JA
So you can say the S word on BBC4 TOTP, but we have to pretend Mike Smith never existed.
JA
Does that have to extend to (often badly) editing out the mentions of his name on the episodes we do see though?
Maybe there's the thinking viewers may get confused by mentioning an episde we won't see, but then, they've left in numerous references to the following week's episodes that BBC4 didn't show, such as episodes not made due to strikes, Christmas day episodes and Tommy Vance giving us a detailed explanation of the InterCity record attempt on the following week's episode. If viewers will supposedly get confused by being told Mike Smith is presenting next week then BBC4 don't show it, they'd be just as confused by Tommy Vance spending a minute telling us about a train speed record attempt that we never saw.
They've even left in the presenters telling us to watch Entertainment USA as long as Jonathan King wasn't actually named. It's only when MS (or JS or DLT when they were still presenting) are explicitly named they get cut out. I'm not sure why the mentions of his presenting the next episode are taboo even if they can't show his episodes, and some of those end of episode edits are incredibly messy.
It feels more like trying to write him out of the show's history rather than just respecting his wishes not to show his episodes. Even UK Gold left in the mentions of his name even though he blocked them from showing his episodes.
Maybe there's the thinking viewers may get confused by mentioning an episde we won't see, but then, they've left in numerous references to the following week's episodes that BBC4 didn't show, such as episodes not made due to strikes, Christmas day episodes and Tommy Vance giving us a detailed explanation of the InterCity record attempt on the following week's episode. If viewers will supposedly get confused by being told Mike Smith is presenting next week then BBC4 don't show it, they'd be just as confused by Tommy Vance spending a minute telling us about a train speed record attempt that we never saw.
They've even left in the presenters telling us to watch Entertainment USA as long as Jonathan King wasn't actually named. It's only when MS (or JS or DLT when they were still presenting) are explicitly named they get cut out. I'm not sure why the mentions of his presenting the next episode are taboo even if they can't show his episodes, and some of those end of episode edits are incredibly messy.
It feels more like trying to write him out of the show's history rather than just respecting his wishes not to show his episodes. Even UK Gold left in the mentions of his name even though he blocked them from showing his episodes.
Last edited by james-2001 on 9 November 2018 11:12pm
TI
Get over it! It’s only a couple of episodes of a 30 odd year old TV programme. It’s hardly ‘history’ being rewritten!
JA
I'm sure we can say "get over it" to half the things people in this forum talk about then and stop all discussion, as they're hardly important either.
They're episodes of a 30 year old TV programme, I guess we may as well not discuss them at all, they're old, irrelevent and we can't change the content of them, we may as well just "get over them" and talking about them full stop.
"Get over" idents, "get over" Good Morning Britain, "get over" Eurovision, none of it's important in the grand scheme of things after all.
It's like Digitalspy all over again. God forbid we have an opinion on a subject that doesn't meet some posters' approval.
They're episodes of a 30 year old TV programme, I guess we may as well not discuss them at all, they're old, irrelevent and we can't change the content of them, we may as well just "get over them" and talking about them full stop.
"Get over" idents, "get over" Good Morning Britain, "get over" Eurovision, none of it's important in the grand scheme of things after all.
It's like Digitalspy all over again. God forbid we have an opinion on a subject that doesn't meet some posters' approval.
DE
I totally understand James's irritation regarding the Smitty situation and BBC4's edits - but I can also see why other TVF members aren't irritated at all.
We *do* still get an enjoyable music show from yesteryear at the end of the day. And it has been said so many times before, but when these repeats began in 2011 very few people thought that they would last for literal years - even without things like Yewtree.
We *do* still get an enjoyable music show from yesteryear at the end of the day. And it has been said so many times before, but when these repeats began in 2011 very few people thought that they would last for literal years - even without things like Yewtree.
JA
Surely if you're not bothered, just ignore the comments and don't reply rather than rudely tell people to "get over it"?
JM
JamesM0984
The problem is when history gets rewritten and the kids take it as fact.
c.f. CWilliams1976
c.f. CWilliams1976
IS
There's no history being re-written, it's just an entertaining and nostalgic half hour of telly. Just watch and enjoy like it was intended.
DE
Well, I *do* agree that ignoring the comments and not replying is better than saying "get over it".
But, presumably, tightrope78 felt the need to be explicit in expressing disagreement, and these were the first words that came to him.
I too occasionally feel the need to be explicit when disagreeing with comments, by replying to these comments accordingly - but I'm usually quite careful in choosing my words.
Absolutely no disrespect intended towards tightrope78 or anyone else, of course.
Surely if you're not bothered, just ignore the comments and don't reply rather than rudely tell people to "get over it"?
Well, I *do* agree that ignoring the comments and not replying is better than saying "get over it".
But, presumably, tightrope78 felt the need to be explicit in expressing disagreement, and these were the first words that came to him.
I too occasionally feel the need to be explicit when disagreeing with comments, by replying to these comments accordingly - but I'm usually quite careful in choosing my words.
Absolutely no disrespect intended towards tightrope78 or anyone else, of course.
JA
Didn't some programme producer say an error actually made it into a TV show as a direct result of his videos?
The problem is when history gets rewritten and the kids take it as fact.
c.f. CWilliams1976
c.f. CWilliams1976
Didn't some programme producer say an error actually made it into a TV show as a direct result of his videos?