|
Post by polly on Jun 3, 2020 19:14:49 GMT
I don't understand why a company in the business of producing audio dramas for nerds needs to comment on current events one way or the other. It's got nothing to do with them or their product. I personally do not find corporate messages of support uplifting, whether it's COVID or pride month, or civil unrest. I can't help but see that as, "You are a demographic we are interested in selling to, and so we want you to think we are your friend. Please buy our stuff." I don't like to comment on political issues myself, but if Nick Briggs or whoever wants to speak out on their own personal twitter, go for it, makes more sense to me than using the company account. If you follow the individual personal Twitter feeds of the BF team, it will more than make up for what the official company website is not saying. Although I admit that it can be very one-sided.
I see myself as a liberal leaning on the left, but sometimes, certain things that are posted there are a bit extreme, even for me. It is not as much as leaning left than hanging out of the window with only holding on by the fingertips...
Ah. Well, I wouldn't know anything about that one way or the other. It's their right to express themselves, of course, but as much as I enjoy Big Finish, I must admit I'm not interested in anybody's personal life or political views, whatever they may be. So I don't follow any of that.
|
|
|
Post by themeddlingmonk on Jun 3, 2020 19:15:21 GMT
BF have actually said that the reason their account didn’t take part is because they couldn’t due to BBC guidelines.
|
|
|
Post by tuigirl on Jun 3, 2020 19:28:03 GMT
If you follow the individual personal Twitter feeds of the BF team, it will more than make up for what the official company website is not saying. Although I admit that it can be very one-sided.
I see myself as a liberal leaning on the left, but sometimes, certain things that are posted there are a bit extreme, even for me. It is not as much as leaning left than hanging out of the window with only holding on by the fingertips...
Ah. Well, I wouldn't know anything about that one way or the other. It's their right to express themselves, of course, but as much as I enjoy Big Finish, I must admit I'm not interested in anybody's personal life or political views, whatever they may be. So I don't follow any of that. Well, it is the company who published "Shape of Things to come". Which is a great audio play and makes you think and it engages you emotionally and is fantastically written and performed. But the ending. They are trying to sell us as a happy ending: {Spoiler} a suicide bomb attack on the leaders of the United Nations. To create a "better world".
I actually was a bit shocked by that.
Some things are just wrong.
|
|
|
Post by polly on Jun 3, 2020 19:41:19 GMT
Ah. Well, I wouldn't know anything about that one way or the other. It's their right to express themselves, of course, but as much as I enjoy Big Finish, I must admit I'm not interested in anybody's personal life or political views, whatever they may be. So I don't follow any of that. Well, it is the company who published "Shape of Things to come". Which is a great audio play and makes you think and it engages you emotionally and is fantastically written and performed. But the ending. They are trying to sell us as a happy ending: {Spoiler} a suicide bomb attack on the leaders of the United Nations. To create a "better world".
I actually was a bit shocked by that.
Some things are just wrong.
I haven't heard that one (or read the book, for that matter) so again I can't really comment. There's plenty of things in fiction I wouldn't like in real life, but so long as that sort of thing stays fiction, they can write whatever they want. I may or may not like the story, but generally speaking I won't judge anybody based on make-believe.
|
|
|
Post by masterdoctor on Jun 3, 2020 20:21:04 GMT
Wait, and this is me genuinely confused and more than happy to understand why, but if Big Finish has to follow guidelines from the BBC on their social media, and one of their rules is they can’t voice opinions/stances on public issues/policy, how is the response pathetic?
Why should the BBC have any control over their social media? Does Canal+ have any control, since they own "The Avengers"? How about whoever owns "Dark Shadows"? Or Gerry Anderson's estate?
Well if they are licensing properties out, each company probably has say in how they want there products to be portrayed publicly, including the company getting the license. So yes, there is a very good chance that these companies have control over what they are okay with Big Finish posting, and that contracts could be broken if BF don't follow the rules.
|
|
|
Post by masterdoctor on Jun 3, 2020 20:37:51 GMT
So with sitting on the topic at hand for the last couple of hours, I think this is a case of Big Finish having their hands tied in a massive way. One that is probably frustrating the hell out of them. I think that this calls for a bit of understanding from our end, especially with us fans having no idea what the business side of things they would run into with this topic.
|
|
|
Post by Audio Watchdog on Jun 3, 2020 20:40:13 GMT
Why should the BBC have any control over their social media? Does Canal+ have any control, since they own "The Avengers"? How about whoever owns "Dark Shadows"? Or Gerry Anderson's estate?
Well if they are licensing properties out, each company probably has say in how they want there products to be portrayed publicly, including the company getting the license. So yes, there is a very good chance that these companies have control over what they are okay with Big Finish posting, and that contracts could be broken if BF don't follow the rules. Big Finish & the BBC are clearly two different entities. I find it difficult to imagine that as long as there was no BBC branded material present, Big Finish could not make a statement of their own. This really is one of those cases where Big Finish should have released nothing official at all because that statement just seems like one big dodge. But whatever. We have enough things to worry about over here in America with a mad king ready to pit the American military against the American people.
|
|
|
Post by stcoop on Jun 3, 2020 22:13:54 GMT
Big Finish & the BBC are clearly two different entities. I find it difficult to imagine that as long as there was no BBC branded material present, Big Finish could not make a statement of their own.
Exactly. They couldn't make a post with something Doctor Who related included but they have no control over what they do apart from that.
At this point I'd trust a tweet from Big Finish only slightly more than I'd trust one from Donald Trump.
|
|
|
Post by xlozdob on Jun 3, 2020 22:36:41 GMT
So with sitting on the topic at hand for the last couple of hours, I think this is a case of Big Finish having their hands tied in a massive way. One that is probably frustrating the hell out of them. I think that this calls for a bit of understanding from our end, especially with us fans having no idea what the business side of things they would run into with this topic. Oh, definitely. I've just read about it on Twitter (the same tweet linked posted earlier in the thread) and I have to say I absolutely understand, and I'm sorry for putting them on the spot earlier. It just seemed weird that a company so vocal and active (especially in recent years) in terms of inclusion and trying to give a space to different minority groups would just stay silent, without as little as a single word of support. But I'm extremely happy to see many of their cast and crew so active whenever I can get on Twitter.
|
|
|
Post by smith11 on Jun 3, 2020 23:09:43 GMT
I promised I wouldn’t say anything but.... What has happened in the world is terrible there’s no doubt about that and it’s nice to see everyone showing unity as an individual in the face of this but how is attacking big finish helping anyone. The staff of the company have posted many social media posts to support the movement. Some people moan about big finish not posting anything on their account and big finish provide a reason (one which I can personally understand) and just call it nonsense. Now I know there are many factors to this but did eaglemoss post anything, no! Did Titan comics post anything, no! But is anyone questioning that or sending them abuse for it, no ( and nor should they)! And I’m a big believer in action speaks louder than words which big finish are doing by having cast and staff of all skin colours and nationalities. Now I don’t think big finish are perfect and I do find their social media presence (especially on twitter) can be a bit odd. But I just find that a few people are actively wanting and enjoying the awkward position that big finish are in, even when they explain why they can’t comment. For both the fandom of a show and a global movement that’s message is meant to encourage kindness amongst all, there seems to be a lot of hate. This is about the situation everywhere, not on here but I just feel safe and comfortable expressing it here. Moan over and thank you
|
|
|
Post by Audio Watchdog on Jun 3, 2020 23:19:41 GMT
I promised I wouldn’t say anything but.... What has happened in the world is terrible there’s no doubt about that and it’s nice to see everyone showing unity as an individual in the face of this but how is attacking big finish helping anyone. The staff of the company have posted many social media posts to support the movement. Some people moan about big finish not posting anything on their account and big finish provide a reason (one which I can personally understand) and just call it nonsense. Now I know there are many factors to this but did eaglemoss post anything, no! Did Titan comics post anything, no! But is anyone questioning that or sending them abuse for it, no ( and nor should they)! And I’m a big believer in action speaks louder than words which big finish are doing by having cast and staff of all skin colours and nationalities. Now I don’t think big finish are perfect and I do find their social media presence (especially on twitter) can be a bit odd. But I just find that a few people are actively wanting and enjoying the awkward position that big finish are in, even when they explain why they can’t comment. For both the fandom of a show and a global movement that’s message is meant to encourage kindness amongst all, there seems to be a lot of hate. This is about the situation everywhere, not on here but I just feel safe and comfortable expressing it here. Moan over and thank you I can only speak for myself but I am not attacking Big Finish. I just feel like in a lot of cases, of which this is one, their messaging, either in it’s content or distribution, leaves a lot to be desired. I don’t doubt for a moment Nick or David or anyone else sits on the right side of this issue but that message, as I said initially, just feels tone deaf and they probably would have been better off not putting anything out there at all.
|
|
ljwilson
Chancellery Guard
It's tangerine....not orange
Likes: 5,062
|
Post by ljwilson on Jun 4, 2020 14:00:58 GMT
I don't understand why a company in the business of producing audio dramas for nerds needs to comment on current events one way or the other. It's got nothing to do with them or their product. I personally do not find corporate messages of support uplifting, whether it's COVID or pride month, or civil unrest. I can't help but see that as, "You are a demographic we are interested in selling to, and so we want you to think we are your friend. Please buy our stuff." I don't like to comment on political issues myself, but if Nick Briggs or whoever wants to speak out on their own personal twitter, go for it, makes more sense to me than using the company account. Well said Polly.
|
|
|
Post by johnhurtdoctor on Jun 4, 2020 14:56:36 GMT
I don't understand why a company in the business of producing audio dramas for nerds needs to comment on current events one way or the other. It's got nothing to do with them or their product. I personally do not find corporate messages of support uplifting, whether it's COVID or pride month, or civil unrest. I can't help but see that as, "You are a demographic we are interested in selling to, and so we want you to think we are your friend. Please buy our stuff." I don't like to comment on political issues myself, but if Nick Briggs or whoever wants to speak out on their own personal twitter, go for it, makes more sense to me than using the company account. BF are happy to use current events for silly memes to promote their products.
|
|
|
Post by project37 on Jun 4, 2020 15:19:17 GMT
In this case it would be completely performative slacktivism while balancing on a corporate stakeholder tightrope. So you'd ultimately get this kind of empty mealy-mouthed box-checking support that earns equally empty "likes":
|
|
lidar2
Castellan
You know, now that you mention it, I actually do rather like Attack of the Cybermen ...
Likes: 5,811
Member is Online
|
Post by lidar2 on Jun 4, 2020 16:00:26 GMT
In this case it would be completely performative slacktivism while balancing on a corporate stakeholder tightrope. So you'd ultimately get this kind of empty mealy-mouthed box-checking support that earns equally empty "likes":
Cynical but accurate. I always think that for anyone, individual or corporate, to pronounce on current issues that they are not personally directly involved in, is a tremendously egotistical and self-important thing to do. E.g. reality tv stars airing their views on some sociopolitical or economic issue. "I'm ME and this is what I say about xyz. Take note everyone, my opinion counts for a lot" Of course they are entitled to hold and express whatever views they want, no issue there, but it is the implied underlying assumption that their views are intrisically important and something the rest of us ought to be aware of that grates on me. I mean Robert de Niro (to take a random example) is a fine actor and I enjoy his movies, but why are his views on Trump any more interesting or important to me than the views of the woman who lives 3 doors down from me or the man who delivered my groceries last Thursday? And yet we all act as if they are
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 4, 2020 16:34:21 GMT
In this case it would be completely performative slacktivism while balancing on a corporate stakeholder tightrope. So you'd ultimately get this kind of empty mealy-mouthed box-checking support that earns equally empty "likes":
Cynical but accurate. I always think that for anyone, individual or corporate, to pronounce on current issues that they are not personally directly involved in, is a tremendously egotistical and self-important thing to do. E.g. reality tv stars airing their views on some sociopolitical or economic issue. "I'm ME and this is what I say about xyz. Take note everyone, my opinion counts for a lot" Of course they are entitled to hold and express whatever views they want, no issue there, but it is the implied underlying assumption that their views are intrisically important and something the rest of us ought to be aware of that grates on me. I mean Robert de Niro (to take a random example) is a fine actor and I enjoy his movies, but why are his views on Trump any more interesting or important to me than the views of the woman who lives 3 doors down from me or the man who delivered my groceries last Thursday? And yet we all act as if they are One Doctor Who writer who springs to mind is @paul_CornellHis Twitter thread is a little bit preoccupied in pro-alignment with fashionable issues such as social justice and as of this past week, overwhelmingly concerned with BAME justice. During a recent tweetalong for 'Human Nature' many fans who had never interacted with him on Twitter found that they could not really take part as they were blocked by him, owing to having expressed opinions of which he disagrees, in the past. Gareth Roberts who apparently has known him from decades back, was quite scathing in making clear that he felt so much of it is insincere. Many speculate that he is working hard to put himself in the radar of the Chris Chibnall for another TV commission. Let's not assume criticism of Cornell as being against these causes oneself, mind, but of the fact that he has become so evangelical of late and intolerant of perceived disagreement.
|
|
|
Post by johnhurtdoctor on Jun 4, 2020 17:02:13 GMT
Cynical but accurate. I always think that for anyone, individual or corporate, to pronounce on current issues that they are not personally directly involved in, is a tremendously egotistical and self-important thing to do. E.g. reality tv stars airing their views on some sociopolitical or economic issue. "I'm ME and this is what I say about xyz. Take note everyone, my opinion counts for a lot" Of course they are entitled to hold and express whatever views they want, no issue there, but it is the implied underlying assumption that their views are intrisically important and something the rest of us ought to be aware of that grates on me. I mean Robert de Niro (to take a random example) is a fine actor and I enjoy his movies, but why are his views on Trump any more interesting or important to me than the views of the woman who lives 3 doors down from me or the man who delivered my groceries last Thursday? And yet we all act as if they are One Doctor Who writer who springs to mind is @paul_CornellHis Twitter thread is a little bit preoccupied in pro-alignment with fashionable issues such as social justice and as of this past week, overwhelmingly concerned with BAME justice. During a recent tweetalong for 'Human Nature' many fans who had never interacted with him on Twitter found that they could not really take part as they were blocked by him, owing to having expressed opinions of which he disagrees, in the past. Gareth Roberts who apparently has known him from decades back, was quite scathing in making clear that he felt so much of it is insincere. Many speculate that he is working hard to put himself in the radar of the Chris Chibnall for another TV commission. Let's not assume criticism of Cornell as being against these causes oneself, mind, but of the fact that he has become so evangelical of late and intolerant of perceived disagreement. Social Justice is a fashionable issue? What a foolish thing to say. He or anyone is perfectly entitled to block people who express views that they disagree with. & who are this "many" who see it as a way of him trying to get attention from Chibnall? This "many" obviously have not much knowledge of Cornell. As for Gareth Roberts, well least said about him the better. If anyone is trying to get attention then its probably him! Sad man.
|
|
|
Post by project37 on Jun 4, 2020 17:08:28 GMT
I always think that for anyone, individual or corporate, to pronounce on current issues that they are not personally directly involved in, is a tremendously egotistical and self-important thing to do. E.g. reality tv stars airing their views on some sociopolitical or economic issue. "I'm ME and this is what I say about xyz. Take note everyone, my opinion counts for a lot" Of course they are entitled to hold and express whatever views they want, no issue there, but it is the implied underlying assumption that their views are intrisically important and something the rest of us ought to be aware of that grates on me. I mean Robert de Niro (to take a random example) is a fine actor and I enjoy his movies, but why are his views on Trump any more interesting or important to me than the views of the woman who lives 3 doors down from me or the man who delivered my groceries last Thursday? And yet we all act as if they are
I don't have problems with celebrities sharing their opinions as they have the right to have them just as much as anyone else does. We don't have to agree with them. I happen to think that Gareth Roberts has come off like a colossal prick with the some of the things he's said about fellow human beings, but he's entitled to his take.
I think when it comes to companies, a LOT of this social media "commentary" just rings as incredibly hollow posturing. John Boyega got some attention on social media this week for his emotional words while participating in his protest. He'd commented that it might cost him his career, but it didn't matter to him. The Star Wars account wasted no time in jumping on to express support.
And all I could think was "**** you." Look how that corporation literally erased that man from his own movie series because they wanted to make sure they could make money in China.
Even Noel Clarke weighed in on this:
To keep it somewhat on topic, I think that Big Finish's silence on the matter may have also avoided negative attention in the current social media landscape with regard to diversity. Granted, I think they've come a long way (flipping through the cast photos in the latest Vortex was great to see) but I also think they can keep continuing to broaden the range of their creative voices (not just on the mic but also on the writing and production fronts).
EDIT: Not all companies are being strategically vague.
|
|
|
Post by nitronine on Jun 4, 2020 19:24:13 GMT
I always think that for anyone, individual or corporate, to pronounce on current issues that they are not personally directly involved in, is a tremendously egotistical and self-important thing to do. E.g. reality tv stars airing their views on some sociopolitical or economic issue. "I'm ME and this is what I say about xyz. Take note everyone, my opinion counts for a lot" Of course they are entitled to hold and express whatever views they want, no issue there, but it is the implied underlying assumption that their views are intrisically important and something the rest of us ought to be aware of that grates on me. I mean Robert de Niro (to take a random example) is a fine actor and I enjoy his movies, but why are his views on Trump any more interesting or important to me than the views of the woman who lives 3 doors down from me or the man who delivered my groceries last Thursday? And yet we all act as if they are I agree in principal that celebrities opinions are not more important than other people's, but if a celebrity wants to use their platform to educate people on an issue then they should be able to do that, even if that issue does not directly involve them. For example, if there's racism in the entertainment industry, a white actor should be able to talk about it and educate their followers, even though it doesn't affect them. Although it would be better if they used their platform to make the voices of the people affected heard, rather than talking over them.
|
|
|
Post by constonks on Jun 4, 2020 23:30:43 GMT
I agree that brand messages of support can feel a bit hollow - it's not a personal message of solidarity, it's a company's. I too get a bit squeamish when I see corporations that seem to be using a movement to sell more products - you do see a lot during Pride season! But might it be nice for BF to make a point of highlighting their Black and minority cast and crew members, like in the thread that xlozdob started here? Sure! Maybe that's worth an email...
|
|