c4countdown

In Autumn next year, Countdown will be one of the programmes (which I'm guessing means this will be on a weekday) which will be presented by an all-black "presenting and reporting team". Presumably that means producers, directors, etc. of Countdown won't be moved (Damian et al) and it only applies to Nick, Rachel, and Susie. Some shows are going all-black behind the scenes too, but Countdown hasn't been mentioned as being off-screen. According to Channel 4's Press Office (https://www.channel4.com/press/news/cha ... keover-day) one entire day of broadcasting will be given over to black talent. Including the hopelessly unfunny Mo Gilligan doing The Big Breakfast - probably one to miss.

I'm not happy, personally, and I can't imagine Nick, Rachel, and Susie, at least in private, being too happy either. Nor Damian, given how intent he was on sticking to Nick & Rachel repeats during lockdown.

On the other hand, let's start speculating...

Edit: Damian should seriously consider this being a special re the contestants as I think it would be incredibly distracting for the champion if all the presenters change from one game to the next.

As regards presenters / producers 'not being happy' at giving up their roles for a day... I doubt that's true, and if it is - they've little to be worrying about.

As regards contestants being distracted... if a player isn't good enough to bring their A game regardless of who the presenters are, they don't deserve to win.

As regards the notion of "Black Take-Over Day", that is a pretty lame idea, and -obviously- the height of virtue signalling.

Don't see the fuss behind it personally. It will be interesting to see what happens with the show on that day.

Rhys Benjamin wrote: ↑Tue Aug 25, 2020 11:11 pm I'm not happy, personally, and I can't imagine Nick, Rachel, and Susie, at least in private, being too happy either. Nor Damian, given how intent he was on sticking to Nick & Rachel repeats during lockdown.

Well Nick has to give way to Jimmy Carr for all the Cats games while Rachel and Susie carry on - I wonder what he thinks of that! That reminds me - there was an all-female 8/10 Cats Does Countdown a while ago, with Katherine Ryan replacing Jimmy Carr. Unfortunately she and it were awful.

L'oisleatch McGraw wrote: ↑Wed Aug 26, 2020 3:30 am As regards the notion of "Black Take-Over Day", that is a pretty lame idea, and -obviously- the height of virtue signalling.

I agree. It's just not the way to go about acheiving equality.

By the way, on a wider note, I think being from a poor background generally is a better predictor of poor life chances and lack of opportunity than specifically being black.

Edit - It's right that there was backlash after the killing of George Floyd, but inequality exists in so many forms in this country and in the world, and the entire focus should not be on just one of them.

Are they going to make sure the contestants are also black? In which case is it just going to be a "special". Looks like the stuff of nightmares to be involved in!

Ian Fitzpatrick wrote: ↑Wed Aug 26, 2020 9:24 am Are they going to make sure the contestants are also black? In which case is it just going to be a "special". Looks like the stuff of nightmares to be involved in!

I think they might want to continue with the champion's run, so they'll probably just get them to black up.

The thought of anyone 'not being happy' is so laughable.

Suck it up, seriously.

I'd be amazed if Nick, Susie or Rachel are upset about it.

Anyone who is upset from a viewer perspective, especially in terms of the competition etc. (is it a special, is it not, octoruns blah blah blah), need to get a life.

In terms of people being annoyed 'why focus on this form of injustice, when there are other forms', 'virtue signalling', whatever else: some real fragility going on there.

Noel Mc wrote: ↑Wed Aug 26, 2020 10:47 am The thought of anyone 'not being happy' is so laughable.

Suck it up, seriously.

I'd be amazed if Nick, Susie or Rachel are upset about it.

Anyone who is upset from a viewer perspective, especially in terms of the competition etc. (is it a special, is it not, octoruns blah blah blah), need to get a life.

In terms of people being annoyed 'why focus on this form of injustice, when there are other forms', 'virtue signalling', whatever else: some real fragility going on there.

Echoed.

Tom S wrote: ↑Wed Aug 26, 2020 12:16 pm

Noel Mc wrote: ↑Wed Aug 26, 2020 10:47 am The thought of anyone 'not being happy' is so laughable.

Suck it up, seriously.

I'd be amazed if Nick, Susie or Rachel are upset about it.

Anyone who is upset from a viewer perspective, especially in terms of the competition etc. (is it a special, is it not, octoruns blah blah blah), need to get a life.

In terms of people being annoyed 'why focus on this form of injustice, when there are other forms', 'virtue signalling', whatever else: some real fragility going on there.

Echoed.

Twice.

Noel Mc wrote: ↑Wed Aug 26, 2020 10:47 am The thought of anyone 'not being happy' is so laughable.

Suck it up, seriously.

I'd be amazed if Nick, Susie or Rachel are upset about it.

I agree with this bit. They're not going to be bothered about it.

In terms of people being annoyed 'why focus on this form of injustice, when there are other forms', 'virtue signalling', whatever else: some real fragility going on there.

I don't see what it's got to do with fragility. We need to focus on inequality wherever it is, and this certainly includes racial inequality, but we shouldn't forget that there are other neglected groups too. I think the media is (are?) very simplistic about this sort of thing. But this comes across as a bit of a silly gimmick to me in any case.

Gavin Chipper wrote: ↑Wed Aug 26, 2020 12:41 pm

Noel Mc wrote: ↑Wed Aug 26, 2020 10:47 am The thought of anyone 'not being happy' is so laughable.

Suck it up, seriously.

I'd be amazed if Nick, Susie or Rachel are upset about it.

I agree with this bit. They're not going to be bothered about it.

In terms of people being annoyed 'why focus on this form of injustice, when there are other forms', 'virtue signalling', whatever else: some real fragility going on there.

I don't see what it's got to do with fragility. We need to focus on inequality wherever it is, and this certainly includes racial inequality, but we shouldn't forget that there are other neglected groups too. I think the media is (are?) very simplistic about this sort of thing. But this comes across as a bit of a silly gimmick to me in any case.

This just sounds like a prolix way of saying all lives matter.

Well said Noel! Next there will be calls for a "White Takeover Day"

My worry with this is that it takes time for new presenters to settle into a role and for viewers to get used to them (look at top gear, or even the comments about Katherine Ryan in this thread), so it's unlikely to be a cracking success, but I think it does highlight important issues.

It's all the little things that add up - like for example if you were designing a set with black presenters or contestants in mind, you probably wouldn't choose a dark brown chair for them to sit in - really noticed that when Shaun Wallace was on. (maybe just me - commented at the time and family thought I was daft!)

My point being that diversity needs to feature all the way through the chain for real change. (I just googled channel 4's board of directors, and they do appear to be ticking that box. https://www.channel4.com/corporate/abou ... -are/board)

Ian Volante wrote: ↑Wed Aug 26, 2020 12:38 pm

Tom S wrote: ↑Wed Aug 26, 2020 12:16 pm

Noel Mc wrote: ↑Wed Aug 26, 2020 10:47 am The thought of anyone 'not being happy' is so laughable.

Suck it up, seriously.

I'd be amazed if Nick, Susie or Rachel are upset about it.

Anyone who is upset from a viewer perspective, especially in terms of the competition etc. (is it a special, is it not, octoruns blah blah blah), need to get a life.

In terms of people being annoyed 'why focus on this form of injustice, when there are other forms', 'virtue signalling', whatever else: some real fragility going on there.

Echoed.

Twice.

Thrice.

Ian Volante wrote: ↑Wed Aug 26, 2020 12:55 pm This just sounds like a prolix way of saying all lives matter.

I find this post just frustrating. When people find themselves split into two opposing groups, they often sterotype the other position, and instead of engaging, they just trot out a cheap reply based on these sterotypes, assuming that people n their side will pat them on the back for it. It would be better if you found fault with the specifics.

I could say that your reply is just a prolix way of saying "*sigh*" - the worst of all responses.

Fiona T wrote: ↑Wed Aug 26, 2020 3:16 pm My worry with this is that it takes time for new presenters to settle into a role and for viewers to get used to them (look at top gear, or even the comments about Katherine Ryan in this thread), so it's unlikely to be a cracking success, but I think it does highlight important issues.

Maybe I was a bit harsh on Katherine Ryan, but I thought her general approach was over the top. It didn't seem like first day nerves. But I think it would be less of a problem with normal Countdown. I'm sure whoever they pick will easily be able to match Nick Hewer. Jimmy Carr just happens to be better than Nick Hewer so harder to match.

Gavin Chipper wrote: ↑Wed Aug 26, 2020 4:20 pm

Ian Volante wrote: ↑Wed Aug 26, 2020 12:55 pm This just sounds like a prolix way of saying all lives matter.

I find this post just frustrating. When people find themselves split into two opposing groups, they often sterotype the other position, and instead of engaging, they just trot out a cheap reply based on these sterotypes, assuming that people n their side will pat them on the back for it. It would be better if you found fault with the specifics.

I could say that your reply is just a prolix way of saying "*sigh*" - the worst of all responses.

The main gripe I have is about the statement "we shouldn't forget about...". We haven't! Just because there's a day highlighting black people, it doesn't detract from other issues. Maybe the specific point is that airtime could talk about other issues at the same time? No idea. But highlighting one issue doesn't negatively highlight other issues. It's, to my ears, sailing close to whataboutery, an oft-used distraction tactic, or often caused by ignorance or lack of thought.

Ian Volante wrote: ↑Wed Aug 26, 2020 5:11 pm

Gavin Chipper wrote: ↑Wed Aug 26, 2020 4:20 pm

Ian Volante wrote: ↑Wed Aug 26, 2020 12:55 pm This just sounds like a prolix way of saying all lives matter.

I find this post just frustrating. When people find themselves split into two opposing groups, they often sterotype the other position, and instead of engaging, they just trot out a cheap reply based on these sterotypes, assuming that people n their side will pat them on the back for it. It would be better if you found fault with the specifics.

I could say that your reply is just a prolix way of saying "*sigh*" - the worst of all responses.

The main gripe I have is about the statement "we shouldn't forget about...". We haven't! Just because there's a day highlighting black people, it doesn't detract from other issues. Maybe the specific point is that airtime could talk about other issues at the same time? No idea. But highlighting one issue doesn't negatively highlight other issues. It's, to my ears, sailing close to whataboutery, an oft-used distraction tactic, or often caused by ignorance or lack of thought.

Well I suppose my point was about the wider issue of poverty etc. not getting airtime rather than in this one specific instance. Plus I've never been a fan of quotas or "reverse"/"positive" discrimination generally, and I see this as that.

Edit - And what I meant to say was that poverty ties in with it. A lot of why black people have poorer life outcomes is that they are more likely to come from poorer backgrounds and live in poor areas in the first place, though that's not necessarily to say all of it.

Hold on one second;
We are all agreed that this is one of the stupidest ideas anyone involved in the entertainment industry has ever had, no?
Even Sharknado 3 was a better idea... (and that's the one that gave a cameo role to Jedward!)

To all those up in arms about this...

Suppose, as an experiment, Channel 4 announced that just for one day, Countdown and some other shows were going to change their entire presenting team for new people. Maybe it'll go well, maybe it won't, but whatever happens it's only one day and the following morning everything will be back as it was.

I think the reaction would be, "well, that's a little unusual, and I don't know how well it'll work, but it sounds interesting, I don't think any broadcaster has tried it before".

Well, the only difference between that and this is the additional detail that all the temporary new presenters will be black. Are you suggesting that's worse? Why?

Exactly what about this enrages you? Is it that Countdown will be presented by people outside the regular presenting team for one episode in 39 years, or that said presenters will be black?

Yes Graeme... the 'change things for a day' in and of itself would be a weird and pointless idea. The opponents of the 'black takeover day' would likely consider it not simply worse, but MUCH worse because they will be black. This is not about changing things around at random or for whimsy, but rather the broadcaster is pandering to the toxic US-based BLM movement / mentality... and, for many, that will be a good reason to boycott it.

Do you genuinely not see that the specific race requirement makes it a political gesture, compared with the scenario you outlined?

ftr personally, I'm not enraged in the least, and am looking forward to the bizarre train wreck that is to come!

L'oisleatch McGraw wrote: ↑Wed Aug 26, 2020 8:20 pm Yes Graeme... the 'change things for a day' in and of itself would be a weird and pointless idea. The opponents of the 'black takeover day' would likely consider it not simply worse, but MUCH wrse because they will be black. This is not about changing things around at random or for whimsy, but rather the broadcaster is pandering to the toxic US-based BLM movement / mentality... and, for many, that will be a good reason to boycott it.

What, so they shouldn't do this because it might offend racists?

L'oisleatch McGraw wrote: ↑Wed Aug 26, 2020 8:20 pm Do you genuinely not see that the specific race requirement makes it a political gesture, compared with the scenario you outlined?

Of course I see that, but why is that bad? How is it any worse than that advert Channel 4 ran in 2014 during the Winter Olympics in Sochi? That was clearly a political statement against Russia's LGBT rights stance, but does that mean they shouldn't have shown it?

Graeme Cole wrote: ↑Wed Aug 26, 2020 7:47 pmSuppose, as an experiment, Channel 4 announced that just for one day, Countdown and some other shows were going to change their entire presenting team for new people. Maybe it'll go well, maybe it won't, but whatever happens it's only one day and the following morning everything will be back as it was.

Well, yes, I would be equally as annoyed. You don’t just throw new presenters in like that.

Also, given it’s Channel 4, it’ll probably be 3 terribly rubbish “comedians” that we all hate rather than anyone decent such as Angelica Bell.

Graeme Cole wrote: ↑Wed Aug 26, 2020 7:47 pm To all those up in arms about this...

I wouldn't say I'm up in arms.

Suppose, as an experiment, Channel 4 announced that just for one day, Countdown and some other shows were going to change their entire presenting team for new people. Maybe it'll go well, maybe it won't, but whatever happens it's only one day and the following morning everything will be back as it was.

I think the reaction would be, "well, that's a little unusual, and I don't know how well it'll work, but it sounds interesting, I don't think any broadcaster has tried it before".

Well, the only difference between that and this is the additional detail that all the temporary new presenters will be black. Are you suggesting that's worse? Why?

Exactly what about this enrages you? Is it that Countdown will be presented by people outside the regular presenting team for one episode in 39 years, or that said presenters will be black?

It's discriminatory isn't it? You don't try to fight discrimination by discriminating but in a different way. Do people not get this?

I am fortunate in that I've never been negatively discriminated against:
Male
White
Heterosexual
Middle Class

However, as a person living in Belfast, were I born at the same time as my parents, things could have been different. I'm lucky that I don't really remember much of what happened here. I was 10 at the time of the Good Friday Agreement. I remember the Omagh bomb. I once got punched (a fairly feeble punch mind you) on the back of the neck for being in the wrong area (apparently).

The position we are in now has been achieved, in part, through positive discrimination. The make-up of the Assembly here, posts being held etc. have had to fulfil certain quotas.

By no stretch of the imagination has it been perfect, I genuinely didn't have any Protestant friends until I was 15.

In an ideal world it wouldn't have had to involve positive discrimination, but it did, and it made things better.

Countdown being presented by an all black team? Go for it.

Noel Mc wrote: ↑Thu Aug 27, 2020 10:01 am I am fortunate in that I've never been negatively discriminated against:
Male
White
Heterosexual
Middle Class

However, as a person living in Belfast, were I born at the same time as my parents, things could have been different. I'm lucky that I don't really remember much of what happened here. I was 10 at the time of the Good Friday Agreement. I remember the Omagh bomb. I once got punched (a fairly feeble punch mind you) on the back of the neck for being in the wrong area (apparently).

The position we are in now has been achieved, in part, through positive discrimination. The make-up of the Assembly here, posts being held etc. have had to fulfil certain quotas.

By no stretch of the imagination has it been perfect, I genuinely didn't have any Protestant friends until I was 15.

In an ideal world it wouldn't have had to involve positive discrimination, but it did, and it made things better.

Countdown being presented by an all black team? Go for it.

Well said!

Rather than highlighting the racial aspect of it, I'm more up in arms about changing the presenters rather than the racial element of it. If you were to replace them all with an LGBT+ cast for a day I would be equally as annoyed.

Interesting timing with this

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/ ... can-people

I saw the sketch and found it uncomfortably cringey - didn't have the redeeming feature of being funny

Noel Mc wrote: ↑Thu Aug 27, 2020 10:01 am I am fortunate in that I've never been negatively discriminated against:
Male
White
Heterosexual
Middle Class

However, as a person living in Belfast, were I born at the same time as my parents, things could have been different. I'm lucky that I don't really remember much of what happened here. I was 10 at the time of the Good Friday Agreement. I remember the Omagh bomb. I once got punched (a fairly feeble punch mind you) on the back of the neck for being in the wrong area (apparently).

The position we are in now has been achieved, in part, through positive discrimination. The make-up of the Assembly here, posts being held etc. have had to fulfil certain quotas.

By no stretch of the imagination has it been perfect, I genuinely didn't have any Protestant friends until I was 15.

In an ideal world it wouldn't have had to involve positive discrimination, but it did, and it made things better.

Countdown being presented by an all black team? Go for it.

Obviously the situation in Northern Ireland is complex and there have been many factors at play, and you know a lot more about it than me, so I certainly wouldn't want to say that the "positive" (sorry - I always put quotes round that) discrimination was irrelevant. However, as I am against it as a general principle, I don't think it should be applied to other cases unless there is a really clear case that it would be a benefit, and I don't really see that here. In any case, this Channel 4 thing isn't a general move in that direction, but a one-off, which is why I've called it a gimmick. But I'm happy to watch it as a bit of fun, and I'm not exactly going to get upset about it.

Anyway, here is something for everyone to enjoy.

Eoin Jackson wrote: ↑Wed Aug 26, 2020 12:38 pm

JackHurst wrote: ↑Wed Aug 26, 2020 12:16 pm

Noel Mc wrote: ↑Wed Aug 26, 2020 10:47 am I am fortunate in that I've never been negatively discriminated against:
Male
White
Heterosexual
Middle Class
Smart
Creative
Witty
Handsome

Well said!

Echoed.

Twice, and Thrice!

I've seen the type of behaviour that's going on on this thread many times in the past. People terrified of being called racist or homophobic or some other 'ist' or 'phobe'. In this case, Countdown fans terrified of being called racists for admitting that they know (and we do all know) what C4 is doing is dumb. It is very nice to be free from that.

During the gay marriage debates in 2015 (Ireland's constitutional amendment) I was schooled -the hard way- in how to deal with group think. Since then, I've often rowed against the tide of popular opinion on the internet, if it seemed people were agreeing with something out of fear. I have been called racist, homophobic, transphobic and a cunt, for my troubles. (Only one of those is true btw.) As far as I am concerned, actually being a good person in real life, is of far more value than giving off a veneer of being a good person, by pretending to be outraged by / in zealous agreement with the correct things on social media.

Noel, the NI comments made for a very interesting read. I appreciate that you qualified your statement by saying "in part". I think that bit is key. Positive discrimination played a part. I would not agree that it played an important part. Things in NI would have improved anyway, as that's where the zeitgeist was leading.

imo 'Positive discrimination' is ultimately not a good thing.

Graeme Cole wrote: ↑Wed Aug 26, 2020 8:46 pm What, so they shouldn't do this because it might offend racists?

No. they shouldn't do it because it's gimmicky. It will probably have very little impact at all... But I do expect it will empower racists to get worse, and will also help convert neutrals to an anti-BLM, or a right-wing stance. The only people who will think this is a "stunning and brave" move are those who already fangirl the BLM movement.

-But back to Rhys's original request that we speculate, I have a terrible feeling that that awful Romesh fella will be involved, most likely in Nick's seat.

1. I'd love to see Trevor MacDonald come out of retirement to host.
2. As the arithmetician role is traditionally associated with eye-candy, I vote Richard Blackwood!
3. Assuming she's black enough, Naga Munchetty can be Susie.

Can we have Chris Kamara in Dictionary Corner please?

If you become anti blm or right wing because of this you were never neutral.

I think you make some fair points Eoin

If I were on that board of directors I would be asking my exec team -

What is the day intended to achieve?
What steps are being taken to ensure long term positive change and not a one day gimmick?
What are the measures of success?

But then I would support the proposal wholeheartedly

Chris Kamara would be excellent in DC, as would Trevor McDonald in the host’s chair. I do worry that we’ll end up with Romesh Ranganathan and Nish Kumar, which may well be unwatchable.

Angelica Bell (which I must admit was not my thought) would be ideal as host or “Rachel”. As would Michael Holding or Ebony Rainford-Brent in DC. I’m not au fait with the current lineup of the OUP to speculate who would take over in Susie’s chair.

Rhys Benjamin wrote: ↑Fri Aug 28, 2020 9:16 am I’m not au fait with the current lineup of the OUP to speculate who would take over in Susie’s chair.

You know her job doesn't take any specialist skills don't you? It doesn't need to be someone from OUP. If anything, Rachel's job is the specialist one.

Rhys Benjamin wrote: ↑Fri Aug 28, 2020 9:16 am I do worry that we’ll end up with Romesh Ranganathan and Nish Kumar, which may well be unwatchable.

Probably not since neither of them are black.

I also generally think that the idea of explicitly separating people out into "races" can be counterproductive. I have an Indian father and am "non-white" but I don't spend any time thinking that I'm "different". Obviously that's not to say we should ignore racial prejudice by saying it can't exist because we're all the same, but we need to get the balance right, and I don't think this is it.

Gavin Chipper wrote: ↑Sat Aug 29, 2020 7:51 am I also generally think that the idea of explicitly separating people out into "races" can be counterproductive. I have an Indian father and am "non-white" but I don't spend any time thinking that I'm "different". Obviously that's not to say we should ignore racial prejudice by saying it can't exist because we're all the same, but we need to get the balance right, and I don't think this is it.

I get where you're coming from, but I think it's important to recognise that the broad forms of racism and discrimination that are experienced tend to be different for different marginalised groups, and targeted anti-racist measures that recognise the specific difficulties of one group are a good thing.

Sam Cappleman-Lynes wrote: ↑Fri Aug 28, 2020 9:48 am

Rhys Benjamin wrote: ↑Fri Aug 28, 2020 9:16 am I do worry that we’ll end up with Romesh Ranganathan and Nish Kumar, which may well be unwatchable.

Probably not since neither of them are black.

By the same token, Lewis Hamilton has a white mother.

Rhys Benjamin wrote: ↑Sat Aug 29, 2020 2:08 pm

Sam Cappleman-Lynes wrote: ↑Fri Aug 28, 2020 9:48 am

Rhys Benjamin wrote: ↑Fri Aug 28, 2020 9:16 am I do worry that we’ll end up with Romesh Ranganathan and Nish Kumar, which may well be unwatchable.

Probably not since neither of them are black.

By the same token, Lewis Hamilton has a white mother.

No, not relevant. Romesh Ranganathan has Sri Lankan heritage and Nish Kumar is of Indian descent. Neither of those ethnicities are Black.

Each time Rhys posts in this thread I do an even bigger face palm than before...

Sam Cappleman-Lynes wrote: ↑Sat Aug 29, 2020 3:36 pm

Rhys Benjamin wrote: ↑Sat Aug 29, 2020 2:08 pm

Sam Cappleman-Lynes wrote: ↑Fri Aug 28, 2020 9:48 am

Probably not since neither of them are black.

By the same token, Lewis Hamilton has a white mother.

No, not relevant. Romesh Ranganathan has Sri Lankan heritage and Nish Kumar is of Indian descent. Neither of those ethnicities are Black.

WHAT! So are you saying their lives don't matter?

JackHurst wrote: ↑Sun Aug 30, 2020 8:06 am Each time Rhys posts in this thread I do an even bigger face palm than before...

But not when Sam posts?!
Seriously, the stuff he is coming out with sounds like it is from a Monty Python sketch!
I was actually only joking when I said "assuming she's black enough" about Naga Munchetty...

This awful discussion we're having right now helps illustrate how toxic the BLM mentality is. Personally, I find no need to focus on people's differences (be they race, sexuality, body shape, whatever) in such a way that it causes divisiveness.

L'oisleatch McGraw wrote: ↑Mon Aug 31, 2020 1:50 pm

JackHurst wrote: ↑Sun Aug 30, 2020 8:06 am Each time Rhys posts in this thread I do an even bigger face palm than before...

But not when Sam posts?!
Seriously, the stuff he is coming out with sounds like it is from a Monty Python sketch!
I was actually only joking when I said "assuming she's black enough" about Naga Munchetty...

This awful discussion we're having right now helps illustrate how toxic the BLM mentality is. Personally, I find no need to focus on people's differences (be they race, sexuality, body shape, whatever) in such a way that it causes divisiveness.

Black people: "Here are some ways in which we, specifically, are affected by racism and discrimination."
You: "Concentrate on what brings us together, not on what separates us."

All you're doing with such a statement is diverting the discussion and diluting the experiences of Black people. Time to start listening.

Sam Cappleman-Lynes wrote: ↑Mon Aug 31, 2020 2:41 pm All you're doing with such a statement is diverting the discussion and diluting the experiences of Black people. Time to start listening.

Neither you nor I have any horse in this race, as we are not from America, and therefore have no need to take on any of the social baggage that goes along with their chequered history.

You clutching your pearls because Rhys didn't know the specific ancestral background of a Z-list celebrity, is a waste of human energy.

L'oisleatch McGraw wrote: ↑Mon Aug 31, 2020 3:03 pm

Sam Cappleman-Lynes wrote: ↑Mon Aug 31, 2020 2:41 pm All you're doing with such a statement is diverting the discussion and diluting the experiences of Black people. Time to start listening.

Neither you nor I have any horse in this race, as we are not from America, and therefore have no need to take on any of the social baggage that goes along with their chequered history.

You clutching your pearls because Rhys didn't know the specific ancestral background of a Z-list celebrity, is a waste of human energy.

So do you think racism against black people is just a part of American history and not an issue that has and continues to be a part of British history and society? Sure the exact nature and results of it are very different, but this is a British problem too.

And have a look at the definition of "clutching your pearls" and the tone of different people's comments in this thread. Sam calmly pointing out that 2 celebrities with recognisably South Asian names aren't going to be part of this event hardly falls under that. Other posts however... (and yes, I know I'm being snarky too there).

Thomas Cappleman wrote: ↑Mon Aug 31, 2020 5:40 pm

L'oisleatch McGraw wrote: ↑Mon Aug 31, 2020 3:03 pm

Sam Cappleman-Lynes wrote: ↑Mon Aug 31, 2020 2:41 pm All you're doing with such a statement is diverting the discussion and diluting the experiences of Black people. Time to start listening.

Neither you nor I have any horse in this race, as we are not from America, and therefore have no need to take on any of the social baggage that goes along with their chequered history.

You clutching your pearls because Rhys didn't know the specific ancestral background of a Z-list celebrity, is a waste of human energy.

So do you think racism against black people is just a part of American history and not an issue that has and continues to be a part of British history and society? Sure the exact nature and results of it are very different, but this is a British problem too.

And have a look at the definition of "clutching your pearls" and the tone of different people's comments in this thread. Sam calmly pointing out that 2 celebrities with recognisably South Asian names aren't going to be part of this event hardly falls under that. Other posts however... (and yes, I know I'm being snarky too there).

Well said.

JackHurst wrote: ↑Mon Aug 31, 2020 7:02 pm

Thomas Cappleman wrote: ↑Mon Aug 31, 2020 5:40 pm

L'oisleatch McGraw wrote: ↑Mon Aug 31, 2020 3:03 pm

Neither you nor I have any horse in this race, as we are not from America, and therefore have no need to take on any of the social baggage that goes along with their chequered history.

You clutching your pearls because Rhys didn't know the specific ancestral background of a Z-list celebrity, is a waste of human energy.

So do you think racism against black people is just a part of American history and not an issue that has and continues to be a part of British history and society? Sure the exact nature and results of it are very different, but this is a British problem too.

And have a look at the definition of "clutching your pearls" and the tone of different people's comments in this thread. Sam calmly pointing out that 2 celebrities with recognisably South Asian names aren't going to be part of this event hardly falls under that. Other posts however... (and yes, I know I'm being snarky too there).

Well said.

Echoed.

On this same general topic, Adele has had some backlash for the way she had her hair, being accused of "cultural appropriation". Now, I think this is ridiculous. First of all, we don't live in isolated cultures anyway (apart from maybe some uncontacted tribes), so it doesn't really make sense as a term - your ancestry or colour of your skin isn't your culture. And secondly, borrowing from other cultures is one of the things that has enabled our species to advance in the many ways it has. (Sure, hairstyles never got us to the moon or enabled us to discover antibiotics, but the general point stands.)

Also, when talking about the death of Chadwick Boseman, Lewis Hamilton said something like "We've lost one of our people." I thought this was a bit of an odd comment - "our people". I'd like to think that he was talking about all of us as people have lost one of our people, but I don't think he was. We have to be careful that this doesn't turn into an "us" and "them" thing.

On the Adele thing, I think it's the intention rather than the act itself which matters. It's the same as the difference between wearing a sari at a traditional Indian wedding (obviously appropriate) and wearing a sari at a fancy dress party because "haha wouldn't it be funny if I wore those funny clothes that Indian people wear lol" (obviously inappropriate).

So if Adele chose her hairstyle because it's a common carnival hairstyle, or even just because she liked it, no problem. But not if it's "haha wouldn't it be funny if I wore this hairstyle that Black people wear lol".

Personally I think it's a bit of a leap to ascribe the latter motivation to her from a single picture online, but you know, this is the internet, and people like getting angry.

Gavin Chipper wrote: ↑Tue Sep 01, 2020 8:40 pm Also, when talking about the death of Chadwick Boseman, Lewis Hamilton said something like "We've lost one of our people." I thought this was a bit of an odd comment - "our people". I'd like to think that he was talking about all of us as people have lost one of our people, but I don't think he was. We have to be careful that this doesn't turn into an "us" and "them" thing.

I think the us and them bridge was crossed long ago, and Lewis's solidarity with the black community doesn't seem odd at all to me in that context, or more generally.

Ian Volante wrote: ↑Wed Sep 02, 2020 7:24 am

Gavin Chipper wrote: ↑Tue Sep 01, 2020 8:40 pm Also, when talking about the death of Chadwick Boseman, Lewis Hamilton said something like "We've lost one of our people." I thought this was a bit of an odd comment - "our people". I'd like to think that he was talking about all of us as people have lost one of our people, but I don't think he was. We have to be careful that this doesn't turn into an "us" and "them" thing.

I think the us and them bridge was crossed long ago, and Lewis's solidarity with the black community doesn't seem odd at all to me in that context, or more generally.

Why was the us and them bridge crossed long ago? Most people are happy to get on with people of any skin colour / race / whatever you want to call it. I know that watching the news that comes out of America might make one think that there is some sort of war between white people and black people, but there isn't. In any case, as much as he might not want to admit it, Hamilton has a white mother and is much white as he is black. The idea that being black is like a dominant gene, which takes precedence over anything else, is just silly really.

Gavin Chipper wrote: ↑Wed Sep 02, 2020 4:58 pm

Ian Volante wrote: ↑Wed Sep 02, 2020 7:24 am

Gavin Chipper wrote: ↑Tue Sep 01, 2020 8:40 pm Also, when talking about the death of Chadwick Boseman, Lewis Hamilton said something like "We've lost one of our people." I thought this was a bit of an odd comment - "our people". I'd like to think that he was talking about all of us as people have lost one of our people, but I don't think he was. We have to be careful that this doesn't turn into an "us" and "them" thing.

I think the us and them bridge was crossed long ago, and Lewis's solidarity with the black community doesn't seem odd at all to me in that context, or more generally.

Why was the us and them bridge crossed long ago? Most people are happy to get on with people of any skin colour / race / whatever you want to call it. I know that watching the news that comes out of America might make one think that there is some sort of war between white people and black people, but there isn't. In any case, as much as he might not want to admit it, Hamilton has a white mother and is much white as he is black. The idea that being black is like a dominant gene, which takes precedence over anything else, is just silly really.

Well I think it's more solidarity than war. Lewis might be as much white heritage as black, but his experiences of racism will not be those of a white person.

Fiona T wrote: ↑Wed Sep 02, 2020 8:23 pm Well I think it's more solidarity than war. Lewis might be as much white heritage as black, but his experiences of racism will not be those of a white person.

That's fair enough I suppose - it just sounded a bit odd when he said it.

WTF???

Might be a good idea to film this if and when Rachel goes off on maternity leave again.

Let the hunt for a replacement Rachel begin...

Dave Preece wrote: ↑Mon Sep 21, 2020 3:15 amWTF???

u ok hun

Richard Ayowade as guest presenter
Naga Munchety as guest DC Lenny Henry as the guest
Diane Abbott to do numbers .
I was trying to come up with the best contestants of colour.
Junaid being one but not sure of who else

Just been announced that the legendary newsreader Sir Trevor McDonald will be the host for the “Black To Front Day”, as it has now been referred to. Certainly a fantastic choice in my opinion. https://twitter.com/tvukzone/status/141 ... 91586?s=21

Excellent choice.

James Robinson wrote: ↑Wed Jul 21, 2021 10:28 am Just been announced that the legendary newsreader Sir Trevor McDonald will be the host

Got one right!

Great lineup.