17 replies to this topic

[Wolf O'Donnell]

So even in death, Margaret Thatcher is stirring up arguments. Albeit this is admittedly Northerners and people on the left, who got a bit butt-hurt by Thatcher's policies. Now this isn't a topic about her policies. I wasn't too keen on her privatising the water company (primarily because privatisation of the water company didn't work on a free market sense - you can't choose who provides your water, so there's no real competition).

That's all irrelevant.

Some people have decided to protest her. They've done it by buying the song, Ding Dong, the Witch is Dead. It's shot up to the charts and now the hapless BBC and even commercial radio stations are in a bind.

If they play the song, they're being disrespectful to someone who's died: a person who may have had questionable politics, but was otherwise a person who cared for children and loved her own children and grandchildren. Furthermore, by playing the song, you're siding with those who decided on the campaign in the first place.

If they don't play the song, well that's censoring. You're playing all the other songs. Why not Ding Dong the Witch is Dead? Besides, if you don't play the song, you're agreeing with the other side.

Now this brings up all sorts of questions:

• Is it ever acceptable to speak ill of the dead?
• What should the radio stations do?

Now BBC Radio 1 has already come up wtih a compromise. They will only air a "clip of it in a news environment."

[Hana-Nezumi]

Even if they disagreed with her policies... it's really dumb and immature to express it that way. To me it actually makes the people who were against her look LESS credible when they're saying juvenile things like "Ding dong! The witch is dead!" and "Boo-hoo, she took away our milk!"

Well, I would consider the fact that it's controversial to be plenty enough reason in itself for the stations to not want to get involved and choose not to air the song. And then there's also the fact that the whole thing is stupid.

[Egann]

Most people can sit down and at least try to have a coherent discussion about politics. Maybe not succeed, but at least try.

That's not true with political figures. My experience is that politicians who happen to be in someone's party are regarded something like "What would happen if Jesus, Buddha, and Ghandi had a baby" and if they're of a different party, they're mustache-twirling Bond villains.

Distance yourself from your own attitudes and appraise what happened fairly? 'Ain't nobody does that.

So I don't have any problem with saying a few negative things about someone who's recently died...so long as they are fair criticisms spoken in the hopes others will learn from them. This song? It depends. I confess, I've got a soft spot for Paul Shanklin songs because he takes political feelings and does something constructive with it, namely make me laugh. If this is like that, I don't really have a problem.

If it's just passing gas in the face of the deceased, that's different.

Either way, it's fine for radio stations to decline to air it for whatever reason. Maybe a political discussion will split their fan base, or perhaps they just think it's in bad taste, but it is their right to curate their own selection of songs for their listeners. Just don't deny the song exists if someone requests it: explain why you're not airing it.

The BBC is possibly a different matter, but even there I don't see it being an issue. Censorship is not a news outlet omitting information, it's destroying something to make spreading it impossible. Arguably simply ignoring it isn't good enough, but even then the BBC can get away with just discussing it. They're under no obligation to air it themselves so long as it is available elsewhere.

[Kwicky Koala]

It happened. Whatever you think of it, its in the charts, so they should play it. They're trying to portray a reality that doesn't exist, one where the opponents of Thatcher haven't made themselves heard.

Furthermore, I don't understand the issue of sensitivity towards the deceased. She was hated when she was alive, but she's not allowed to be hated when she's dead? Its not like she's around to hear it. It would be different if she died young, or in "tragic" circumstances, but she was old and clearly on her way out. No, death is the defining moment because its when her supporters are starting to canonise her. And the status quo, which of course includes the BBC, are going along with it by impeding all that vocal opposition.

[Showsni]

Maybe they could compromise by having a minute's silence for her every other time they would normally play the song.

Really, though, it seems pretty mean spirited of people to try and make themselves heard in their dislike of her just because she's died. They've had, what, 34 years since she was first elected in which they could have shown their displeasure, and instead they've waited until now when she's dead and can't fight back and her family are mourning her?

[Selena]

Furthermore, I don't understand the issue of sensitivity towards the deceased.

I've never understood this either. Well, I understand it, but it's both hypocritical and nonsensical.

Using another prominent British figure, recall the death of Princess Diana. After her death, she was regarded as a saint who could do no wrong, and it was reprehensible to talk badly about her. But in the months leading up to her death, everyone in the media -- both British and foreign -- was calling her a whore for getting involved with people following her split from Charles. This video's a good remnant of that period (about halfway through).

So, if you're gonna spend a long time badmouthing someone, there's no sense in "taking it back" after they've died. That's not what anyone actually feels, and it's only done to "honor the dead." It's not genuine.

I'm sure the family wouldn't approve, but they also wouldn't have approved of all the things said while she was alive, either. They've had a long time to get used to the insults, so you might as well let people do their thing.



But when it comes to the BBC taking part in this, well... I'm not sure how much of it is run by the state nowadays. That would have an impact on matters. If it's still primarily state-run, then it'd be unprofessional of them to do anything to disrespect a fellow public servant, even if people requested them to. They usually have protocol for that. If the BBC is mostly private now, then the consumer ultimately rules.


Although, shit! I don't remember anyone getting this ecstatic/mournful when Reagan died! Or maybe I just wasn't paying attention.

[Veteran]

The beeb should've played it in full for purely academic reasons. They've been down this road before and look where it got them. At least this one wasn't as big a thing as those before it.

Regarding the song even getting in the charts - it's all hilarious! Is it in bad taste? Yes. Could it have been in worse taste? Certainly. Think of all the songs they could've chosen and they went with the Munchkins? It's as if the Internet of the North all cried out in one voice.

[Oberon Storm]

Simply refusing to play something is not censorship. There is nothing that says they should be compelled to do it for any reason.

[Veteran]

Other than it being the chart show.

[Wolf O'Donnell]

Oh yes. Didn't I make that clear in my first post? My apologies. We're talking about chart shows here, shows that go out of their way to play the top ten songs.

[Oberon Storm]

Oh.. Well in that case... That just makes the whole thing dumb.

Edited by Chief Fire Storm, 16 April 2013 - 03:22 PM.

[Alastair]

The purpose of the Top 40 chart is to play the 40 best selling songs. That is its remit. The songs that are played may well reflect badly on the British public, but in no way can fault be ascribed to the BBC.

Whether the song should be played at other times is open to debate. However, I do not see how a commercial chart can be edited on grounds of personal taste (barring obscene lyrics which break public broadcasting laws). If it is acceptable to skip a song for being in poor taste, then why not skip songs that are simply terrible (the £1 fish song recently made it into our charts - if you haven't heard it consider yourself lucky).

[Hana-Nezumi]

Except, isn't the BBC a public company? And wasn't Thatcher a PRIME MINISTER?

Of course they wouldn't play it, it would be highly inappropriate to, no matter if it's on the charts. That's common sense. Is it censorship? I guess. But playing a song that got on the charts because of a campaign to celebrate a public official's death is just not something the BBC is in a position to do, period.

[Veteran]

System of a Down got a Christmas number 1 because people bought it in protest against yet another talent show release. It wasn't there on musical merit, it was there to say "Fuck you I won't do what you tell me."

Okay, I'm comparing apples with oranges, but the principle is essentially the same. A protest song is a protest song regardless of the cause. Ban one you have to ban them all because where's the distinction?

I guess the line in the sand is hate crimes. So is this song a hate crime? People aren't glad she's dead because she's a woman, or gay, or black, or ginger. They're glad she's dead because she did things to them, and those deeds have consequences.

[Hana-Nezumi]

It's not "banned", they're just not playing it on the show because it's inappropriate. I don't see anything wrong with that. It's a stupid "protest" anyways. Could they have picked a more juvenile song?

[Veteran]

Frankie Goes To Hollywood was deemed inappropriate too.

[Khallos]

The problem with being a public figure is that you sacrifice some of your freedoms but presenting yourself to public scrutiny in life and death. If you willingly make yourself known to the population you become more than just a person, you become a figure, a symbol, an idea. And in my mind you can perfectly attack ideas, Thatcher was not stupid, she likely would have felt embarrassed to need defending (whatever you can say of her, she spoke her mind and usually stuck to it).

I feel in the UK the real problem was the hypocrisy, naturally the easiest person to compare her with could be Hitler or Saddam. Unfortunately that is hyperbole and a much better comparison would be the late President of Venezuela, Hugo Chavez who at least was close to the former Mayor of London's heart, if not many lefties. Of course he wasn't British, the impact is lesser but there was still a certain degree of 'that red madman is dead, maybe South America will be more stable'. The issue being is you can say Thatcher is monster because she was chummy with mass murderers and tyrants like Pinochet and Hussein, and her cruel privatisation of Britain. In the same way Chavez is a monster because he was mates with bigoted butchers like Ahmadinejad and Assad, while at home his mad privatisation of agriculture and the food industry was tyranical. Sadly not many in Britain said both, just because someone has died doesn't mean you whitewash their life and declare them a Saint, nor do you damn their name to be wiped from history.

You step in the lime light and your actions are judged to the grave. Some people loathed Thatcher, others loved her. I seem to mainly hear praise from the status quo and rage from the 'people', but as said previously a sad lack of objective criticism.


Also if a song gets to the top of the charts unless it has explicit lyrics, it should be played. It's no one's fault if people have voted with their wallets.

Edited by Khallos, 16 April 2013 - 06:59 PM.

[Hana-Nezumi]

Frankie Goes To Hollywood was deemed inappropriate too.

What? There's not really a comparison, they were intentionally trying to shock people and make waves, their music was deemed obscene for entirely different reasons than this, it was a current release by a current band making it a situation where the censorship was actually cutting them out of deserved publicity, AND that was 3 decades ago.

I would be all for trying to get it on the air if the song they chose had any kind of meaningful political message but it doesn't. This is just people saying "lol, she was a bitch". And even if it was meaningful I wouldn't expect it to be played on the public radio, that's what HAPPENS to controversial music. I'm fine with people celebrating her death privately, in fact I encourage it if that's what people feel they need to do. But as long as they have even a small grain of respect for the recently deceased and the British government itself, a public radio station like the BBC would never play a song in celebration of a public official's death. It's obvious and unavoidable as long as censorship exists.