|
Post by ollychops on Jul 25, 2019 22:19:36 GMT
I’ll be skipping The Psychic Circus. Dreyfus wasn’t a particularly interesting Master anyway, so I’m not too fussed. Not only is he bigoted but he’s acting incredibly unprofessional and immature in response to people being upset by his casting.
I was disappointed seeing the March 2019 recording date on the page, but I’m hoping that it’s just BF filling contractual obligations with him before dropping him, so he can’t sue them or anything of the sort.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 25, 2019 22:23:23 GMT
Indeed Dreyfus has already raised the possibility of legal action on his twitter account today, so if BF were to remove him they would almost definitely face legal retaliation from him. Honestly this situation is a stain on Big Finish, I will be steering clear of any release featuring Dreyfus. (Though honestly wasn’t particulary interested in his incarnation of the Master anyway). You have to wonder that if BF claimed he had brought their product into disrepute or some such would he have a legal leg to stand on. I suppose that BF could and probably will just not hire him if and when any existing contracts are up. I don't think he would have a leg to stand on anyway. He was employed and paid, surely. That's the only obligation they've got to him. Ditto Gareth Roberts - BBC books made sure to put in their press release that he was paid every penny he would have been due if published.
|
|
|
Post by frisby78 on Jul 25, 2019 22:28:09 GMT
You have to wonder that if BF claimed he had brought their product into disrepute or some such would he have a legal leg to stand on. I suppose that BF could and probably will just not hire him if and when any existing contracts are up. I don't think he would have a leg to stand on anyway. He was employed and paid, surely. That's the only obligation they've got to him. Ditto Gareth Roberts - BBC books made sure to put in their press release that he was paid every penny he would have been due if published. Good point. I just see him being quietly dropped.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 25, 2019 22:30:42 GMT
This "statement" is a load of waffling nonsense that fails to directly address anything at all. ... and typically Big Finish, doesn't actually get on top of the issue or put out any fires ... while the tweets from some angry customers continue to pile up (those that don't get deleted that is) and The Psychic Circus - which has a lot of promise as a story - now becomes a controversial release. It's very much a page from their HR documents copied and printed, yeah, but I wouldn't have expected to get a "James Dreyfus will no longer work with Big Finish" while he's on his Twitter threatening legal action. I think they're doing enough to put out their equality statement, which is clearly because of this issue, but not do anything that could jeopardize their standing going forward. It's been 24 hours, I wouldn't be surprised at all if they've got a legal team looking at things before being any more specific than outlining their policy and training for all staff, permanent and contracted.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 25, 2019 22:38:39 GMT
I don't think he would have a leg to stand on anyway. He was employed and paid, surely. That's the only obligation they've got to him. Ditto Gareth Roberts - BBC books made sure to put in their press release that he was paid every penny he would have been due if published. Good point. I just see him being quietly dropped. I don't even mean this glibly but he won't be missed. Taking ALL this mess out of the picture, his Master was the most generic, uninspired one ever. He was just another charming but evil Master. Been there, done that. If it was an actor I loved in their role, though, I'd like to think I'd still feel the same - that some things are just beyond the pale and you don't get a bye from them just for being popular.
|
|
newt5996
Chancellery Guard
Likes: 2,696
Member is Online
|
Post by newt5996 on Jul 25, 2019 22:39:25 GMT
... and typically Big Finish, doesn't actually get on top of the issue or put out any fires ... while the tweets from some angry customers continue to pile up (those that don't get deleted that is) and The Psychic Circus - which has a lot of promise as a story - now becomes a controversial release. It's very much a page from their HR documents copied and printed, yeah, but I wouldn't have expected to get a "James Dreyfus will no longer work with Big Finish" while he's on his Twitter threatening legal action. I think they're doing enough to put out their equality statement, which is clearly because of this issue, but not do anything that could jeopardize their standing going forward. It's been 24 hours, I wouldn't be surprised at all if they've got a legal team looking at things before being any more specific than outlining their policy and training for all staff, permanent and contracted. And because Big Finish is small I don’t think they could afford to risk the legal action.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 25, 2019 22:43:00 GMT
... and typically Big Finish, doesn't actually get on top of the issue or put out any fires ... while the tweets from some angry customers continue to pile up (those that don't get deleted that is) and The Psychic Circus - which has a lot of promise as a story - now becomes a controversial release. As a matter of interest would you publicly say you wouldn't work with him again? If I was Big Finish I certainly wouldn't want my name associated with his bigoted views, so I'd be a bit more pro-active from an early stage in distancing myself from him and his views. These things don't tend to go away so the product has to be protected.
|
|
|
Post by Digi on Jul 25, 2019 22:45:31 GMT
This "statement" is a load of waffling nonsense that fails to directly address anything at all. I was willing to give them the benefit of the doubt that they were just putting out work that had been recorded ages ago (as nice as it would be in principle, I don't actually expect a company to throw stuff out like that), but this Seventh Doctor story with Dreyfus was only recorded a few months ago according to their site. I'm officially done buying Big Finish at this point. Into the bin with the lot of them. I hear you: at first read, it does indeed sound like waffling, wishy-washy nothingness. But I've been thinking on it since I first read it this afternoon and ultimately landed at the complete reverse position. The way Big Finish conducts their business -- and I mean just their business attitude, not anything social -- is quite conservative; they've taken forever to adjust their prices despite a perceived problem, they don't like to announce releases until the recording is already complete so they can avoid any casting announcement corrections, they rarely announce release dates in a window narrower than a month, excepting Nick & Benji on the podcast they virtually never discuss their staff or performers in terms anything other than professional achievements, etc etc etc. So for them to have heard this torrent of criticism...and then to actually issue a response? That's unprecedented. That's Earth-shaking for them. Where I first read a wishy-washy useless answer, instead I now see something else: a deeply trepidatious company taking the unprecedented step of saying "we hear you, and we're dealing with it." Thing is, they're still a business with legal concerns -- and very narrow financial margins. They have to be extremely cautious that they don't invite a lawsuit from Dreyfus for defamation, not just for publicity/press reasons, but because they simply may not be able to afford the legal fight (or a premature termination of contract). There may also be contractual obligations with others that we aren't aware of, like a number of productions per year they're required to do with Sylvester, or promotional obligations they have to the other actors or director, or whoever else. And then there's the longer-term potential effects: like attracting talent down the line. Suppose the separation goes badly and Big Finish gets a bunch of bad press, and suddenly they're having trouble enticing actors to come work for them. Or Dreyfus has more pull in the industry and discourages people from going to work with them. Or any number of other long-term knock-on effects. It would be lovely if Big Finish could react quickly and transparently to situations such as these. It would remove much ambiguity, and make it much simpler to make a just moral stand. But the legal, business, and financial/economic calculus are far, far more complicated than that.
|
|
|
Post by frisby78 on Jul 25, 2019 22:46:14 GMT
As a matter of interest would you publicly say you wouldn't work with him again? If I was Big Finish I certainly wouldn't want my name associated with his bigoted views, so I'd be a bit more pro-active from an early stage in distancing myself from him and his views. These things don't tend to go away so the product has to be protected. Agreed.
|
|
lidar2
Castellan
You know, now that you mention it, I actually do rather like Attack of the Cybermen ...
Likes: 5,819
|
Post by lidar2 on Jul 25, 2019 22:49:48 GMT
You have to wonder that if BF claimed he had brought their product into disrepute or some such would he have a legal leg to stand on. I suppose that BF could and probably will just not hire him if and when any existing contracts are up. He was employed and paid, surely. That's the only obligation they've got to him. Yes, that's absolutely right. All this talk of boycotting releases featuring Dreyfus is ludicrous - yes, a lot of people have been offended by his comments and want to register their disapproval - but boycotting will have no effect on Dreyfus whatsoever as he has been paid for what he has done and is unlikely to get future employment from BF anyway. Instead the boycotters will be hurting BF financially - because BF have invested money in these productions that they need to recoup - for something that is really not BF's fault or responsibility. They are also, to a lesser extent, punishing all the other creatives whose efforts will go unappreciated if the release is pulled. It really makes no sense to me. I would say to anyone thinking of boycotting - think it through logically - who are you actually punishing in reality?
|
|
|
Post by frisby78 on Jul 25, 2019 22:54:29 GMT
This "statement" is a load of waffling nonsense that fails to directly address anything at all. I was willing to give them the benefit of the doubt that they were just putting out work that had been recorded ages ago (as nice as it would be in principle, I don't actually expect a company to throw stuff out like that), but this Seventh Doctor story with Dreyfus was only recorded a few months ago according to their site. I'm officially done buying Big Finish at this point. Into the bin with the lot of them. I hear you: at first read, it does indeed sound like waffling, wishy-washy nothingness. But I've been thinking on it since I first read it this afternoon and ultimately landed at the complete reverse position. The way Big Finish conducts their business -- and I mean just their business attitude, not anything social -- is quite conservative; they've taken forever to adjust their prices despite a perceived problem, they don't like to announce releases until the recording is already complete so they can avoid any casting announcement corrections, they rarely announce release dates in a window narrower than a month, excepting Nick & Benji on the podcast they virtually never discuss their staff or performers in terms anything other than professional achievements, etc etc etc. So for them to have heard this torrent of criticism...and then to actually issue a response? That's unprecedented. That's Earth-shaking for them. Where I first read a wishy-washy useless answer, instead I now see something else: a deeply trepidatious company taking the unprecedented step of saying "we hear you, and we're dealing with it." Thing is, they're still a business with legal concerns -- and very narrow financial margins. They have to be extremely cautious that they don't invite a lawsuit from Dreyfus for defamation, not just for publicity/press reasons, but because they simply may not be able to afford the legal fight (or a premature termination of contract). There may also be contractual obligations with others that we aren't aware of, like a number of productions per year they're required to do with Sylvester, or promotional obligations they have to the other actors or director, or whoever else. And then there's the longer-term potential effects: like attracting talent down the line. Suppose the separation goes badly and Big Finish gets a bunch of bad press, and suddenly they're having trouble enticing actors to come work for them. Or Dreyfus has more pull in the industry and discourages people from going to work with them. Or any number of other long-term knock-on effects. It would be lovely if Big Finish could react quickly and transparently to situations such as these. It would remove much ambiguity, and make it much simpler to make a just moral stand. But the legal, business, and financial/economic calculus are far, far more complicated than that. All valid points. Regarding your last point, from what I've heard from friends in the know he's not very popular in the industry. There seems to be a mutual love in with him, Oberman and Rachel Riley, but the latter two opinions are also, shall we say, dubious.
|
|
|
Post by frisby78 on Jul 25, 2019 22:55:57 GMT
He was employed and paid, surely. That's the only obligation they've got to him. Yes, that's absolutely right. All this talk of boycotting releases featuring Dreyfus is ludicrous - yes, a lot of people have been offended by his comments and want to register their disapproval - but boycotting will have no effect on Dreyfus whatsoever as he has been paid for what he has done and is unlikely to get future employment from BF anyway. Instead the boycotters will be hurting BF financially - because BF have invested money in these productions that they need to recoup - for something that is really not BF's fault or responsibility. They are also, to a lesser extent, punishing all the other creatives whose efforts will go unappreciated if the release is pulled. It really makes no sense to me. I would say to anyone thinking of boycotting - think it through logically - who are you actually punishing in reality? It might end up being a great tax write off....
|
|
|
Post by aussiedoctorwhofan on Jul 25, 2019 23:01:18 GMT
This "statement" is a load of waffling nonsense that fails to directly address anything at all. I was willing to give them the benefit of the doubt that they were just putting out work that had been recorded ages ago (as nice as it would be in principle, I don't actually expect a company to throw stuff out like that), but this Seventh Doctor story with Dreyfus was only recorded a few months ago according to their site. I'm officially done buying Big Finish at this point. Into the bin with the lot of them. I hear you: at first read, it does indeed sound like waffling, wishy-washy nothingness. But I've been thinking on it since I first read it this afternoon and ultimately landed at the complete reverse position. The way Big Finish conducts their business -- and I mean just their business attitude, not anything social -- is quite conservative; they've taken forever to adjust their prices despite a perceived problem, they don't like to announce releases until the recording is already complete so they can avoid any casting announcement corrections, they rarely announce release dates in a window narrower than a month, excepting Nick & Benji on the podcast they virtually never discuss their staff or performers in terms anything other than professional achievements, etc etc etc. So for them to have heard this torrent of criticism...and then to actually issue a response? That's unprecedented. That's Earth-shaking for them. Where I first read a wishy-washy useless answer, instead I now see something else: a deeply trepidatious company taking the unprecedented step of saying "we hear you, and we're dealing with it." Thing is, they're still a business with legal concerns -- and very narrow financial margins. They have to be extremely cautious that they don't invite a lawsuit from Dreyfus for defamation, not just for publicity/press reasons, but because they simply may not be able to afford the legal fight (or a premature termination of contract). There may also be contractual obligations with others that we aren't aware of, like a number of productions per year they're required to do with Sylvester, or promotional obligations they have to the other actors or director, or whoever else. And then there's the longer-term potential effects: like attracting talent down the line. Suppose the separation goes badly and Big Finish gets a bunch of bad press, and suddenly they're having trouble enticing actors to come work for them. Or Dreyfus has more pull in the industry and discourages people from going to work with them. Or any number of other long-term knock-on effects. It would be lovely if Big Finish could react quickly and transparently to situations such as these. It would remove much ambiguity, and make it much simpler to make a just moral stand. But the legal, business, and financial/economic calculus are far, far more complicated than that. Excellently worded.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 25, 2019 23:04:29 GMT
I hear you: at first read, it does indeed sound like waffling, wishy-washy nothingness. But I've been thinking on it since I first read it this afternoon and ultimately landed at the complete reverse position. The way Big Finish conducts their business -- and I mean just their business attitude, not anything social -- is quite conservative; they've taken forever to adjust their prices despite a perceived problem, they don't like to announce releases until the recording is already complete so they can avoid any casting announcement corrections, they rarely announce release dates in a window narrower than a month, excepting Nick & Benji on the podcast they virtually never discuss their staff or performers in terms anything other than professional achievements, etc etc etc. So for them to have heard this torrent of criticism...and then to actually issue a response? That's unprecedented. That's Earth-shaking for them. Where I first read a wishy-washy useless answer, instead I now see something else: a deeply trepidatious company taking the unprecedented step of saying "we hear you, and we're dealing with it." Thing is, they're still a business with legal concerns -- and very narrow financial margins. They have to be extremely cautious that they don't invite a lawsuit from Dreyfus for defamation, not just for publicity/press reasons, but because they simply may not be able to afford the legal fight (or a premature termination of contract). There may also be contractual obligations with others that we aren't aware of, like a number of productions per year they're required to do with Sylvester, or promotional obligations they have to the other actors or director, or whoever else. And then there's the longer-term potential effects: like attracting talent down the line. Suppose the separation goes badly and Big Finish gets a bunch of bad press, and suddenly they're having trouble enticing actors to come work for them. Or Dreyfus has more pull in the industry and discourages people from going to work with them. Or any number of other long-term knock-on effects. It would be lovely if Big Finish could react quickly and transparently to situations such as these. It would remove much ambiguity, and make it much simpler to make a just moral stand. But the legal, business, and financial/economic calculus are far, far more complicated than that. All valid points. Regarding your last point, from what I've heard from friends in the know he's not very popular in the industry. There seems to be a mutual love in with him, Oberman and Rachel Riley, but the latter two opinions are also, shall we say, dubious. Yes - to be fair to Digi though, he's from overseas and may not know where Dreyfus is in terms of the pop culture totem pole. When BF have got legit British TV superstars like Derek Jacobi and Nicola Walker, not to mention David Tennant, on their books regularly...I don't think Dreyfus - an actor who's two biggest roles were supporting ones in low budget sitcoms 20-25 years ago - is going to have much pull or sway in anything but his very closest circles. It wouldn't make headlines, in anything but the cultiest of cult outlets to be blunt and even if it did, I think the public would condemn him for his words before sympathizing because they liked him with Rowan Atkinson 25 years ago. I'd imagine an absolutely huge percentage of the creatives BF would want to employ would look at what he's said with disdain anyway far from sympathise with him and look twice at working with BF. It's not as though he would have been let go flippantly or for some minor misunderstanding blown up. Quite the opposite, I'd imagine more would look twice at working with BF if they kept him on - exactly as happened with Gareth Roberts where BBC Books had more than one person threaten to withdraw their work if he was kept on, and even Who royalty in Paul Cornell condemning his words too.
|
|
|
Post by Digi on Jul 25, 2019 23:07:59 GMT
All valid points. Regarding your last point, from what I've heard from friends in the know he's not very popular in the industry. There seems to be a mutual love in with him, Oberman and Rachel Riley, but the latter two opinions are also, shall we say, dubious. Yes - to be fair to Digi though, he's from overseas and may not know where Dreyfus is in terms of the pop culture totem pole. When BF have got legit British TV superstars like Derek Jacobi and Nicola Walker, not to mention David Tennant, on their books regularly...I don't think Dreyfus - an actor who's two biggest roles were supporting ones in low budget sitcoms 20-25 years ago - is going to have much pull or sway in anything but his very closest circles. It wouldn't make headlines, in anything but the cultiest of cult outlets to be blunt and even if it did, I think the public would condemn him for his words before sympathizing because they liked him with Rowan Atkinson 25 years ago. I'd imagine an absolutely huge percentage of the creatives BF would want to employ would look at what he's said with disdain anyway far from sympathise with him and look twice at working with BF. It's not as though he would have been let go flippantly or for some minor misunderstanding blown up. Quite the opposite, I'd imagine more would look twice at working with BF if they kept him on - exactly as happened with Gareth Roberts where BBC Books had more than one person threaten to withdraw their work if he was kept on, and even Who royalty in Paul Cornell condemning his words too. Guilty Although, my point was less these specific scenarios and more that there are a lot of possible knock-on effects that we, on the outside looking in, can't necessarily foresee, that they need to be cautious of.
|
|
lidar2
Castellan
You know, now that you mention it, I actually do rather like Attack of the Cybermen ...
Likes: 5,819
|
Post by lidar2 on Jul 25, 2019 23:08:50 GMT
This "statement" is a load of waffling nonsense that fails to directly address anything at all. I was willing to give them the benefit of the doubt that they were just putting out work that had been recorded ages ago (as nice as it would be in principle, I don't actually expect a company to throw stuff out like that), but this Seventh Doctor story with Dreyfus was only recorded a few months ago according to their site. I'm officially done buying Big Finish at this point. Into the bin with the lot of them. The statement looks to me very much like a cut and paste from their staff handbook with an introductory paragraph added in for today's announcement. And the extract from the staff handbook itself looks very like a generic template for a "model equality & diversity policy" that they got off the ACAS website or a similar source.
So it doesn't directly address the concerns people are raising, but it does indirectly make the point that BF as a company has a policy/stance against the sorts of views that some of the people they employ have expressed and most certainly doesn't condone them.
The compamy I work for has 150 employees and an HR manager who is CIPD qualified (the standard professional qualification for HR in the uk). An organisation like the BBC has thousands of employees and much bigger infrastructure and resource to manage these kinds of issues. BF have (say) 10 employees and probably someone who is not an HR professional dealing with the HR amongst many other duties. BF cannot be held to the same standard as a much larger organisation. I think they are basically all good guys and gals, perhaps not always the most business and PR savvy and with limited resource and expertise in more general management issues, but their hearts are in the right place. As I said upthread when it was in another thread, I don't think it is reasonable to expect BF to vet all the public utterances of every actor/writer/director/sound designer they employ - it would probably require another full time employee spending all their time on it - and I do think some of the criticisms of BF are a bit unreasonable.
|
|
|
Post by masterdoctor on Jul 25, 2019 23:09:56 GMT
I hear you: at first read, it does indeed sound like waffling, wishy-washy nothingness. But I've been thinking on it since I first read it this afternoon and ultimately landed at the complete reverse position. The way Big Finish conducts their business -- and I mean just their business attitude, not anything social -- is quite conservative; they've taken forever to adjust their prices despite a perceived problem, they don't like to announce releases until the recording is already complete so they can avoid any casting announcement corrections, they rarely announce release dates in a window narrower than a month, excepting Nick & Benji on the podcast they virtually never discuss their staff or performers in terms anything other than professional achievements, etc etc etc. So for them to have heard this torrent of criticism...and then to actually issue a response? That's unprecedented. That's Earth-shaking for them. Where I first read a wishy-washy useless answer, instead I now see something else: a deeply trepidatious company taking the unprecedented step of saying "we hear you, and we're dealing with it." Thing is, they're still a business with legal concerns -- and very narrow financial margins. They have to be extremely cautious that they don't invite a lawsuit from Dreyfus for defamation, not just for publicity/press reasons, but because they simply may not be able to afford the legal fight (or a premature termination of contract). There may also be contractual obligations with others that we aren't aware of, like a number of productions per year they're required to do with Sylvester, or promotional obligations they have to the other actors or director, or whoever else. And then there's the longer-term potential effects: like attracting talent down the line. Suppose the separation goes badly and Big Finish gets a bunch of bad press, and suddenly they're having trouble enticing actors to come work for them. Or Dreyfus has more pull in the industry and discourages people from going to work with them. Or any number of other long-term knock-on effects. It would be lovely if Big Finish could react quickly and transparently to situations such as these. It would remove much ambiguity, and make it much simpler to make a just moral stand. But the legal, business, and financial/economic calculus are far, far more complicated than that. All valid points. Regarding your last point, from what I've heard from friends in the know he's not very popular in the industry. There seems to be a mutual love in with him, Oberman and Rachel Riley, but the latter two opinions are also, shall we say, dubious. I’ve seen multiple people mentioned Tracy Ann Oberman and Rachel Riley, but no one has given anything beyond that they said something. Any chance you could shine a light on this front?
|
|
|
Post by Audio Watchdog on Jul 25, 2019 23:25:22 GMT
So I did a search on Google for James Dreyfus trans and I'm mostly coming up with his Twitter feed where he seems in large part pro-trans. Could someone direct me to his actual comments that have fired up the outrage?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 25, 2019 23:29:26 GMT
Yes - to be fair to Digi though, he's from overseas and may not know where Dreyfus is in terms of the pop culture totem pole. When BF have got legit British TV superstars like Derek Jacobi and Nicola Walker, not to mention David Tennant, on their books regularly...I don't think Dreyfus - an actor who's two biggest roles were supporting ones in low budget sitcoms 20-25 years ago - is going to have much pull or sway in anything but his very closest circles. It wouldn't make headlines, in anything but the cultiest of cult outlets to be blunt and even if it did, I think the public would condemn him for his words before sympathizing because they liked him with Rowan Atkinson 25 years ago. I'd imagine an absolutely huge percentage of the creatives BF would want to employ would look at what he's said with disdain anyway far from sympathise with him and look twice at working with BF. It's not as though he would have been let go flippantly or for some minor misunderstanding blown up. Quite the opposite, I'd imagine more would look twice at working with BF if they kept him on - exactly as happened with Gareth Roberts where BBC Books had more than one person threaten to withdraw their work if he was kept on, and even Who royalty in Paul Cornell condemning his words too. Guilty Although, my point was less these specific scenarios and more that there are a lot of possible knock-on effects that we, on the outside looking in, can't necessarily foresee, that they need to be cautious of. They're certainly possible, but as Simon was saying that one of reputational damage in the creative community seems less likely than, say, the legal repercussions of accusing him of something in public when he's already talking about lawyering up. I'd say that's a more real and present concern. I mean the knock on effects of doing absolutely nothing and giving him more work could cause even worse effects - I think they almost certainly would be worse, in fact. But I think that BF deserve, as we're both agreeing on, a bit more than 24 hours to look into all that kind of stuff and consult who they need to before addressing Dreyfus' situation specifically. Certainly more than 24 hours before people are talking about boycotts or throwing their collections out.
|
|
|
Post by frisby78 on Jul 25, 2019 23:39:24 GMT
All valid points. Regarding your last point, from what I've heard from friends in the know he's not very popular in the industry. There seems to be a mutual love in with him, Oberman and Rachel Riley, but the latter two opinions are also, shall we say, dubious. I’ve seen multiple people mentioned Tracy Ann Oberman and Rachel Riley, but no one has given anything beyond that they said something. Any chance you could shine a light on this front? Just Google Rachel Riley and Palestine etc. She's a mentalist.
|
|