When the Parkinson Goons Special was shown on BBC2 the day Harry Secombe died they didn't edit out Sellers saying "wog"...I was watching 'Two-Way Stretch' on Carlton Cinema last night and his character said "nig-nogs".

Who decides the hierarchy of 'offensive' words?

>"If President Kennedy would just go on TV one day and say, I'd like to introduce you to all of the niggers in my cabinet"

Not that Kennedy would have had any niggers in his cabinet.

>>"If President Kennedy would just go on TV one day and say, I'd like to introduce you to all of the niggers in my cabinet"
>
>Not that Kennedy would have had any niggers in his cabinet.

Apart from his drinks cabinet, polishing from the inside.

>>>"If President Kennedy would just go on TV one day and say, I'd like to introduce you to all of the niggers in my cabinet"
>>
>>Not that Kennedy would have had any niggers in his cabinet.
>
>Apart from his drinks cabinet, polishing from the inside.
>
That's exactly the observation Lenny Bruce proceeded to make!! Well, the fact that there weren't any African-Americans in the government - this was 1962, after all!!

>When the Parkinson Goons Special was shown on BBC2 the day Harry Secombe died they didn't edit out Sellers saying "wog"...I was watching 'Two-Way Stretch' on Carlton Cinema last night and his character said "nig-nogs".
>
>Who decides the hierarchy of 'offensive' words?

This isn't the current answer, but was at the time of the Goons and makes for amusing reading anyway.

http://minnie.cs.adfa.edu.au/Goons/davidj/bbc.green.book.gz

>Lenny Bruce once challenged his nightclub
>audience to shout, "Nigger!" at the top of
>their voices during his act. When they
>failed to do so, he said,:-
>"Too many fucking white liberals in the
>audience! If President Kennedy would just
>go on TV one day and say, I'd like to
>introduce you to all of the niggers in my
>cabinet, and just keep saying it over and
>over again until nigger didn't mean
>anything anymore, then you'd never see a
>ten year old black kid cry because some
>asshole called him a nigger in school. It's
>the supression of words which gives them
>the power of violence and hatred."

Tangentially related:

I've been sorting through my parents' old videos (thing recorded between '85 and '91 - for me, between 7 and 13 - initially looking for 'Who Shot Alan B'Stard', which I'm sure I recorded when it was on, then branching out to see just what stray programs had been recorded on the ends of films during those first 6 years we had a VCR), and came across an episode of 'Did You See?'

One of the topics underd discussion is the return of 'In Sickness and in Health' (after about nine years), and Graham Chapman (who's there with Ken Russell and some woman to comment on the week's programs), makes roughly the same point - Ludo asks if it's still Ok to say "nig-nog", and what about the hypothetical young black man who might be offended, and Graham (and it's fascinating seeing him sober *and* without the mask) says that it's the racist's stupidity, and the word itself is just a word and shouldn't cause offence. He also points out (and this is about '85) that plenty of black people in America use the word "nigger" properly, have effectively reclaimed the word.

Besides that, it's interesting to see them discuss whether 'In Sickness and in Health' can still work as a sitcom, whether it's slower pace will turn viewers off, whether it's still relevant (esp. since it didn;t have any young people at this point - no Una Stubbs or PM's father-in-law - though ISTR that they gave Alf a younger wife [did the first one die?] and a young, black, gay home-help a couple of years later. Chapman seems to have been quite a fan.

Is the editing actually related to a desire to avoid offending people, or just a desire to make sure that the nation's-favourite-vintage-sitcom-I-like-it-when-he-says-don't-tell-him-Pike reputation of Dad's Army survives untarnished?

Do you want them to be able to say nigger then?
Don't you understand why it is now no longer acceptable?
What would be achieved by allowing it to go on.
The insistence on this kind of stuff strikes me as very reactionary. In a bad way.
If it was a great joke then maybe. But it doesn't sound it,
Discuss

If a word is reclaimed then it can have a positive effect rather than a hurtful or negative one. A case in point is the word 'Queer' which went from a gentle euphemism in the days of Polari, to a hateful insult, and back to a powerful label that can be used in almost any sense. You can see this in large groups of 'queers' gathered together. the really old ones don't mind the word, whereas people in their mid-thirties to their fifties find the word horrible and disgusting. Younger people (including myself) use the word freely, it's not a badge of shame anymore, just another way of describing ourselves.

In 1943 (or whatever) reciting that particular children's rhyme would have been completely unremarkable. A white non-racist might have said that simply because they were raised in a "unicultural" society where the use of the word wouldn't offend anyone. So its use in a show set then, in that particular context is surely not offensive. We might through the lens of 21st century hindsight notice and remark upon the characters' attitude, but only as a historical detail, surely?
Now if one of the characters on Dad's Army had actually directed the word at a black American GI as an expression of hatred, and it had passed without comment, that might be more of an issue. Because a supposedly sympathetic character is actually being nasty to another human being. So you would expect the writers to, at the least, show the negative outcome of the characters' actions or something.

>Do you want them to be able to say nigger then?
>Don't you understand why it is now no longer acceptable?
>What would be achieved by allowing it to go on.
>The insistence on this kind of stuff strikes me as very reactionary. In a bad way.
>If it was a great joke then maybe. But it doesn't sound it,
>Discuss

Haven't you heard any Lenny Bruce CD's? He quite stunningly points out the unbelievably patronising attitude of what he derides as "white liberals" in a routine called "The typical white person's concept of how we relax coloured people at parties". This involves Lenny Bruce acting out a scene with black guitarist Eric Miller and includes the following exchanges:
Bruce: - "Hey, y'know, I'd like you to come around to my house after this!"
Miller: - "Why, thank you, that's very kind of you."
Bruce: - "Yeah, well, it'll be dark soon. No one'll see us, it'll be okay."
Miller: - "Oh, right..."
Bruce: - "Some good dancing here, that lady tapdancing there, you dance a little yourself?"
Miller: - "Well, yeah..."
Bruce: - "Right, all of you people can dance, right! You people have a natural sense of rhythm! Born right in you, I guess!"
Miller: "Oh, I suppose so..."
Bruce: - "Did you have anything to eat, yet?"
Miller: - "No..."
Bruce: - "Well, I think they've got some water melon left...I'll see if I can fix you up with something. After that, I'd like to you come over to my place but, you see, well...I got a sister you know. And I hear that you guys...well, I'll put it to you a different way. You wouldn't want a Jew doing it to your sister, right? Well, that's the way I feel about it. No offence..."
Miller: - "Sure, sure..."

Following this routine during one of his 1962 nightclub dates, he was heckled from his mainly white audience, with Eric Miller having difficulty containing his laughter.

I disagree. 'Reclaiming' is ok for the people that directly benefit from it (no more feeling insulted by a word, regardless of the invective aimed at you), of course it is, but it is still as incredibly socially divisive as it was to start with; I am allowed to say 'faggot', and you are not anymore, becuase when I say it it means one thing and when you you you say it it means something completely different. It actually draws MORE battle lines than were there originally. The expression of homophobia is just shifted to another few words, the homophobe still uses the word in that way, I use it in another. It reclaims nothing.

just a thought.
x
d

thats a good point. similarly reclamation of words, i think, can only be done by the people who are insulted by the word in the first place. its ok white liberals saying that other white liberals are being too white and liberal but at the end of the day they do not know what it is like to be on the receiving end of that word, or to hear it used casually, in whatever context. 'queer' was reclaimed by gay people and thats fine. 'nigger' has been reclaimed by some black people and thats fine too but im not sure its a good thing reclaiming a word on behalf of someone else.

'Fuzzy wuzzy' is still left in Dad's Army isn't it?

Anyway, it's not about "reclaiming", it's about rewriting history to suit the present. This episode of Dad's Army is a relic from the past and should be viewed AS IT WAS, not scribbled all over using the felt tip of political correctness. Either show it, AS IT WAS, or don't fucking show it. When I was about 13 I used to keep a diary and in the first flushes of "being interested in girls" I put things like "AC 4 JN" in there, and "I put my arm rouind Jackie today" and subsequently, when I was "going out with" a different girl (possibly Tina) I went back and changed all the pro references to Jackie so it looked like I never really liked her. I even rather dimly did it in a different pen! How ineptly like Stalin (and the BBC taste police) I was. Do you see what I'm trying to say, in an I Love 1978 kind of way? Hmmm?

>This episode of Dad's Army is a relic from the past and should be viewed AS IT WAS, not scribbled all over using the felt tip of political correctness.

I disagree. It wasn't being shown as a relic. If it had been part of a themed 'Relic Night' then it should have been left intact. But it was being used as cheap (and cheerful!) filler. Take out the casual racism and it would serve it's original purpose - as an entertaining, unchallenging sitcom for people to laugh at.

>>This episode of Dad's Army is a relic from the past and should be viewed AS IT WAS, not scribbled all over using the felt tip of political correctness.
>
>I disagree. It wasn't being shown as a relic. If it had been part of a themed 'Relic Night' then it should have been left intact. But it was being used as cheap (and cheerful!) filler. Take out the casual racism and it would serve it's original purpose - as an entertaining, unchallenging sitcom for people to laugh at.

What's the difference?

>>It wasn't being shown as a relic. If it had been part of a themed 'Relic Night' then it should have been left intact. But it was being used as cheap (and cheerful!) filler. Take out the casual racism and it would serve it's original purpose - as an entertaining, unchallenging sitcom for people to laugh at.
>
>What's the difference?

Sorry Mike - could you clarify? Between being shown as part of the theme night or as cheap filler? Or do you mean between the episode's entertainment value with and without casual racism?

Being shown as part of a relic night, or as a sitcom for 'normal' viewers - why should there be a difference? Both should see it uncut, and be credited with the intelligence to understand why a line exists.

I don't think Lenny Bruce and Pike are attempting to do the same thing.
Dad's army comes from a time when no-one would give a fuck about the word nigger.
The show is being shown again at a time when they do and so I don't think it's a big deal to cut it when it clearly is unimportant and not making any kind of point (when it is going to offend people- and possibly cause problems - what if a child were to innocently repeat that at school?)
At a time of race related rioting I think it makes perfect sense to crop something like that.
The fact that they leave in fuzzy wuzzy shows that they are staying true to the spirit of the original where it is important. But there's a world of difference.

I am against censorship (certainly in adult viewing times) but I think there are individual cases where it makes sense (and to see rubbish racist jokes still left in repeats of 70s comedy shows on cable makes me unhappy) And believe me Bernard Manning is no Lenny Bruce. (and nor is Pike)
I suppose for me it's a matter of intent, but comedians and writers have to take responibility for the effects of what they say

Don't think that anyone has raised this point .
If it was used a a cheap and cheerful filler programme and it was decided that part of the content required editing , why didn't they just pick another episode that didn't . Surely it would be cheaper/easier?

Seems that somewhere down the line in the past some attempt ( probably for export purposes ) to sanitise episode that could be deemed to be 'inappropriate ' .

I reckon that while the editing is for me and many here reprehensible because it retrospecively applies todays standards on things/words/attitudes of the past , it probably wasn't a deliberate action at the time of broadcast,but done sometime ago .

The occasionally racist attitudes/language in Fawlty Towers has survived the countless repeats. But for how long?

I think the only 'responsibility' a comedy writer has is to be funny.

Richard, do you make the distinction between audiences - would you be happy about a bunch of informed comedy fans watching 'racist' sitcoms as part of their interest in television? If so, why are they different to a bunch of 'ordinary' people? Same question I asked Jessica, really.

>Being shown as part of a relic night, or as a sitcom for 'normal' viewers - why should there be a difference?

I wasn't distinguishing between the viewers - rather the context of the show.

>Both should see it uncut, and be credited with the intelligence to understand why a line exists.

I'm sure they would be capable of that. But the fact remains that including the line would *detract* from the enjoyment, not add to it. It's a weak joke with some casual racism and the programme doesn't suffer without it. Why leave it in?

And it *is* casual racism, which I don't tend to think is something worth showing on TV. That may be an unpopular opinion amongst the enlightened crowd here, but I'm afraid I have to hold to it.

But keep campaigning for the right to hear racist language on light entertainment TV - I'm sure Mr. Bushell will be grateful.

Oh - could someone follow this post with an hilarious peice of genuine (but ironic!) racism? That always raises the tone of this kind of thread.

I don't think Lenny Bruce and Pike are attempting to do the same thing.

I've always thought Ian Valentine's portrayal of Pike was spookily similar to some recordings of Lenny Bruce, especially his 'oooh Uncle Arthur'

>But keep campaigning for the right to hear racist language on light entertainment TV - I'm sure Mr. Bushell will be grateful.

I didn't mean that, and you know it. You're one to talk about cheap jokes...

>>But keep campaigning for the right to hear racist language on light entertainment TV - I'm sure Mr. Bushell will be grateful.
>
>I didn't mean that, and you know it. You're one to talk about cheap jokes...

I know, I know. I was referring more to other people's way of addressing the subject. More to the point, it detracted from the main thrust of my argument.. sorry about that.

However, you can't escape the fact that Garry Bushell would be pleased to see language like that left in there. Different motivations, I imagine, but the consequences are the same.

It's a weak joke with some casual racism and the programme doesn't suffer without it. Why leave it in?
>
Quite agree that the programme doesn't suffer without it but as of being a 'weak joke', it's not not a joke of any kind, nor is it presented as such, It's a children's rhyme. Which Pike's character would use.

>Quite agree that the programme doesn't suffer without it but as of being a 'weak joke', it's not not a joke of any kind, nor is it presented as such, It's a children's rhyme. Which Pike's character would use.

Yes, I did realise that. Sorry I didn't make that clearer.

Also, there have never been any genuinely 'racist sitcoms' - at worst, just satires *on* racism that weren't very good. All individual racist lines (Del Boy saying 'Paki' etc - *that* disappeared pretty sharpish) can be justified in terms of character.

But far easier to sneer at those misguided 70s idiots, eh? Thank god we're all so informed nowadays.

>Also, there have never been any genuinely 'racist sitcoms' - at worst, just satires *on* racism that weren't very good.

At risk of sounding misguided, I think that 'Mind Your Language' was racist. Insofar as it derived much of its humour from the portrayal of other nations and/or races as stereotypes. I'm willing to be convinced otherwise, mind.

Cheerio

>Also, there have never been any genuinely 'racist sitcoms' - at worst, just satires *on* racism that weren't very good.

Well, I can't disagree with you there. Largely because I haven't seen many of the accused 'poisonous' shows, for obvious reasons.

>All individual racist lines (Del Boy saying 'Paki' etc - *that* disappeared pretty sharpish) can be justified in terms of character.

Many things can be justified in terms of character. But these aren't supposed to be totally realistic people - they are comedy creations. Why choose to invoke one 'believable' element of Del Boy's character while ignoring others? You could easily justify him being a drug-dealer as part of his character if you really wanted to. Sitcoms are always contrived, aren't they?

>But far easier to sneer at those misguided 70s idiots, eh? Thank god we're all so informed nowadays.

I didn't sneer. Read everything I have written on this thread and you won't find me criticising the writers or performers once. Of course the script was a product of its time - and that's still part of its charm.

>>Also, there have never been any genuinely 'racist sitcoms' - at worst, just satires *on* racism that weren't very good.
>
>At risk of sounding misguided, I think that 'Mind Your Language' was racist. Insofar as it derived much of its humour from the portrayal of other nations and/or races as stereotypes. I'm willing to be convinced otherwise, mind.
>
>Cheerio

True - as it was repeated on Saturday afternoons as late as '97-98 on LWT , it was poor stereotypes delivering poor catchphrases on cue. Whatever the intention is comes across as racist now .
Odd thing is that I remember watching it as a kid and really enjoying it . The mind plays funny tricks on you ...

>>I think that 'Mind Your Language' was racist.

Its intent wasn't nasty. Also, it was based on satirical books written by Leo 'Joys of Yiddish' Rosten, which nobody ever mentions.

>True - as it was repeated on Saturday afternoons as late as '97-98 on LWT , it was poor stereotypes delivering poor catchphrases on cue. Whatever the intention is comes across as racist now .

It came across as racist to me then. I would've been about 8 or so.

>Odd thing is that I remember watching it as a kid and really enjoying it . The mind plays funny tricks on you ...

Well, children are hardly the barometer of comedy taste, though, eh? I used to think dog poo was funny. Now, though... actually, it is quite funny. I take it back.

>At risk of sounding misguided, I think that 'Mind Your Language' was racist. Insofar as it derived much of its humour from the portrayal of other nations and/or races as stereotypes. I'm willing to be convinced otherwise, mind.

I think that 'Mind Your Language' is not racist because the foreign students portrayed actually got off their arses and made a real effort to learn a language that was strange to them and succeeding far better than most of us in speaking another language. Their antics on the way may have had the odd amusing moment but always we were sympathetic to their efforts and were not portrayed in a negative way.

If people tuned in to laugh at the foreigners that is their problem but it should be left to the viewers to decide if something is racist, not video editors chopping up a show with hindsight.

>I think that 'Mind Your Language' is not racist because the foreign students portrayed actually got off their arses and made a real effort to learn a language that was strange to them and succeeding far better than most of us in speaking another language. Their antics on the way may have had the odd amusing moment but always we were sympathetic to their efforts and were not portrayed in a negative way.

Well, I was a very sensitive child. I have to admit that I've not seen it recently (last 10 years or so), but that's been more through lack of effort on my part than it being censored by TV networks, which is why I claimed that I'm willing to be persuaded. To the best of my recollection, though, the joke was pointedly "here is a German woman, she acts exactly as you would expect a stereotype to act if you'd never actually met one", and so on.

Probably best for me to shut up until I've seen it.

Cheerio

I don't think the racist programmes of the 70s should be wiped out. Quite the opposite they are a useful social document in a similar way to the way "Mein Kampf" is a useful social document. And one that should be studied and kept as a reminder of the way things once were.
And I think if people are interested in watching them then they should be allowed to. But that doesn't mean they should be broadcast on prime time TV. Because I am afraid that the word nigger is offensive to people, both white and black. Much more so than almost any other word I can think of.

It would be easy to dub the word in Pike's speech to an inoffensive word and it would still retain it's childish nature without needlessly offending people. And in fact make no difference to the show.

I agree that censorship is annoying and I agree that it is patronising at times. But if you genuinely can't see the difference in this case (and don't understand what I have said fairly clearly several times) then I think you are getting too wrapped up in it and need to look at the bigger picture. We live in a multicultural society and although I think most of us have no problem with that (and in fact think it is a great thing) that tensions still exist. If the word had been left in there would have been a massive amount of protest and I don't think that was ever what anyone involved in Dad's Army (a wonderful heartwarming programme) would have wanted. I wouldn't be surprised if the writers themselves had requested the removal of the word. I know I would have done if it was me.

And yes you shouldn't judge the people of yesteryear by the standards of today, but nor does that mean that their offensive material should be shown in a context which is inappropriate now.

It's absolutely clear why the BBC would censor the word. It doesn't matter whether it was acceptable at the time of broadcast. It isn't acceptable now

I am all for using comedy as a way of challenging social mores and exposing hypocrisy, but I think a lot of the genuinely racist stuff from the 70s is nasty in intent and reveals much the the nasty underbelly of our society then.As such it is embarrassing to see it put out on TV now. But like I have said I think people who want to see it should be able to. And I don't think Dad's Army falls into this cateogary. And as I said before the fact that fuzzy wuzzy is not censored shows that the BBC are staying true to the original intentions of the writers

>If people tuned in to laugh at the foreigners that is their problem but it should be left to the viewers to decide if something is racist, not video editors chopping up a show with hindsight.
>

I believe that old programmes should be shown as they were made.

As far as Mind Your Language (and Love Thy Neighbour, etc.) goes, I don't believe it is racist - in the sense of promoting genuine race hatred. It was just a crappy sitcom which made use of 'funny foreigners' in a way that much comedy of the time did. Not necessarily pleasant, but hardly a petrol bomb through the window of a house in Southall.

Saying that has now put into my mind the ludicrous but amusing idea of Vince Powell accepting backhanders from John Tyndall and Martin Webster to foment racial hatred through a lousy sitcom script. "Vince my boy, you keep the comedy coon and wacky Paki lines coming and you'll be minister for culture in our first government."

However, it should also be pointed out that not all the concerns about Mind Your Language have necessarily come up in hindsight. Isaac knows better than anyone else what End of Part One had to say about MYL, and that was in 1978.

When I started this thread last night, it was simply to carry on the tradition of "Edit Spotting", and I never thought we'd get into a deep discussion about censorship and racism! Having read all the posts, I have to say I think Richard Herring has pretty much hit the nail on the head. At first, I was a bit annoyed at this seemingly "politically correct" edit, but like Richard said, the BBC has a responsibility to look at the wider picture or the overall situation, and it probably would have caused trouble if Pike's line had been left in. It wasn't at all crucial to the plot and its absence didn't detract from the show.

The full unedited episode, should you wish to see it, is availiable anyway on BBC video. But, strangely, my father taped this episode when it was repeated during the early nineties, and I've just checked it and discovered that Pike's line is included - in fact the whole sequence was left intact. So when exactly did the BBC decide it had to go?
Presumably, this early nineties repeat showing didn't cause any protests? Or did it?

Censorship is a thorny issue - it creates contradictions and anomalies, but what other alternative is there? Compared to many other old shows, I suspect Dad's Army requires relatively little consideration as to what would cause offence nowadays. There is an irony, though, surely - on the same night, words like "motherfucker" being broadcast by a channel that wouldn't have dared do so ten years ago, yet another word that, in this particular show up until now, has been allowed to go out, is now curtailed. How many people are offended by the use of the words "fuck" "cunt", etc, yet are just told, if you don't like it you don't have to watch it? Where does free speech end and censorship begin? Who decides where this line is? By what authority?

Well, I suppose by tomorrow night everybody will be talking about Brass Eye again. Now there's another show that's been censored!

What trouble would it have caused for it to be left in? Really? A few complaints, granted, but nothing else.

And in 'Dad's Army', too? Possibly the most harmless show ever. Can't see who would have complained.

>I don't think the racist programmes of the 70s should be wiped out. Quite the opposite they are a useful social document in a similar way to the way "Mein Kampf" is a useful social document. And one that should be studied and kept as a reminder of the way things once were.


Hang on, Richard, you're not seriously comparing these shows to Mein Kampf, are you? Mind Your Language and its ilk were never intentionally designed to incite racial hatred, as you well know. Comparing a 70's sitcom to fascist propaganda is way off the mark.

The real problem with Mind Your Language was the way that the students' command of English was actually pretty sophisticated until the moment the lessons began.

Rich, would you be as happy for something in Fist Of Fun to be similarly edited out or overdubbed if it was repeated?

This isn't a deliberately provocative question, by the way. I'm genuinely interested to know what you think.

>Rich, would you be as happy for something in Fist Of Fun to be similarly edited out or overdubbed if it was repeated?

Well that all depends on whether jokes about chew bars and pants become the new racism in 25 years time.

They cut a line out of tonight's Porridge repeat... just after Godber mentions they're working together like negro slaves in the plantations, he flings some mud near Fletch.

The cut line is something like "if you keep digging like that we're gonna look like 'em an' all".

Woohoo, my first proper edit-spot. I feel all warm and angry.

>>Rich, would you be as happy for something in Fist Of Fun to be similarly edited out or overdubbed if it was repeated?
>
>Well that all depends on whether jokes about chew bars and pants become the new racism in 25 years time.

Well, how about people from Somerset, then? I'd find young Mr Herring's comments in FoF pretty offensive if I lived in a cave in Cheddar.
>

If I said nigger on FOF I would hope that it would be overdubbed.
I'm not talking about Mind your language (in fact I was largely talking about dad's army, but the stuff I think is unpleasant is some of the remarks in the comedians and the wheeltappers and shunters thing which are shown uncut as fara s I can see.

I said it was similar to Mein Kampf. I deliberately chose the word similar and not the words "the same".
I think the attitude of Bernard Manning in the 70s is comparable to the words of Hitler in the 20s in that they were not shouted down at the time, but were both clearly wrong and nasty. And I wouldn't like either of them broadcast into my home without my express desire to see them (which I want to have the choice to have)
I don't think that by reading Mein Kampf I will become a fascist. I don't think by seeing BM's "light hearted" comments on racial relations I will become a racist. They are similar, but not the same.

I also think there is humour to be got out of the subjects of race and prejudice (and that's one of the things we attempt to do on TGP) and there are plenty of comics who do that right (yes Lenny Bruce and many others) who you know are coming from the right place with it.
I don't believe BM is one of them from the TV work I've seen (though I suspect he might be doing something interesting nowadays and live- it can only be a suspicion, I don't know. And I believe he has a right to say what he thinks)

I used to love Mind your language as a child. When I have seen it since it has seemed to me to be a pile of shit both in comedy and sterotype terms. But quite enjoyable shit as it goes.

Ultimately I am more in favour of freedom of expression over anything else. But that doesn't mean you can't point out when the expression is rubbish, or that there aren't cases when changing stuff is justified. I think in the case of Pike's comment and in the dog called Nigger in the Dambusters there is nothing to lose by changing it. And if you can't see that I think you're an arse!

I hope that answers all your questions. I have attempted to be as clear as possible, but look forward to being misinterpreted anyway

>>I don't believe BM is one of them from the TV work I've seen (though I suspect he might be doing something interesting nowadays and live- it can only be a suspicion, I don't know. And I believe he has a right to say what he thinks)

So can we expect to see you in a new double-act with the lovely Bernard? I've also seen some of the Wheeltappers and Comedians repeats and the most disturbing bits were the black and/or Irish comedians making racist jokes about themselves. I suppose that's what was expected of them?

Maybe they didn't mind?

Although I think you'd have to ask them. And force them to tell you the truth.

>If I said nigger on FOF I would hope that it would be overdubbed.

No, I meant stuff you actually did say. For example, references to Princess Diana that could be crudely overdubbed or hacked out.

I can accept that the word might offend. I can accept that tempering with what is, effectively, a historical document, might be OK if you want to preserve its image in the general group mind. Never mind pretending its a thing of its time and showing it as such, let's pretend it's brand new - Christ, why not re-colourise?

So, yes, edit the offensive words. Though, at that time of night - given you can get away with fuck and cunt at that time of night, I really don't... no, nver mind, it's fine. There's nothing wrong with editing the word. It was probably a good decision, and there are good reasons for it.

In which case, why the hell haven't the Beeb edited all references to the Home Guard out of 'Dad's Army'? Now that we know the HG weren't actually a bunch of sweet little incompetents who bravely got through the war doing no harm, but were actually dangerously, wilfully incompetent - mutilating themselves and each, and murdering members of the general public?

Seriously.

(Even better idea - can we just stop showing this series completely?)

>>If I said nigger on FOF I would hope that
>>it would be overdubbed.
>
>No, I meant stuff you actually did say. For
>example, references to Princess Diana that
>could be crudely overdubbed or hacked out.

They'd pretty much have to be lost, I imagine. I wonder if they'd cut out the Baroness Young confusion - especially if she becomes the new Chair of the Governors.

I know, let's ask one of the many black contributors to this forum what they think.