|
Post by mark687 on May 2, 2018 22:21:25 GMT
So another issue of Doctor Who Magazine drops Tomorrow with apparently No New Series Production News in it (not even Production Notes) and I found this quote by Editor Marcus Heam made in February after the usual "the Production Team are so supportive of the Mag" line:
“That we will be breaking news, I hope. We the time comes later this year when the new series begins but I don’t necessarily feel that’s our primary function. I don’t think, as Series 11 approaches, I would hope we get the opportunity to do that but I think people will look to Doctor Who Magazine more for a detailed and accurate representation of what’s actually happening. I think they will look to Doctor Who Magazine for a detailed and accurate representation of actually how the show is actually coming to the air. They’ll look to Doctor Who Magazine for an accurate and detailed representation of the people who are actually making the show because that’s the sort of thing we do on Doctor Who Magazine, we talk to the people, not just the actors, who are obviously terribly important, but we talk to the people who actually the writers, the directors, the behind-the-scenes people that maybe other magazines may not be interested in but that’s what we do on Doctor Who Magazine. I see Doctor Who Magazine not just as a source of accurate news of that sort buy also as a journal of record.”
So what dose this make the current Purpose of DWM?
To wax lyrical on the history of the show for the next 6 months ala the Wilderness Years?
Regards
mark687
|
|
|
Post by nucleusofswarm on May 2, 2018 23:44:21 GMT
So what dose this make the current Purpose of DWM?
To wax lyrical on the history of the show for the next 6 months ala the Wilderness Years?
In fairness, isn't that what it always does?
|
|
|
Post by mark687 on May 2, 2018 23:57:19 GMT
So what dose this make the current Purpose of DWM?
To wax lyrical on the history of the show for the next 6 months ala the Wilderness Years?
In fairness, isn't that what it always does? Since 2005 its been reasonable balanced with current Production info as well though and don't forget its now the "Official Magazine" there's a danger of it sliding back into fan/public mediocrity again without it.
Regards
mark687
|
|
|
Post by omega on May 3, 2018 0:00:53 GMT
In fairness, isn't that what it always does? Since 2005 its been reasonable balanced with current Production info as well though and don't forget its now the "Official Magazine" there's a danger of it sliding back into fan/public mediocrity again without it.
Regards
mark687
We're getting very little coverage on series 11 coming from the BBC, so there's not much for DWM to work with on that front.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on May 3, 2018 0:01:51 GMT
They've got the revival releases to cover, so there's plenty of intrest there.....
|
|
|
Post by mark687 on May 3, 2018 0:05:19 GMT
Since 2005 its been reasonable balanced with current Production info as well though and don't forget its now the "Official Magazine" there's a danger of it sliding back into fan/public mediocrity again without it.
Regards
mark687
We're getting very little coverage on series 11 coming from the BBC, so there's not much for DWM to work with on that front. Exactly almost defeats the purpose of having an "official magazine" currently.
Regards
mark687
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on May 3, 2018 0:59:52 GMT
Eh, DWM has it's faults, but I'd rather have it ongoing. It's become a fan institution by fans for fans and continues to be given considerable freedom, regardless of it's official status. I'm not a fan of everything that's been done under it's banner - the Tabloid-esque misrepresentation of Sophie Aldred's comments on RTD on the cover of DWM #445 for instance or given Davison's advancing age, printing comments about Peter Davision talking about Colin Baker's 'attiude' towards the BBC (which felt like concern for a friend) or comments about his son-in-law finally adopting his stepson or a reviewer cheering on Toby Hadoke taking Terrance Dicks to task whether or not he was on set for Frontier in Space or discussing Colin Baker's conditions for being interviewed about The Last Adventure - (some of which sadly stems from a small minority of adult fans needing to accept the wonder and move on with the pracilities of adult life) - but I'd rather have it around then not and Marcus Heam seems to be a welcome change from his preddesscors in that regard.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on May 3, 2018 2:02:26 GMT
Eh, DWM has it's faults, but I'd rather have it ongoing. It's become a fan institution by fans for fans and continues to be given considerable freedom, regardless of it's official status. I'm not a fan of everything that's been done under it's banner - the Tabloid-esque misrepresentation of Sophie Aldred's comments on RTD on the cover of DWM #445 for instance or given Davison's advancing age, printing comments about Peter Davision talking about Colin Baker's 'attiude' towards the BBC (which felt like concern for a friend) or comments about his son-in-law finally adopting his stepson or a reviewer cheering on Toby Hadoke taking Terrance Dicks to task whether or not he was on set for Frontier in Space or discussing Colin Baker's conditions for being interviewed about The Last Adventure - (some of which sadly stems from a small minority of adult fans needing to accept the wonder and move on with the pracilities of adult life) - but I'd rather have it around then not and Marcus Heam seems to be a welcome change from his preddesscors in that regard. Mmm, I like having it around. Particularly as a historical record of Zeitgeist, which changes dramatically over the decades; Series D of Blake's 7 leant very heavily into things like Star Wars if the annuals are anything to go by, for example. But I'd take it with a pinch of salt like a lot of other news media. Who or no. Flicking back through TARDIS wikia to jog my memory, they certainly seem to be in that reminiscent phase we saw them in before The Return of Dr Mysterio. *neck scratch* Truth be told, I read it for the comics more than anything and even there a lot of old characters have come up out of the woodwork. I think for the time being... They look like they're tying up loose ends and seeking out opportunities they missed the first time round, which seems sensible given the reprieve. Still, anything fresh like the revived Target range, they've pounced on immediately, so there's still things for them to cover here and there, at least.
|
|
|
Post by omega on May 3, 2018 2:45:24 GMT
Eh, DWM has it's faults, but I'd rather have it ongoing. It's become a fan institution by fans for fans and continues to be given considerable freedom, regardless of it's official status. I'm not a fan of everything that's been done under it's banner - the Tabloid-esque misrepresentation of Sophie Aldred's comments on RTD on the cover of DWM #445 for instance or given Davison's advancing age, printing comments about Peter Davision talking about Colin Baker's 'attiude' towards the BBC (which felt like concern for a friend) or comments about his son-in-law finally adopting his stepson or a reviewer cheering on Toby Hadoke taking Terrance Dicks to task whether or not he was on set for Frontier in Space or discussing Colin Baker's conditions for being interviewed about The Last Adventure - (some of which sadly stems from a small minority of adult fans needing to accept the wonder and move on with the pracilities of adult life) - but I'd rather have it around then not and Marcus Heam seems to be a welcome change from his preddesscors in that regard. Mmm, I like having it around. Particularly as a historical record of Zeitgeist, which changes dramatically over the decades; Series D of Blake's 7 leant very heavily into things like Star Wars if the annuals are anything to go by, for example. But I'd take it with a pinch of salt like a lot of other news media. Who or no. Flicking back through TARDIS wikia to jog my memory, they certainly seem to be in that reminiscent phase we saw them in before The Return of Dr Mysterio. *neck scratch* Truth be told, I read it for the comics more than anything and even there a lot of old characters have come up out of the woodwork. I think for the time being... They look like they're tying up loose ends and seeking out opportunities they missed the first time round, which seems sensible given the reprieve. Still, anything fresh like the revived Target range, they've pounced on immediately, so there's still things for them to cover here and there, at least. And Big Finish gets plenty of coverage as well. It encompasses the franchise as a whole, not just what TV episodes are currently in production or airing. The Fact of Fiction still has a long way to go before it exhausts even the Classic Series. The reviews cover books, audiobooks, Big Finish, reference books etc. It's also a good time to give cover space to interview subjects.
2009 was a relatively quiet year, yet still DWM didn't falter. We got the superb Magenta Pryce out of it after all.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on May 3, 2018 7:35:20 GMT
Eh, DWM has it's faults, but I'd rather have it ongoing. It's become a fan institution by fans for fans and continues to be given considerable freedom, regardless of it's official status. I'm not a fan of everything that's been done under it's banner - the Tabloid-esque misrepresentation of Sophie Aldred's comments on RTD on the cover of DWM #445 for instance or given Davison's advancing age, printing comments about Peter Davision talking about Colin Baker's 'attiude' towards the BBC (which felt like concern for a friend) or comments about his son-in-law finally adopting his stepson or a reviewer cheering on Toby Hadoke taking Terrance Dicks to task whether or not he was on set for Frontier in Space or discussing Colin Baker's conditions for being interviewed about The Last Adventure - (some of which sadly stems from a small minority of adult fans needing to accept the wonder and move on with the pracilities of adult life) - but I'd rather have it around then not and Marcus Heam seems to be a welcome change from his preddesscors in that regard. Mmm, I like having it around. Particularly as a historical record of Zeitgeist, which changes dramatically over the decades; Series D of Blake's 7 leant very heavily into things like Star Wars if the annuals are anything to go by, for example. But I'd take it with a pinch of salt like a lot of other news media. Who or no. But, it's a magazine which is a celeberation of Doctor Who - it's not an outlet for 'real journalism', particularly when so many people involved who give interviews don't have to and do it for the fans. I don't want DWM ever to become a puff piece and there are distinct lines to that (Louise Jameson talking about Tom Baker's antagonistic behaviour as a young actress), but the Colin Baker stuff was just nasty, unnecessary and unprofessional.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on May 3, 2018 8:57:57 GMT
The purpose of DWM is to report & provide articles on all things Doctor Who, that could be current productions (& we have a new show coming which is deciding to take a different, refreshing approach & not reveal lots of info which of course impacts on what the magazine can cover in that regard), comic books, novels, audio, merchandise, retrospective articles etc.
|
|
|
Post by omega on May 3, 2018 9:03:57 GMT
The purpose of DWM is to report & provide articles on all things Doctor Who, that could be current productions (& we have a new show coming which is deciding to take a different, refreshing approach & not reveal lots of info which of course impacts on what the magazine can cover in that regard), comic books, novels, audio, merchandise, retrospective articles etc. Precisely. It doesn't stop because there's no updates on the upcoming series. It probably seems aimless at the moment because the end of the Twelfth Doctor era has been tapped out and there's little to go on with the Thirteenth Doctor at this point.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on May 3, 2018 9:11:01 GMT
The purpose of DWM is to report & provide articles on all things Doctor Who, that could be current productions (& we have a new show coming which is deciding to take a different, refreshing approach & not reveal lots of info which of course impacts on what the magazine can cover in that regard), comic books, novels, audio, merchandise, retrospective articles etc. Precisely. It doesn't stop because there's no updates on the upcoming series. It probably seems aimless at the moment because the end of the Twelfth Doctor era has been tapped out and there's little to go on with the Thirteenth Doctor at this point. I wouldn't say aimless - there's still plenty as you say to cover elsewhere, including to fans who have only experienced the revival series.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on May 3, 2018 10:44:13 GMT
Mmm, I like having it around. Particularly as a historical record of Zeitgeist, which changes dramatically over the decades; Series D of Blake's 7 leant very heavily into things like Star Wars if the annuals are anything to go by, for example. But I'd take it with a pinch of salt like a lot of other news media. Who or no. But, it's a magazine which is a celeberation of Doctor Who - it's not an outlet for 'real journalism', particularly when so many people involved who give interviews don't have to and do it for the fans. I don't want DWM ever to become a puff piece and there are distinct lines to that (Louise Jameson talking about Tom Baker's antagonistic behaviour as a young actress), but the Colin Baker stuff was just nasty, unnecessary and unprofessional. Oh, there's not a short answer to that... Bear with me, I'm going to go a little off-topic. It's true that they're not a source of "real journalism", but as with all forms of media, it's vital to remember that the people writing it have preconceptions. Particularly if as Heam says, DWM's mission statement is to provide "an accurate and detailed representation of the people who are actually making the show." And that's not a strike against DWM or anyone who writes for it, it's simply one of the many truths of writing. People have opinions which affect how and what they put down on the paper. In philosophy and experimental science, it's basically the concept that input cannot be consumed on a strictly objective basis by human beings because of the very subjective nature of the observer themselves. The same is ultimately true of written information. We are not receiving the information directly from the primary source, we are getting it through a secondary relay, which does its own interpretation along the way. These preconceptions typically don't become noticed until they fail to jive with the observer's own views. When that happens and depending on the information being relayed through the writer, that disconnect can provoke all manner of responses. Confusion, amusement, disdain, reevaluation, all or none of it can happen depending on how a reader interprets the writer's previously invisible preconception. It's very prevalent in newcast journalism, but the same thread of subjectivity can be seen in every form of media. Nonfiction, fiction, it's all over the place. Most of it invisible unless you're doing analysis and pulling apart a text to have a look at its inner workings. It's why a film like Starship Troopers can provoke frustration at the fascist nature of its protagonists, if the film is taken as just another sci-fi action flick. If taken instead as a satire on propaganda films, the audience's biases and expectations change dramatically and the characters' behaviour, while not condoned, become more understandable in the framework of their story. So, the desire for him to see DWM as an "accurate source of news", means that the reader should be accounting for human fallibility. And I want to emphasise again that it's not about a blanket condemnation in any regard. Instead, it's an awareness of the process between media production and consumption. Nerdwriter has a brilliant video on exploring a particular facet of the phenomenon in action, which is definitely worth checking out as it focusses on its application to YouTube.
|
|
|
Post by whiskeybrewer on May 3, 2018 11:38:00 GMT
In the words of Superintendent Andrews:
This is Rumour Control, Here are the Facts
|
|
lidar2
Castellan
You know, now that you mention it, I actually do rather like Attack of the Cybermen ...
Likes: 5,813
|
Post by lidar2 on May 3, 2018 14:35:06 GMT
The purpose of DWM is and has always been to feed the fans' insatiable hunger for all things Who
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on May 3, 2018 17:08:08 GMT
I have been a reader of DWM on and off since the 5th Doctor (not counting the first three issues of the weekly as i was young and binned them when finished with) and one of the key pleasures of reading it was that reviews were not afraid of objective criticism. If a reviewer did not think something worked, we had their independent opinion. Gary Gillat provided reliably entertaining and amusing critiques of past and present who as both editor and reviewer. His DVD reviews archived on squabbling rubber (his blog) are a fun way to look back on Classic Who DVD releases for wryly amusing observations of both episodes and extras.
Looking through back issues during the editorship of Clayton Hickman, when Doctors 9 & 10 were on screen, reviews did not hold back, whether it was a Big Finish Audio, a Classic Series DVD, or a new who episode. The magazine did not pull punches over the fact the Main Range Audio's were going through what is now acknowledged as a fallow patch.
Gradually, it seems not all were happy with this, as Big Finish reviews all started ending with 'and its another welcome addition to the range'. As Time Team progressed to new who, every episode was liked by the majority of the team, and observations were bland in comparison to the hits the old series had aimed at it.
Gradually reviews of the new series, especially of the past few years (Doctor 12) have become more reminiscent of the travelogue reviews on TV shows like the Holiday show (Judith Chalmers & Cliff Michelmore anyone?), where its all jolly good and recommended. If scores were given it would all be 8.5, 9.0, 9.5 or 10.
I take a look at each new issue as it comes out, but have not been moved to but for a good while now, as there seems to be a lack of objectivity. Private Eye has reported frequently of the creeping tendency in journalism towards 'Advertorial', whereby promotion of commercial interests works its way into the main papers as opposed to being a separately flagged supplement.
I fear that the price of holding on to its licence and the promise of access, means that the magazine currently seems shackled in terms of allowing negativity creep into its pages.
This Blog is not Gallifrey Base, thankfully. Most posters like the show regardless and have no wish for bile. However, i get far more balance reading about BBC Books, Classic Series DVD reissues, New Who episodes and so forth, than DWM is presently offering, from the Divergent Universe threads.
|
|
|
Post by thethirddoctor on May 8, 2018 19:23:28 GMT
Has anyone read the Time Team review of Spearhead, Time and the Rani, and Rose? It is hilarious!
|
|
|
Post by sherlock on May 8, 2018 19:47:05 GMT
This is an interesting one.
I rarely get news from DWM, in part because of a time delay at my end whereby my parents have to forward on my subscriber copy to my uni address so by the time I get it, any news has popped up either on this forum or social media. The features range in interest depending on their topic, but I must admit to really enjoying the comics. The Majenta Pryce arc was my first proper DWM comic arc (discounting the final part of The Widow's Curse and Time of My Life, though the latter is very good too) and that was a great introduction. The comics output can be very good, the 50th anniversary storyline Hunters of the Burning Stone was superb, so that's one of the draws for me personally.
I don't recall the magazine printing much shooting news in the past, aside from any official announcements and the occasional interview, coverage of the TV Series production typically only really gets going the issue before the first episode airs if my memory is accurate, so I don't see why the lack of production News would be an issue. Chibnall not doing regular Production Notes is the only real change since the changeover, and I guess that's just a personal thing from Chibnall, maybe he feels he hasn't got the time. He indicated in his first one he will do them from time to time, just not every month. So waxing lyrical about the past for a couple of months is quite normal for the magazine, if my memory's accurate.
|
|
|
Post by mark687 on May 8, 2018 19:47:33 GMT
Has anyone read the Time Team review of Spearhead, Time and the Rani, and Rose? It is hilarious! I'm in grin and bear it mode but then again its not completely terrible
Regards
mark687
|
|