Who’s Been Cancelled??

[Lar Naparka]

Brass Eye Paedogeddon was brilliant

But it was the most complained about television programme in UK history

Should an apology have made by C4, Lar?

I know literally nothing about this programme sid so I cant possibly give you an opinion on this one.
Edit:
Ahoy sid, are you still here?
I don't see any reason to object to the show being broadcast if plenty of advance notice had been given that some viewers might be offended by the contents.
Freedom to express one's point of view is one thing but, IMO, there is  no justification for deliberately intending to cause offence to others.

Yes there is

It's called comedy, it's called satire, it's called debate, it's called life - an integral part of which is offence

There is a big difference between giving deliberate offence and hate speech - which is what we don't want

So, you now see nothing wrong with the sketch - except the apparent lack of trigger warning?

But the complaints weren't about the lack of trigger warnings

Anyway, I thought trigger warnings were what so called "snowflakes" wanted - well that's how they've satirised by much of the religious right - in a painfully unfunny manner - in my opinion

Turns out that it was the religious right who were the ones who desperately wanted trigger warnings, political correctness gone mad and censorship all along

Who could have guessed they never believed a word they say

Note that I am not calling you a member of the religious right -  I have no idea of your beliefs - but you have been suckered into adopting their framing on this topic

Oh no there isn't!
To follow your line of reasoning,  it should be perfectly okay for me to call you a thundering asshole, who comes from a long line of degenerative alcoholics and to state that your opensupport of Dublin GAA is a tacit admission that your can't tell you ass from your elbow.

The fact that I don't necessarily believe none of the above is of no consequence- as long as I  fit it all into a sketch, I can claim it's only  a work of art so you can sod off. Following on with your logic, it is perfectly okay to present controversial items, designed to cause offence to young children without warning and at a time when minors are likely to be watching.
I never said my only complaint was the apparent lack of a trigger warning. I said plenty more besides. I have no truck with the religious right and I don't give the proverbial fuuck about what they may or may not say- another blatant assumption by you.
"It's called comedy, it's called satire, it's called debate, it's called life - an integral part of which is offence"
Sez who?
Here's a perfect example of your  ex cathedral proclamations. Pope sid  his throne again giving his infallible opinion on what's right or wrong.
FYI, I've been around longer than most and I have yet to hear of anybody else who'd agree with you on this or many other subjects for that matter.
You're a man in a million sid. (Actually,  probably 100 million.)

[sid waddell]

Brass Eye Paedogeddon was brilliant

But it was the most complained about television programme in UK history

Should an apology have made by C4, Lar?

I know literally nothing about this programme sid so I cant possibly give you an opinion on this one.
Edit:
Ahoy sid, are you still here?
I don't see any reason to object to the show being broadcast if plenty of advance notice had been given that some viewers might be offended by the contents.
Freedom to express one's point of view is one thing but, IMO, there is  no justification for deliberately intending to cause offence to others.

Yes there is

It's called comedy, it's called satire, it's called debate, it's called life - an integral part of which is offence

There is a big difference between giving deliberate offence and hate speech - which is what we don't want

So, you now see nothing wrong with the sketch - except the apparent lack of trigger warning?

But the complaints weren't about the lack of trigger warnings

Anyway, I thought trigger warnings were what so called "snowflakes" wanted - well that's how they've satirised by much of the religious right - in a painfully unfunny manner - in my opinion

Turns out that it was the religious right who were the ones who desperately wanted trigger warnings, political correctness gone mad and censorship all along

Who could have guessed they never believed a word they say

Note that I am not calling you a member of the religious right -  I have no idea of your beliefs - but you have been suckered into adopting their framing on this topic

Oh no there isn't!
To follow your line of reasoning,  it should be perfectly okay for me to call you a thundering asshole, who comes from a long line of degenerative alcoholics and to state that your opensupport of Dublin GAA is a tacit admission that your can't tell you ass from your elbow.

The fact that I don't necessarily believe none of the above is of no consequence- as long as I  fit it all into a sketch, I can claim it's only  a work of art so you can sod off. Following on with your logic, it is perfectly okay to present controversial items, designed to cause offence to young children without warning and at a time when minors are likely to be watching.
I never said my only complaint was the apparent lack of a trigger warning. I said plenty more besides. I have no truck with the religious right and I don't give the proverbial fuuck about what they may or may not say- another blatant assumption by you.
"It's called comedy, it's called satire, it's called debate, it's called life - an integral part of which is offence"
Sez who?
Here's a perfect example of your  ex cathedral proclamations. Pope sid  his throne again giving his infallible opinion on what's right or wrong.
FYI, I've been around longer than most and I have yet to hear of anybody else who'd agree with you on this or many other subjects for that matter.
You're a man in a million sid. (Actually,  probably 100 million.)

You can call me an asshole all you want, please do

The rest of your little hypothetical dig into my background, if you were making it seriously, would constitute ad hominem abuse of my family - which would only make you look like a gigantic asshole

Why wouldn't I support Dublin, I come from Dublin

Your statement that my support for Dublin shows I "don't know my ass from my elbow" makes as much sense as if I said you don't know your ass from your elbow because you support Mayo

The basic problem you have is that you don't understand the boundaries of what is acceptable satire/comedy and hate speech, and neither do you understand the boundaries between what is acceptable opinion about a person or a belief they have, and unacceptable abuse of them based on non-chosen family background or non-chosen characteristics they may have

You'd want to watch that tendency, could be a problem for you in society

The sketch was broadcast after the watershed, it was broadcast late at night, it wasn't broadcast in the CBeebies slot

Again I find it hilarious how you invoke the Pope - surely under your own rules, that's unacceptable - well I suppose it would be if it wasn't projection, which it is

And I'm not really sure how you think I'm acting like "the Pope", given that I'm defending the right to poke fun at religion, while your whole argument here has been about how making fun of religion is off limits

Your post actually reads like Mary Whitehouse, or Helen Lovejoy from The Simpsons, you even paraphrase her "won't somebody please think of the children?!" line

[quit yo jibbajabba]

Chuck Norris?! This year just gets worser and worser......

[Milltown Row2]

As regards the Brass Eye Paedogeddon programme, C4 did indeed apologise

They cancelled the Brass Eye series

And they were wrong to do so

20 years later, the programme is remembered as one of the finest and most daring ever broadcast on UK television, and is still extremely relevant today - especially with the bizarre phenomena of QAnon, so called "paedophile hunters" and the far right's extremely creepy obsession with paedophilia in general - which smacks of extreme denial

How did the presenter end up after all that? Just interested I've no axe to grind on this topic

[Taylor]

Chuck Norris?! This year just gets worser and worser......

What did Chuck do?

[Lar Naparka]

Brass Eye Paedogeddon was brilliant

But it was the most complained about television programme in UK history

Should an apology have made by C4, Lar?

I know literally nothing about this programme sid so I cant possibly give you an opinion on this one.
Edit:
Ahoy sid, are you still here?
I don't see any reason to object to the show being broadcast if plenty of advance notice had been given that some viewers might be offended by the contents.
Freedom to express one's point of view is one thing but, IMO, there is  no justification for deliberately intending to cause offence to others.

Yes there is

It's called comedy, it's called satire, it's called debate, it's called life - an integral part of which is offence

There is a big difference between giving deliberate offence and hate speech - which is what we don't want

So, you now see nothing wrong with the sketch - except the apparent lack of trigger warning?

But the complaints weren't about the lack of trigger warnings

Anyway, I thought trigger warnings were what so called "snowflakes" wanted - well that's how they've satirised by much of the religious right - in a painfully unfunny manner - in my opinion

Turns out that it was the religious right who were the ones who desperately wanted trigger warnings, political correctness gone mad and censorship all along

Who could have guessed they never believed a word they say

Note that I am not calling you a member of the religious right -  I have no idea of your beliefs - but you have been suckered into adopting their framing on this topic

Oh no there isn't!
To follow your line of reasoning,  it should be perfectly okay for me to call you a thundering asshole, who comes from a long line of degenerative alcoholics and to state that your opensupport of Dublin GAA is a tacit admission that your can't tell you ass from your elbow.

The fact that I don't necessarily believe none of the above is of no consequence- as long as I  fit it all into a sketch, I can claim it's only  a work of art so you can sod off. Following on with your logic, it is perfectly okay to present controversial items, designed to cause offence to young children without warning and at a time when minors are likely to be watching.
I never said my only complaint was the apparent lack of a trigger warning. I said plenty more besides. I have no truck with the religious right and I don't give the proverbial fuuck about what they may or may not say- another blatant assumption by you.
"It's called comedy, it's called satire, it's called debate, it's called life - an integral part of which is offence"
Sez who?
Here's a perfect example of your  ex cathedral proclamations. Pope sid  his throne again giving his infallible opinion on what's right or wrong.
FYI, I've been around longer than most and I have yet to hear of anybody else who'd agree with you on this or many other subjects for that matter.
You're a man in a million sid. (Actually,  probably 100 million.)

You can call me an asshole all you want, please do

The rest of your little hypothetical dig into my background, if you were making it seriously, would constitute ad hominem abuse of my family - which would only make you look like a gigantic asshole

Why wouldn't I support Dublin, I come from Dublin

Your statement that my support for Dublin shows I "don't know my ass from my elbow" makes as much sense as if I said you don't know your ass from your elbow because you support Mayo

The basic problem you have is that you don't understand the boundaries of what is acceptable satire/comedy and hate speech, and neither do you understand the boundaries between what is acceptable opinion about a person or a belief they have, and unacceptable abuse of them based on non-chosen family background or non-chosen characteristics they may have

You'd want to watch that tendency, could be a problem for you in society

The sketch was broadcast after the watershed, it was broadcast late at night, it wasn't broadcast in the CBeebies slot

Again I find it hilarious how you invoke the Pope - surely under your own rules, that's unacceptable - well I suppose it would be if it wasn't projection, which it is

And I'm not really sure how you think I'm acting like "the Pope", given that I'm defending the right to poke fun at religion, while your whole argument here has been about how making fun of religion is off limits

Your post actually reads like Mary Whitehouse, or Helen Lovejoy from The Simpsons, you even paraphrase her "won't somebody please think of the children?!" line

sid you are getting worse!
If you bother to read what I wrote, you may realise that I called you nothing of the sort.
The sketch was broadcast at a time when young an old were tuned in to watch new year's festivities, which  was mentioned by a considerable number of those who formally complained.
Your modus operandi seems to to make sweeping decorations that do not allow for any counter opinion. There is seldom any attempt to justify what you are handing down to he rest of us poor mortals.
Tell you what sid- if you can get anyone to put it in writing that your line of reasoning makes perfect sense, I will admit that I am beaten and I will rest my case,

[Rossfan]

Use the ignore function thingy Lar

[Lar Naparka]

Use the ignore function thingy Lar

I know I should Ross this is my only of killing time at the moment.

I need renal dialysis 3 times a week and I can do very little during sessions as my left hand is used for the dialysis so cap letters are a problem.
To cap it all, Santa's idea of a Christmas pressie wab an emergency eye operation on Christmas Eve. A case of a detached retina without any warning.
So its a case of going mad quickly from sheer boredom or going ditto trying to figure wtf sid is on about. I've a touch of masochism in my makeup so I chose the latter.
(But I'm starting to have ne doubts,)

[quit yo jibbajabba]

Chuck Norris?! This year just gets worser and worser......

What did Chuck do?

Was allegedly at the Capitol Hill saga but have since read it was a doppleganger. Apologies. Hes not been cancelled! 2021 mite be ok yet! Tho he is a Trump supporter..

Lar i had both eyes done. Other than the injecting at start not too bad eh?! Always fun telling people how brave ive been, being awake throughout them etc 😃

[Taylor]

Chuck Norris?! This year just gets worser and worser......

What did Chuck do?

Was allegedly at the Capitol Hill saga but have since read it was a doppleganger. Apologies. Hes not been cancelled! 2021 mite be ok yet! Tho he is a Trump supporter..

Lar i had both eyes done. Other than the injecting at start not too bad eh?! Always fun telling people how brave ive been, being awake throughout them etc 😃

Phew - 2021 would be going the way of 2020 if they cancelled Chuck

[restorepride]

I suspect ye both are getting the Immaculate Conception wrong.

This is a good point!!  I'm that long away from it, I forgot about the finer detail of Mary's 'birth'.  Thanks for spotting my Immaculate Misconception!!!   

[restorepride]

That people who were all over #jesuischarlie but are complaining about this sketch are fools is a personal opinion

That they are liars and hypocrites is fact

And neither are they critical thinkers - you've done a fair job lumping yourself into that category too

Not once have you provided any sort of justification for an apology

sid, believe it or not, I am beginning to feel sorry for Rossfan.
I know next to nothing about Angelo and I used to think you were just a harmless nutcase but I'll now take Rossfan's opinion of you as proven beyond a reasonable shadow of doubt. 

Lár na Páirce - do you mind me asking if you believe that 'The Blessed Virgin' was impregnated by 'God'?

The short answer to both queries is no- I don't mind you asking and I don't believe in the Virgin birth.
However, my personal beliefs  are, well, personal and I do not attempt to foist mine on others who may disagree with me.
Had advance warning been given that the sketch in question contained material that could give offence to some viewers and had a more suitable broadcast being chosen, I doubt that I would have [paid much, if any, attention to the presentation.
THe time chosen to air this sketch was a time when families throughout the country were settling down to watch the celebrations marking the change of year.  That meant that considerable numbers of elderly, devout Christains and equally huge numbers of impressionable young children would be tuned in. For once I agree with sid, when he says the purpose of the exercise was to cause offence.
I am not naive enough to think that sid is the only one who thinks there should have been no apology but he is the only one to date who has said so publicly- to te best of my knowledge.
According to what I have read on extra.ie and a number of other media outlets, over 5,000 watchers have lodged formal complaints. Not a single reference to a mention of an opposite view.
If majority rights have an meaning, you'll find it here.

Thanks for reply.  I don't feel an apology was required as God doesn't exist for me so it was humour about a ridiculous belief - for me, of course.
I think that satire can be useful in prompting people to actually think through 'blind belief'.   People who enjoyed it had no need to let RTÉ know, only those who took offence.  My own opinion is that some people nowadays 'choose' to be offended - far too easily (not referring to you necessarily!).  I doubt if there is a 'joke' in the world that someone someplace couldn't take offence to, if they tried or wanted.  After the watershed, it is parental responsibility to decide who watches what, imo.  Having said that, I do respect your opinion on the matter.

Anyhow, on a different note and genuinely, it is a great pity that so many of the great servants to Mayo football have recently ended their county days without the medal they dreamed of.   Unlucky to come up against, so often, the greatest team that there has ever been (again, just imo!)

Sláinte na bhFear agus Contae Mhaigh Eo, nuair a éagas na Gaeil ná raibh aon duine beo!

[Main Street]

I suspect ye both are getting the Immaculate Conception wrong.

This is a good point!!  I'm that long away from it, I forgot about the finer detail of Mary's 'birth'.  Thanks for spotting my Immaculate Misconception!!!   

That people who were all over #jesuischarlie but are complaining about this sketch are fools is a personal opinion

That they are liars and hypocrites is fact

And neither are they critical thinkers - you've done a fair job lumping yourself into that category too

Not once have you provided any sort of justification for an apology

sid, believe it or not, I am beginning to feel sorry for Rossfan.
I know next to nothing about Angelo and I used to think you were just a harmless nutcase but I'll now take Rossfan's opinion of you as proven beyond a reasonable shadow of doubt. 

Lár na Páirce - do you mind me asking if you believe that 'The Blessed Virgin' was impregnated by 'God'?

The short answer to both queries is no- I don't mind you asking and I don't believe in the Virgin birth.
However, my personal beliefs  are, well, personal and I do not attempt to foist mine on others who may disagree with me.
Had advance warning been given that the sketch in question contained material that could give offence to some viewers and had a more suitable broadcast being chosen, I doubt that I would have [paid much, if any, attention to the presentation.
THe time chosen to air this sketch was a time when families throughout the country were settling down to watch the celebrations marking the change of year.  That meant that considerable numbers of elderly, devout Christains and equally huge numbers of impressionable young children would be tuned in. For once I agree with sid, when he says the purpose of the exercise was to cause offence.
I am not naive enough to think that sid is the only one who thinks there should have been no apology but he is the only one to date who has said so publicly- to te best of my knowledge.
According to what I have read on extra.ie and a number of other media outlets, over 5,000 watchers have lodged formal complaints. Not a single reference to a mention of an opposite view.
If majority rights have an meaning, you'll find it here.

Thanks for reply.  I don't feel an apology was required as God doesn't exist for me so it was humour about a ridiculous belief - for me, of course.
I think that satire can be useful in prompting people to actually think through 'blind belief'.   People who enjoyed it had no need to let RTÉ know, only those who took offence.  My own opinion is that some people nowadays 'choose' to be offended - far too easily (not referring to you necessarily!).  I doubt if there is a 'joke' in the world that someone someplace couldn't take offence to, if they tried or wanted.  After the watershed, it is parental responsibility to decide who watches what, imo.  Having said that, I do respect your opinion on the matter.

Anyhow, on a different note and genuinely, it is a great pity that so many of the great servants to Mayo football have recently ended their county days without the medal they dreamed of.   Unlucky to come up against, so often, the greatest team that there has ever been (again, just imo!)

Sláinte na bhFear agus Contae Mhaigh Eo, nuair a éagas na Gaeil ná raibh aon duine beo!

No apology was needed. Regardless, the figure of 5,000 sounds like the more devoted  Fraternity members have learned how to fraternise on the internet and organise the outrage at some sketch which was tame by the Monty Python gold standard.of judging the boundaries of such sketches.

Anyway, the christian God is actually  more dark skinned and looks more like an image of a smiling Osama bin Laden.

[Rossfan]

Lar best wishes on the health front.

[sid waddell]

Brass Eye Paedogeddon was brilliant

But it was the most complained about television programme in UK history

Should an apology have made by C4, Lar?

I know literally nothing about this programme sid so I cant possibly give you an opinion on this one.
Edit:
Ahoy sid, are you still here?
I don't see any reason to object to the show being broadcast if plenty of advance notice had been given that some viewers might be offended by the contents.
Freedom to express one's point of view is one thing but, IMO, there is  no justification for deliberately intending to cause offence to others.

Yes there is

It's called comedy, it's called satire, it's called debate, it's called life - an integral part of which is offence

There is a big difference between giving deliberate offence and hate speech - which is what we don't want

So, you now see nothing wrong with the sketch - except the apparent lack of trigger warning?

But the complaints weren't about the lack of trigger warnings

Anyway, I thought trigger warnings were what so called "snowflakes" wanted - well that's how they've satirised by much of the religious right - in a painfully unfunny manner - in my opinion

Turns out that it was the religious right who were the ones who desperately wanted trigger warnings, political correctness gone mad and censorship all along

Who could have guessed they never believed a word they say

Note that I am not calling you a member of the religious right -  I have no idea of your beliefs - but you have been suckered into adopting their framing on this topic

Oh no there isn't!
To follow your line of reasoning,  it should be perfectly okay for me to call you a thundering asshole, who comes from a long line of degenerative alcoholics and to state that your opensupport of Dublin GAA is a tacit admission that your can't tell you ass from your elbow.

The fact that I don't necessarily believe none of the above is of no consequence- as long as I  fit it all into a sketch, I can claim it's only  a work of art so you can sod off. Following on with your logic, it is perfectly okay to present controversial items, designed to cause offence to young children without warning and at a time when minors are likely to be watching.
I never said my only complaint was the apparent lack of a trigger warning. I said plenty more besides. I have no truck with the religious right and I don't give the proverbial fuuck about what they may or may not say- another blatant assumption by you.
"It's called comedy, it's called satire, it's called debate, it's called life - an integral part of which is offence"
Sez who?
Here's a perfect example of your  ex cathedral proclamations. Pope sid  his throne again giving his infallible opinion on what's right or wrong.
FYI, I've been around longer than most and I have yet to hear of anybody else who'd agree with you on this or many other subjects for that matter.
You're a man in a million sid. (Actually,  probably 100 million.)

You can call me an asshole all you want, please do

The rest of your little hypothetical dig into my background, if you were making it seriously, would constitute ad hominem abuse of my family - which would only make you look like a gigantic asshole

Why wouldn't I support Dublin, I come from Dublin

Your statement that my support for Dublin shows I "don't know my ass from my elbow" makes as much sense as if I said you don't know your ass from your elbow because you support Mayo

The basic problem you have is that you don't understand the boundaries of what is acceptable satire/comedy and hate speech, and neither do you understand the boundaries between what is acceptable opinion about a person or a belief they have, and unacceptable abuse of them based on non-chosen family background or non-chosen characteristics they may have

You'd want to watch that tendency, could be a problem for you in society

The sketch was broadcast after the watershed, it was broadcast late at night, it wasn't broadcast in the CBeebies slot

Again I find it hilarious how you invoke the Pope - surely under your own rules, that's unacceptable - well I suppose it would be if it wasn't projection, which it is

And I'm not really sure how you think I'm acting like "the Pope", given that I'm defending the right to poke fun at religion, while your whole argument here has been about how making fun of religion is off limits

Your post actually reads like Mary Whitehouse, or Helen Lovejoy from The Simpsons, you even paraphrase her "won't somebody please think of the children?!" line

sid you are getting worse!
If you bother to read what I wrote, you may realise that I called you nothing of the sort.
The sketch was broadcast at a time when young an old were tuned in to watch new year's festivities, which  was mentioned by a considerable number of those who formally complained.
Your modus operandi seems to to make sweeping decorations that do not allow for any counter opinion. There is seldom any attempt to justify what you are handing down to he rest of us poor mortals.
Tell you what sid- if you can get anyone to put it in writing that your line of reasoning makes perfect sense, I will admit that I am beaten and I will rest my case,

I've consistently debated and rebutted counter opinion! That's what debate is supposed to be!

The only reasonable argument I can see from the counter side is that there should have been a warning on the segment - I didn't watch the programme live, maybe there was?

As for the actual sketch itself, neither you nor anybody else has come up with a single argument as to why it should have been apologised for

The only argument I can see against the sketch is the blasphemy one, which would be ludicrous, we're not living in JC McQuaid's Ireland anymore

Best wishes with your health problems