Serebii Posted January 8, 2011 Share Posted January 8, 2011 (edited) I do have to wonder how many complaints were put in before the Daily Mail article. These things have a habit of being blown out of proportion after the Daily Mail rallies its mindless masses. While the story may be a bit out of bad taste, it's something which some crazy person may do and so they're just portraying a crazy. Edited January 8, 2011 by Serebii Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chairdriver Posted January 8, 2011 Share Posted January 8, 2011 I hate when people equate depressing with bad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Retro_Link Posted January 8, 2011 Share Posted January 8, 2011 I hate when people equate depressing with bad.Eastenders is depressing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Peeps Posted January 8, 2011 Share Posted January 8, 2011 Welcome back Chairdriver I don't understand why people watch these shows. It's always tragedy after tragedy and when something good does happen - marriage or baby, etc - it's always a prelude to murder or something. If something good happens in Eastenders then you can bet within 3 weeks it'll somehow go horribly wrong. So why do people watch a programme that shows only the worst of 'real life'? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dannyboy-the-Dane Posted January 8, 2011 Share Posted January 8, 2011 I hate when people equate depressing with bad. Welcome back! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryuk Posted January 8, 2011 Share Posted January 8, 2011 The program may be ficitional but it does cover real life issues, and there are people out there that do kidnap children because they have had problems with there own, not even nesscary a death. It is shocking the amount of complaints the BBC have recaived for this though, even though the story is a bit depressing I am enjoying it, I just hope they don't drag the story on.. Knowing the amount of complaints they have reciaved I doubt it will. I orginally thought it'd last to atleast easter but now i'm guessing it'll end sooner. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frank Posted January 8, 2011 Share Posted January 8, 2011 Creepy/...odd I went on to your profile, Chair, just now as I noticed I hadn't seen you comment in ages. Then you left a comment just a few minutes ago. *cue music Audio Welcome back indeed. How did that raising money thing go? I think it was for HIV /AIDS and digital death, right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happenstance Posted January 8, 2011 Share Posted January 8, 2011 The program may be ficitional but it does cover real life issues, and there are people out there that do kidnap children because they have had problems with there own, not even nesscary a death. It is shocking the amount of complaints the BBC have recaived for this though, even though the story is a bit depressing I am enjoying it, I just hope they don't drag the story on.. Knowing the amount of complaints they have reciaved I doubt it will. I orginally thought it'd last to atleast easter but now i'm guessing it'll end sooner. It was originally supposed to go on a lot longer, possibly next Christmas but its now going to end in April. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chairdriver Posted January 8, 2011 Share Posted January 8, 2011 Welcome back indeed. How did that raising money thing go? I think it was for HIV /AIDS and digital death, right? Disappointing - £30 raised. Still, it was worthwhile for me. Really needed an offline period. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Mad Monkey Posted January 8, 2011 Share Posted January 8, 2011 I thought Ronny was going to freak when Kat came in last night saying 'give him back'. I'm really struggling to see how they're going to stretch this out till April, let alone a whole year. Didn't Ronny tell Roxy the other night what she'd done, I was cooking dinner at the time so only caught bits, but I'm sure she did. All these complainers are just stupid, the only complaint I had with it is that the matching outfits was a bit too convenient, otherwise it was fine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happenstance Posted January 8, 2011 Share Posted January 8, 2011 It reminds of the storyline Hollyoaks wanted to do where one of their characters was going to have killed a kid when they were younger but Jamie Bulgers mum wasnt happy about it and complained until they dropped the storyline. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beast Posted January 8, 2011 Share Posted January 8, 2011 (edited) The worst part about all this is that it brings all the real life trolls out; people who get their knickers in a twist over "appropriateness" and "moral values" and stuff like that. How long will it take before people learn to accept things that they don't necessarily like themselves? I don't think it's that they don't like it (well, it is) but it was how it was done. I can understand why people have complained. I think they were saying that cot death is a major thing in itself so why wasn't it enough to have that storyline instead of cot death then baby swapping. But, as someone said on here, the way it was done was insensitive. Ronnie barely grieved for her child, she found out James was dead and then five minutes later, she swapped her baby for Tommy (Kat and Alfie's baby). I would have thought cot death was enough though... Also, I'm not surprised that the storyline was supposed to last til next Christmas. After all, this is Eastenders, the soap that drags depressing storylines the longest! I even think April is too long as well. I hate when people equate depressing with bad. First of all, Eastenders is depressing as well as bad. Second of all, welcome back! :D:D I'm sorry that your offline event didn't go so well but at least you showed a hell of a lot of willpower! Oh yeah, when's the Disney Mafia back on? Edited January 8, 2011 by Animal Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Mad Monkey Posted January 8, 2011 Share Posted January 8, 2011 I don't think it's that they don't like it (well, it is) but it was how it was done. I can understand why people have complained. I think they were saying that cot death is a major thing in itself so why wasn't it enough to have that storyline instead of cot death then baby swapping. But, as someone said on here, the way it was done was insensitive. Ronnie barely grieved for her child, she found out James was dead and then five minutes later, she swapped her baby for Tommy (Kat and Alfie's baby). I would have thought cot death was enough though... If you watched the show you'd know it fits with the character. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beast Posted January 8, 2011 Share Posted January 8, 2011 If you watched the show you'd know it fits with the character. I know that there's something wrong with Ronnie, what with her history with Archie and stuff but she could have at least grieved a little longer than five minutes. Also, I thought it weren't right when she crept over Tommy's crib and said "he's my son", I thought it was a tad insensitive. Still, I wouldn't complain to Ofcom about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dannyboy-the-Dane Posted January 8, 2011 Share Posted January 8, 2011 I don't think it's that they don't like it (well, it is) but it was how it was done. I can understand why people have complained. I think they were saying that cot death is a major thing in itself so why wasn't it enough to have that storyline instead of cot death then baby swapping. But, as someone said on here, the way it was done was insensitive. Ronnie barely grieved for her child, she found out James was dead and then five minutes later, she swapped her baby for Tommy (Kat and Alfie's baby). I would have thought cot death was enough though... Well, that's pretty much my point. It doesn't matter how insensitively it's done, it's meant to provoke, and people need to accept that not all things will fit their morals tastes. Heck, I'd never watch the Saw films because they're in no way to my tastes, but I don't complain about them. I accept that some people like to watch those films. If the whole storyline is too great a deviation from the general tone of the series, I can certainly understand a lot of fans getting pissed, and I'd then think it's a stupid move by the writers, but I generally think getting offended morally is silly. Life's full of disturbing stuff, and if it's not for you, then don't watch, and please, please don't complain because your sensitivities have been stepped on. Stick to your own and let others have theirs. Live and let live. Sorry for the rant, but I really hate censorship and people who are morally oversensitive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slaggis Posted January 8, 2011 Share Posted January 8, 2011 It confuses me completely. I overheard a couple of my house-mates discussing how it should never have been shown, and I just glared menacingly at them. If you feel it's a sensitive subject for you, then just don't watch. It's a fictional soap, full of fictional characters and fictional story lines. Obviously it was going to be a completely outrageous storyline. If soaps mirrored real life, then who would bother tuning in? Plus, if anything it's helped raise the profile of cot deaths, which is surely only a good thing? For people saying "it's saying all mothers who experience cot death are crazy and want to steal babies", grow a brain. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryuk Posted January 8, 2011 Share Posted January 8, 2011 don't think all mothers would but some would, and again people have done it for lesser reasons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ashley Posted January 8, 2011 Author Share Posted January 8, 2011 Plus, if anything it's helped raise the profile of cot deaths, which is surely only a good thing? I never quite understood this. Did a percentage of the population not know about cot deaths before last week? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guy Posted January 8, 2011 Share Posted January 8, 2011 Next thing we know ugly Billy Mitchell and fishy Ian Beale will be prank calling Andrew Sachs. Ridiculous storyline met with ridiculous public backlash. What did they expect? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryuk Posted January 8, 2011 Share Posted January 8, 2011 (edited) I never quite understood this. Did a percentage of the population not know about cot deaths before last week? To be fair i did not know about the reference of cot deaths until two years ago and how much it happens. I just thought it was a baby dieing in bed. I didn't relise the severity of how dangerious a cat cot can actully be. Edited January 8, 2011 by Ryuk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ashley Posted January 8, 2011 Author Share Posted January 8, 2011 To be fair i did not know about the reference of cot deaths until two years ago and how much it happens. I just thought it was a baby dieing in bed.I didn't relise the severity of how dangerious a cat can actully be. Sorry, couldn't resist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryuk Posted January 8, 2011 Share Posted January 8, 2011 oops sorry major typo there lol. bbcode don't work on the forums ?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ashley Posted January 8, 2011 Author Share Posted January 8, 2011 Huh? They do work, [noparse][/noparse] etc Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryuk Posted January 8, 2011 Share Posted January 8, 2011 the is suppose to put a line over the words Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MoogleViper Posted January 8, 2011 Share Posted January 8, 2011 oops sorry major typo there lol. bbcode don't work on the forums ?? Did you mean [noparse][/noparse]? Like this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts