 wrote:

king_carlos wrote:

Duty281 wrote:

king_carlos wrote:

Duty281 wrote:https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-52990714
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-52983319
https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2020/jun/09/cops-tv-show-cancelled-police-protests

Anything made before the new enlightenment will have to be airbrushed from history.

They aren't being airbrushed from history. Little Britain and Gone with the Wind still exist. They are still available to watch for those that wish to seek them out. Little Britain DVD box sets can probably be found in just about any charity shop in Britain. Those distributors are just choosing not to actively promote the content on their streaming services.

With regards to Little Britain I think it's pertinent to note that Lucas and Walliams have both stated innumerable times that they would make the show very differently now and regret certain characters and portrayals. Lucas in particular said something recently along the lines of being embarrassed by them using crude stereotypes to get lazy laughs.

Airbrushed meaning as in concealed from view, not as in removed from existence. Little Britain will still be there for people who actively seek it, but the BBC/streaming companies will pretend it never existed. It won't feature on compliation shows, archives, won't be mentioned on panel shows or quiz programmes etc. And we will see a lot more of this.

For what it's worth, I found Little Britain about as funny as having testicular cancer, but I'm concerned at the direction things are going in. Because it won't stop at films and tv.

How often was Little Britain mentioned on panel shows or shown in compilations though? It's aged about as well as my face. Which for context, these days looks like a small confused face drawn on a hefty and exuberant scrotum.

With regards to Gone with the Wind HBO have said it will return to the platform with discussion about it's historical context. Presumably meaning that they will include a disclaimer or also release a documentary of sorts looking at the racial implications of past film making.

I understand reservations about censorship but I don't believe this is it. It's simply media platforms choosing to not push racially insensitive content from the past. The airbrushing film and TV comments are also misguided with regards to Gone with the Wind given that the longstanding criticism of the film has been for it airbrushing history with regards to the slave trade.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-52990714 wrote:"The movie had the very best talents in Hollywood at that time working together to sentimentalise a history that never was," continued the Oscar-winning screenwriter of 12 Years A Slave.

An excellent quote there from 12 Years A Slave screenwriter John Ridley with regards to Gone with the Wind.

This may not be it, but it could be the start of it.

I disagree.

I do however think that many people, especially within the establishment, in Britain feeling more concerned by the review of racially insensitive, and in many cases outright offensive, media and monuments than they are by institutionalised racism sums up why people have been driven to protest.

JuliusHMarx wrote:

Duty281 wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:So you would be happy for jokes about getting on your elephant to go home. Using racist language such as p*k* and w*g to get some laughs. Brilliant. At least I know where you stand. I dont agree. It's this sort of thing that these matches stand against. I'm on their side.

Good point, we'll have to bin Only Fools and Horses and Life on Mars, too.

I'm opposed to censorship of popular entertainment because of where it leads. And I'm more than happy to take that stance.

It's not been censored. It's not banned or prohibited. You can buy Gone With the Wind.

This is a discussion which relates to what I think about censorship, not about Gone With the Wind.

Duty281 wrote:

JuliusHMarx wrote:

Duty281 wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:So you would be happy for jokes about getting on your elephant to go home. Using racist language such as p*k* and w*g to get some laughs. Brilliant. At least I know where you stand. I dont agree. It's this sort of thing that these matches stand against. I'm on their side.

Good point, we'll have to bin Only Fools and Horses and Life on Mars, too.

I'm opposed to censorship of popular entertainment because of where it leads. And I'm more than happy to take that stance.

It's not been censored. It's not banned or prohibited. You can buy Gone With the Wind.

This is a discussion which relates to what I think about censorship, not about Gone With the Wind.

Then why post links to things that haven't been censored?

king_carlos wrote:

Duty281 wrote:

king_carlos wrote:

Duty281 wrote:

king_carlos wrote:

Duty281 wrote:https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-52990714
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-52983319
https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2020/jun/09/cops-tv-show-cancelled-police-protests

Anything made before the new enlightenment will have to be airbrushed from history.

They aren't being airbrushed from history. Little Britain and Gone with the Wind still exist. They are still available to watch for those that wish to seek them out. Little Britain DVD box sets can probably be found in just about any charity shop in Britain. Those distributors are just choosing not to actively promote the content on their streaming services.

With regards to Little Britain I think it's pertinent to note that Lucas and Walliams have both stated innumerable times that they would make the show very differently now and regret certain characters and portrayals. Lucas in particular said something recently along the lines of being embarrassed by them using crude stereotypes to get lazy laughs.

Airbrushed meaning as in concealed from view, not as in removed from existence. Little Britain will still be there for people who actively seek it, but the BBC/streaming companies will pretend it never existed. It won't feature on compliation shows, archives, won't be mentioned on panel shows or quiz programmes etc. And we will see a lot more of this.

For what it's worth, I found Little Britain about as funny as having testicular cancer, but I'm concerned at the direction things are going in. Because it won't stop at films and tv.

How often was Little Britain mentioned on panel shows or shown in compilations though? It's aged about as well as my face. Which for context, these days looks like a small confused face drawn on a hefty and exuberant scrotum.

With regards to Gone with the Wind HBO have said it will return to the platform with discussion about it's historical context. Presumably meaning that they will include a disclaimer or also release a documentary of sorts looking at the racial implications of past film making.

I understand reservations about censorship but I don't believe this is it. It's simply media platforms choosing to not push racially insensitive content from the past. The airbrushing film and TV comments are also misguided with regards to Gone with the Wind given that the longstanding criticism of the film has been for it airbrushing history with regards to the slave trade.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-52990714 wrote:"The movie had the very best talents in Hollywood at that time working together to sentimentalise a history that never was," continued the Oscar-winning screenwriter of 12 Years A Slave.

An excellent quote there from 12 Years A Slave screenwriter John Ridley with regards to Gone with the Wind.

This may not be it, but it could be the start of it.

I disagree.

I do however think that many people, especially within the establishment, in Britain feeling more concerned by the review of racially insensitive, and in many cases outright offensive, media and monuments than they are by institutionalised racism sums up why people have been driven to protest.

Possibly because the first of those is relatively new, whereas efforts to tackle institutional racism have been going on for decades.

JuliusHMarx wrote:

Duty281 wrote:

JuliusHMarx wrote:

Duty281 wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:So you would be happy for jokes about getting on your elephant to go home. Using racist language such as p*k* and w*g to get some laughs. Brilliant. At least I know where you stand. I dont agree. It's this sort of thing that these matches stand against. I'm on their side.

Good point, we'll have to bin Only Fools and Horses and Life on Mars, too.

I'm opposed to censorship of popular entertainment because of where it leads. And I'm more than happy to take that stance.

It's not been censored. It's not banned or prohibited. You can buy Gone With the Wind.

This is a discussion which relates to what I think about censorship, not about Gone With the Wind.

Then why post links to things that haven't been censored?

Because I was talking about the possibility of such things being airbrushed from history. Another poster then asked me, on a slightly different topic, if I was always opposed to censorship.

No 7&1/2 wrote:Well there you go. Duty would like to see racist jokes back on mainstream tv. You wonder why people march.

Fresh air, presumably.

Duty281 wrote:

king_carlos wrote:

Duty281 wrote:

king_carlos wrote:

Duty281 wrote:

king_carlos wrote:

Duty281 wrote:https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-52990714
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-52983319
https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2020/jun/09/cops-tv-show-cancelled-police-protests

Anything made before the new enlightenment will have to be airbrushed from history.

They aren't being airbrushed from history. Little Britain and Gone with the Wind still exist. They are still available to watch for those that wish to seek them out. Little Britain DVD box sets can probably be found in just about any charity shop in Britain. Those distributors are just choosing not to actively promote the content on their streaming services.

With regards to Little Britain I think it's pertinent to note that Lucas and Walliams have both stated innumerable times that they would make the show very differently now and regret certain characters and portrayals. Lucas in particular said something recently along the lines of being embarrassed by them using crude stereotypes to get lazy laughs.

Airbrushed meaning as in concealed from view, not as in removed from existence. Little Britain will still be there for people who actively seek it, but the BBC/streaming companies will pretend it never existed. It won't feature on compliation shows, archives, won't be mentioned on panel shows or quiz programmes etc. And we will see a lot more of this.

For what it's worth, I found Little Britain about as funny as having testicular cancer, but I'm concerned at the direction things are going in. Because it won't stop at films and tv.

How often was Little Britain mentioned on panel shows or shown in compilations though? It's aged about as well as my face. Which for context, these days looks like a small confused face drawn on a hefty and exuberant scrotum.

With regards to Gone with the Wind HBO have said it will return to the platform with discussion about it's historical context. Presumably meaning that they will include a disclaimer or also release a documentary of sorts looking at the racial implications of past film making.

I understand reservations about censorship but I don't believe this is it. It's simply media platforms choosing to not push racially insensitive content from the past. The airbrushing film and TV comments are also misguided with regards to Gone with the Wind given that the longstanding criticism of the film has been for it airbrushing history with regards to the slave trade.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-52990714 wrote:"The movie had the very best talents in Hollywood at that time working together to sentimentalise a history that never was," continued the Oscar-winning screenwriter of 12 Years A Slave.

An excellent quote there from 12 Years A Slave screenwriter John Ridley with regards to Gone with the Wind.

This may not be it, but it could be the start of it.

I disagree.

I do however think that many people, especially within the establishment, in Britain feeling more concerned by the review of racially insensitive, and in many cases outright offensive, media and monuments than they are by institutionalised racism sums up why people have been driven to protest.

Possibly because the first of those is relatively new, whereas efforts to tackle institutional racism have been going on for decades.

Content providers considering what media they offer isn't new though. The BBC never offered Come Fly with Me (another Lucas/Walliams show) on iPlayer for instance and Britbox removed it back in November. Gone with the Wind has been criticised for years and I believe other channels and cinemas that show old movies have stopped screening it long before now, HBO have now joined them.

The conversation is become louder and broader now as these topics come into the spotlight more. I believe that is a brilliant and vital thing to finally be happening.

Would consider yourself a racist duty?

Duty281 wrote:

JuliusHMarx wrote:

Duty281 wrote:

JuliusHMarx wrote:

Duty281 wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:So you would be happy for jokes about getting on your elephant to go home. Using racist language such as p*k* and w*g to get some laughs. Brilliant. At least I know where you stand. I dont agree. It's this sort of thing that these matches stand against. I'm on their side.

Good point, we'll have to bin Only Fools and Horses and Life on Mars, too.

I'm opposed to censorship of popular entertainment because of where it leads. And I'm more than happy to take that stance.

It's not been censored. It's not banned or prohibited. You can buy Gone With the Wind.

This is a discussion which relates to what I think about censorship, not about Gone With the Wind.

Then why post links to things that haven't been censored?

Because I was talking about the possibility of such things being airbrushed from history. Another poster then asked me, on a slightly different topic, if I was always opposed to censorship.

Are you concerned about the lack of black British history on the school curriculum, given that the current lack of teaching on the subject effectively airbrushes it from history?

No 7&1/2 wrote:Would consider yourself a racist duty?

No.

But you want to see statues celebrating racists still standing and programmes with racist jokes on tv. Perhaps some self reflection needed?

JuliusHMarx wrote:

Duty281 wrote:

JuliusHMarx wrote:

Duty281 wrote:

JuliusHMarx wrote:

Duty281 wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:So you would be happy for jokes about getting on your elephant to go home. Using racist language such as p*k* and w*g to get some laughs. Brilliant. At least I know where you stand. I dont agree. It's this sort of thing that these matches stand against. I'm on their side.

Good point, we'll have to bin Only Fools and Horses and Life on Mars, too.

I'm opposed to censorship of popular entertainment because of where it leads. And I'm more than happy to take that stance.

It's not been censored. It's not banned or prohibited. You can buy Gone With the Wind.

This is a discussion which relates to what I think about censorship, not about Gone With the Wind.

Then why post links to things that haven't been censored?

Because I was talking about the possibility of such things being airbrushed from history. Another poster then asked me, on a slightly different topic, if I was always opposed to censorship.

Are you concerned about the lack of black British history on the school curriculum, given that the current lack of teaching on the subject effectively airbrushes it from history?

I don't know how much black British history there is, currently, on the school curriculum. Windrush should certainly be added, if it hasn't been already.

No 7&1/2 wrote:But you want to see statues celebrating racists still standing and programmes with racist jokes on tv. Perhaps some self reflection needed?

This is a far more nuanced discussion than you're reducing it to.

No 7&1/2 wrote:But you want to see statues celebrating racists still standing and programmes with racist jokes on tv. Perhaps some self reflection needed?

On the first, you would be hard pressed to have any statues of historical figures left if you took out those that held racial views - if you're specifically referring to Colston, I would rather he didn't have a statue up, but disagree with the way in which it was removed. Also important to remember that people are not simply 'good' or 'bad'.

On the second, I've never directly stated that, only that I oppose censorship of popular entertainment (opposing censorship, at least to me, means opposing it for things I do like and for things I do not like).

The curriculum with regards to black British history is a joke.

I attended a school that William Wilberforce, instrumental in the abolition of slavery in Britain, also attended. I remember vividly a conversation in my final school year with a teacher who was leaving to lecture at a prominent university. I asked why he was moving away from school teaching, which he was brilliant at, and he pointed out that in order to educate students significantly about Wilberforce (a local who young children will naturally take interest in) he had to teach outwith the curriculum.

Nothing represents airbrushing history in Britain better than lack of education with regards to British imperialism.

Nuance soul? Theres some here that make our that it's never a good thing that a law is broken. Personally I've said a lot of good can come from it. A lot of good has come from it in the last 24 hours or so. Now we're onto let's get racism back on tv. Heck of a stand to take, including tha bad faith arguments ignoring context.

king_carlos wrote:

Duty281 wrote:

king_carlos wrote:

Duty281 wrote:

king_carlos wrote:

Duty281 wrote:

king_carlos wrote:

Duty281 wrote:https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-52990714
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-52983319
https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2020/jun/09/cops-tv-show-cancelled-police-protests

Anything made before the new enlightenment will have to be airbrushed from history.

They aren't being airbrushed from history. Little Britain and Gone with the Wind still exist. They are still available to watch for those that wish to seek them out. Little Britain DVD box sets can probably be found in just about any charity shop in Britain. Those distributors are just choosing not to actively promote the content on their streaming services.

With regards to Little Britain I think it's pertinent to note that Lucas and Walliams have both stated innumerable times that they would make the show very differently now and regret certain characters and portrayals. Lucas in particular said something recently along the lines of being embarrassed by them using crude stereotypes to get lazy laughs.

Airbrushed meaning as in concealed from view, not as in removed from existence. Little Britain will still be there for people who actively seek it, but the BBC/streaming companies will pretend it never existed. It won't feature on compliation shows, archives, won't be mentioned on panel shows or quiz programmes etc. And we will see a lot more of this.

For what it's worth, I found Little Britain about as funny as having testicular cancer, but I'm concerned at the direction things are going in. Because it won't stop at films and tv.

How often was Little Britain mentioned on panel shows or shown in compilations though? It's aged about as well as my face. Which for context, these days looks like a small confused face drawn on a hefty and exuberant scrotum.

With regards to Gone with the Wind HBO have said it will return to the platform with discussion about it's historical context. Presumably meaning that they will include a disclaimer or also release a documentary of sorts looking at the racial implications of past film making.

I understand reservations about censorship but I don't believe this is it. It's simply media platforms choosing to not push racially insensitive content from the past. The airbrushing film and TV comments are also misguided with regards to Gone with the Wind given that the longstanding criticism of the film has been for it airbrushing history with regards to the slave trade.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-52990714 wrote:"The movie had the very best talents in Hollywood at that time working together to sentimentalise a history that never was," continued the Oscar-winning screenwriter of 12 Years A Slave.

An excellent quote there from 12 Years A Slave screenwriter John Ridley with regards to Gone with the Wind.

This may not be it, but it could be the start of it.

I disagree.

I do however think that many people, especially within the establishment, in Britain feeling more concerned by the review of racially insensitive, and in many cases outright offensive, media and monuments than they are by institutionalised racism sums up why people have been driven to protest.

Possibly because the first of those is relatively new, whereas efforts to tackle institutional racism have been going on for decades.

Content providers considering what media they offer isn't new though. The BBC never offered Come Fly with Me (another Lucas/Walliams show) on iPlayer for instance and Britbox removed it back in November. Gone with the Wind has been criticised for years and I believe other channels and cinemas that show old movies have stopped screening it long before now, HBO have now joined them.

The conversation is become louder and broader now as these topics come into the spotlight more. I believe that is a brilliant and vital thing to finally be happening.

Out of interest, though, how far would you take this?

For example, Netflix currently offers Fawlty Towers, Only Fools and Horses and Life on Mars on its streaming service. The first of those had multiple uses of the ni**er word, the second used outdated terms and phrases like 'ch*nk' and 'black man's pinch', and the third had a character use numerous homophobic and a few racial terms, like 'p**i'.

Do you think these shows should be removed from Netflix/Britbox, and not shown again on the BBC?

They've got into trouble not putting warnings or cutting out racism on Netflix for that. Why on earth would you want racism like that still included? Why are you happy for a young Asian kid having to sit through that?

Fawlty Towers did get edited by the BBC a few years ago because of that word - even though the scene was to show that a character was racist. Only one episode though, iirc.
Programmes such as Mind Your Language are pretty much based on a premise that is racist, so it doesn't get shown at all.

No 7&1/2 wrote:They've got into trouble not putting warnings or cutting out racism on Netflix for that. Why on earth would you want racism like that still included? Why are you happy for a young Asian kid having to sit through that?

Or have to be subjected to white kids calling them offensive words which they picked up on the TV as OK to use.

No 7&1/2 wrote:They've got into trouble not putting warnings or cutting out racism on Netflix for that. Why on earth would you want racism like that still included? Why are you happy for a young Asian kid having to sit through that?

Because writers should be allowed to create racist characters within their works of fiction, just like they should be allowed to create misogynists/murderers/rapists/thieves/adulterers/arsonists or even good people.

Or do you think racist characters within fiction, be it film/television/literature, should be completely banned?

JuliusHMarx wrote:Fawlty Towers did get edited by the BBC a few years ago because of that word - even though the scene was to show that a character was racist. Only one episode though, iirc.
Programmes such as Mind Your Language are pretty much based on a premise that is racist, so it doesn't get shown at all.

Yes, 'the Germans' episode, it still exists unedited on Netflix.

Exactly julius. I think that racism is so widespread some dont see it at all. Some like duty do see it of course but think it shouldn't be censored. Sorry, this impacts people. Whether it be quite overt like Nick Ferrari saying when asked to discuss statues for the person to leave the country or a popular recent film like Hidden Figures which tries to celebrate black women introducing a mythical white saviour: these things have an impact.

Ah. Deliberately ignoring context now duty. Excellent. Let's get back to your point you want to see bernard manning telling a black guy to eff off back to his own country.

No 7&1/2 wrote:Ah. Deliberately ignoring context now duty. Excellent. Let's get back to your point you want to see bernard manning telling a black guy to eff off back to his own country.  

Nope, never said that.

I answered your question of why should racism be included in tv and film - because writers should have the freedom to create characters of their own choosing. Do you not support that freedom?