This discussion has been closed.
Posted by DavidG (U2600889) on Monday, 1st March 2010
Or so says Harry Lansdown, the commissioning editor for BBC 3 in his blog at www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/... where he takes issue with what various Ouchers, including I, Nia and Meridi have had to say, reducing our positions to out of context phrases before blithely dismissing them.
Harry, if you're so eager to pursue the debate, we're here and waiting. We don't bite, but we do hold people to a fairly high standard of argument, so you'll need something better than simply saying the Black and White Minstrel Show analogy doesn't work because you used real disabled people. I notice you failed to address the Dancing With Gay Men analogy, your breaches of common disability etiquette or your pursuit of models of disability widely hated within the disability community.
Posted by RoseRodent (U1896879) on Monday, 1st March 2010
What a mark-misser of the debate to finish up with Di's "I thought I'd never dance again" [sic] to justify 100% of the approach. Surely she could have equally been in a position of discovering she can dance again by taking part in an inclusive competition where there were both wheelchair dancers and non-wheelchair couples? Or if the show had been aired primetime like the AB counterparts? Just because you can pick out a single positive comment it does not trump every other argument!
How about "I hate racisim and everything about racism but I happened to meet my lovely fiancee through a BNP campaign event in my area, so that makes everything better because it turned out to have some personal benefit to me which offsets all the disadvantages to the wider community" - not looking so appealing now!
Personally I understand the position of this show within a journey, it's a Cosby show of its time, when black actors felt they had to appear in all-black shows because the only parts for black actors on mainstream TV shows were "token black person of ridicule". It's a step on a road, so long as the powers that be do not confuse it with the *destination* then I don't object too vocally to the concept, just many parts of the execution.
Posted by RoboMam (U12300384) on Monday, 1st March 2010
I for one will be looking forward to see what response you get David .
Posted by Glistener (U5249510) on Monday, 1st March 2010
I'm glad you haven't gone Robo. Not had time to post recently but been reading a bit tonight.
Posted by RoboMam (U12300384) on Friday, 5th March 2010
...still waiting ... for the debate ...
The Ouch! messageboard has now closed. Messages you have posted will remain archived.
The message board is currently closed for posting.
To continue the conversation visit Ouch's blog (bbc.co.uk/ouch) - now part of BBC News. There you'll find our podcast, regular blog entries and articles, community events, and links to where you can find us on Facebook and Twitter.
This messageboard is reactively moderated.
Find out more about this board's House Rules
This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.