Phil Spector RIP

[Spandaubaggie]

Oh you can!!

https://www.ebay.co.uk/sch/i.html?_from=...r&_sacat=0

Of course you can Duffers. The internet is a big place. You’ll have to have a look around it.

I've heard that you can find all kinds of stuff on there!! 

I think it’s a debate for Google, Mr Zuckerberg and others. Does Phil Spector even deserve to be amongst the main headlines on the Beeb?

---

River Deep Mountain High the best production ever imo

This.

Although Ike Turner hated it. He thought it was over produced.

You’re not allowed to like that song anymore. Yours Duffers!

I haven’t  said you’re not allowed to like anything Spandau.

You’re the one stating that removing the worst child molester this country has ever known from TV screens is “heavy handed”. Imagine that, imagine thinking that it’s still okay to broadcast footage of Jimmy Saville.

But he’s still on YouTube. In a world where publishing is much more wishy washy and rules so grey it’s incredibly brain churning. 
Personally I’m for much stronger censorship of the internet and platforms being responsible for what they show. 
I do think though, if you were a kid who the 70s etc was your era the idea that programmes are airbrushed due to the appearance of Saville is unnecessary . 
Wouldn’t a warning beforehand for sensitive souls be enough?

[Duffers]

Of course you can Duffers. The internet is a big place. You’ll have to have a look around it.

I've heard that you can find all kinds of stuff on there!! 

I think it’s a debate for Google, Mr Zuckerberg and others. Does Phil Spector even deserve to be amongst the main headlines on the Beeb?

---

River Deep Mountain High the best production ever imo

This.

Although Ike Turner hated it. He thought it was over produced.

You’re not allowed to like that song anymore. Yours Duffers!

I haven’t  said you’re not allowed to like anything Spandau.

You’re the one stating that removing the worst child molester this country has ever known from TV screens is “heavy handed”. Imagine that, imagine thinking that it’s still okay to broadcast footage of Jimmy Saville.

But he’s still on YouTube. In a world where publishing is much more wishy washy and rules so grey it’s incredibly brain churning. 
Personally I’m for much stronger censorship of the internet and platforms being responsible for what they show. 
I do think though, if you were a kid who the 70s etc was your era the idea that programmes are airbrushed due to the appearance of Saville is unnecessary . 
Wouldn’t a warning beforehand for sensitive souls be enough?

It’s not about being sensitive, as previously stated the man’s crimes mean he has no right to be remembered as an entertainer. He destroyed countless lives and you’re happy to ignore all that just so that you can have a little nostalgia??

[Lewis Duckworth]

As the post above shows, this is a typical case of separation of the artist from the person. Personally I’m slightly uncomfortable about trying to airbrush people from history as they were bad characters, but yet they made a huge difference. I understand the sensitivity though.
Taking old Top of the Pops off air as they had Jimmy Saville or Gary Glitter just seems to be overly heavy handed.
For instance some outlets wouldn’t allow Phil Spector records after the conviction. Equally I’ve seen a load of glam rock documentaries where they’ve overlooked Gary Glitter.
You can accept these people as creeps but that shouldn’t get in the way of what their music meant at a time before the vile acts came to light.
It’s a tricky one and not dissimilar to the statue issues we’ve had of late.

Say what you like about Fred West, but he could build a lovely patio

[Spandaubaggie]

I've heard that you can find all kinds of stuff on there!! 

I think it’s a debate for Google, Mr Zuckerberg and others. Does Phil Spector even deserve to be amongst the main headlines on the Beeb?

---

This.

Although Ike Turner hated it. He thought it was over produced.

You’re not allowed to like that song anymore. Yours Duffers!

I haven’t  said you’re not allowed to like anything Spandau.

You’re the one stating that removing the worst child molester this country has ever known from TV screens is “heavy handed”. Imagine that, imagine thinking that it’s still okay to broadcast footage of Jimmy Saville.

But he’s still on YouTube. In a world where publishing is much more wishy washy and rules so grey it’s incredibly brain churning. 
Personally I’m for much stronger censorship of the internet and platforms being responsible for what they show. 
I do think though, if you were a kid who the 70s etc was your era the idea that programmes are airbrushed due to the appearance of Saville is unnecessary . 
Wouldn’t a warning beforehand for sensitive souls be enough?

It’s not about being sensitive, as previously stated the man’s crimes mean he has no right to be remembered as an entertainer. He destroyed countless lives and you’re happy to ignore all that just so that you can have a little nostalgia??

And Gary Glitter has no right to be remembered as a singer, but those who went to his shows and lined his pockets will have conundrums. 
The hypocrisy of publishing is a huge issue as I’ve demonstrated. It does help with Saville that he had no talent worth mentioning. Even as kids the overwhelming feeling about him from everyone was he was odd  at the mild end of opinion on him. 
Regarding sensitivity though it is extreme now, no denying. EG Rockin Around The Christmas Tree with Kim Wilde and Mel Smith mentioned Two Little Boys by Rolf Harris. Radio stations have now deemed it fit to eradicate that. 
We do live in an era of fear of what some faceless fecker says on Twitter.

[Spandaubaggie]

As the post above shows, this is a typical case of separation of the artist from the person. Personally I’m slightly uncomfortable about trying to airbrush people from history as they were bad characters, but yet they made a huge difference. I understand the sensitivity though.
Taking old Top of the Pops off air as they had Jimmy Saville or Gary Glitter just seems to be overly heavy handed.
For instance some outlets wouldn’t allow Phil Spector records after the conviction. Equally I’ve seen a load of glam rock documentaries where they’ve overlooked Gary Glitter.
You can accept these people as creeps but that shouldn’t get in the way of what their music meant at a time before the vile acts came to light.
It’s a tricky one and not dissimilar to the statue issues we’ve had of late.

Say what you like about Fred West, but he could build a lovely patio

I’ve heard that quip before so does it mean every house he worked on has been demolished out of respect for victims? As I said it’s not straightforward.

[Lewis Duckworth]

As the post above shows, this is a typical case of separation of the artist from the person. Personally I’m slightly uncomfortable about trying to airbrush people from history as they were bad characters, but yet they made a huge difference. I understand the sensitivity though.
Taking old Top of the Pops off air as they had Jimmy Saville or Gary Glitter just seems to be overly heavy handed.
For instance some outlets wouldn’t allow Phil Spector records after the conviction. Equally I’ve seen a load of glam rock documentaries where they’ve overlooked Gary Glitter.
You can accept these people as creeps but that shouldn’t get in the way of what their music meant at a time before the vile acts came to light.
It’s a tricky one and not dissimilar to the statue issues we’ve had of late.

Say what you like about Fred West, but he could build a bloody good patio.

[Spandaubaggie]

Oh you can!!

https://www.ebay.co.uk/sch/i.html?_from=...r&_sacat=0

Of course you can Duffers. The internet is a big place. You’ll have to have a look around it.

I've heard that you can find all kinds of stuff on there!! 

I think it’s a debate for Google, Mr Zuckerberg and others. Does Phil Spector even deserve to be amongst the main headlines on the Beeb?

---

River Deep Mountain High the best production ever imo

This.

Although Ike Turner hated it. He thought it was over produced.

You’re not allowed to like that song anymore. Yours Duffers!

I haven’t  said you’re not allowed to like anything Spandau.

You’re the one stating that removing the worst child molester this country has ever known from TV screens is “heavy handed”. Imagine that, imagine thinking that it’s still okay to broadcast footage of Jimmy Saville.

There is footage of him all over the internet. Phil Spector took someone’s life the ultimate crime of humanity and yet he’s lauded still. 
Rather than try and pick a row with me look at the whole issues surrounding the internet, taste and censorship. 
There’s massive debates in organisations on all this. I can see Saville galore on old Top of the pops on YouTube but not BBC etc. 
Personally lm not horrified when I see Saville on TV introducing Depeche Mode and not writing to my MP. Some may be but not me and millions of others too. 
Watching him assault someone would be different. 
Big big questions being asked about the internet now and think is taken 20 years for this to come to the fore. 
For what it’s worth Duffers this is a really well thought exchange of views  by you and I can certainly see your side of it.

[Kit Kat Chunky]

As the post above shows, this is a typical case of separation of the artist from the person. Personally I’m slightly uncomfortable about trying to airbrush people from history as they were bad characters, but yet they made a huge difference. I understand the sensitivity though.
Taking old Top of the Pops off air as they had Jimmy Saville or Gary Glitter just seems to be overly heavy handed.
For instance some outlets wouldn’t allow Phil Spector records after the conviction. Equally I’ve seen a load of glam rock documentaries where they’ve overlooked Gary Glitter.
You can accept these people as creeps but that shouldn’t get in the way of what their music meant at a time before the vile acts came to light.
It’s a tricky one and not dissimilar to the statue issues we’ve had of late.

“Yeah Jimmy Saville may have been one of the worst sexual predators and abusers of children this country has ever known... but it’s really important that future generations see how good he was at introducing pop songs.”

You can find plenty of footage of them on YouTube. Saville also oversaw the 1000th episode of Top of the Pops in 83. Important historically.
Easy for most of us too young for the Wall of Sound to have been an important backdrop to our youth.
However, what if a massive act from the 80s or 90s that got found out as a paedo how would it alter our perceptions?
It’s the age old thing about censorship. Tricky balancing act in complex times.
As for the RIP in the title I think few wish him peace.

Oh yes, the 1000th edition with Saville, DLT, Glitter and Jonathan King. That won't be repeated any time soon on BBC

I'm glad it's on YouTube though. People can choose to watch it if they want to (I have), and it is preserved as a document for history.

[Borin' Baggie]

I've got a solution, whenever Saville is on a TV screen a fully visible white text with a black background that takes up 3/4 of the screen explicitly states that Saville raped children and dead bodies, and they give him the Gerry Adams treatment and alter his voice.

Or we could realise that broadcast corporations do not want to air anything controversial that would paint them in a bad light, and this has always been the case. Johnny Rotten was banned by the Beeb for calling their beloved Saville out.

[Spandaubaggie]

I've got a solution, whenever Saville is on a TV screen a fully visible white text with a black background that takes up 3/4 of the screen explicitly states that Saville raped children and dead bodies, and they give him the Gerry Adams treatment and alter his voice.

Or we could realise that broadcast corporations do not want to air anything controversial that would paint them in a bad light, and this has always been the case. Johnny Rotten was banned by the Beeb for calling their beloved Saville out.

And this is where a bigger debate comes into play on platforms like YouTube, Twitter etc and veers into the whole policing of the net. Why should they publish it without as much as a mention. 
Equally are corporations too quick to avoid conflict. There’ll always be people outraged at something. See a local forum on Facebook. We all have parameters. We get people outraged on here unable to sleep, for someone saying Sawyers did ok. 
As I said I think there has to be much tighter policies regarding the net, taste etc. 
Trump has moved this on, but that’s even bigger as a topic.