[FERAL SHARKEY]

at first i thought wtf then did i imagine this -turned to the wife who looked at me like wtf ,
so its real .
http://www.nydailynews.com/entertain...y_glitter.html

i dont know what to make of this actually
what are your thoughts ?

[garcia]

Trivializes the issues by bringing celebrity into it.

[U96]

I think Gary Glitter is a bad man.
However.I did a double take when i saw the title of the programme.I think it's on this week?.
I wouldn't allow it to be broadcast.Purely for the sole reason,that it's possible it may incite extreme physical violence to said person.And that's simply not on.
Yes.We all know what he's done.But he's commited the crime and he's done his time.What next?,lynch mobs and vigilanties?.

[FERAL SHARKEY]

im no glitter fan myself he is a bad man ,
however this programme unsettles me .

[Doll Feet]

As far as I'm aware he isn't a pederast.

[BigBHM]

Originally Posted by Doll Feet

As far as I'm aware he isn't a pederast.

In reality he has never been accused or charged with that particular act, but perhaps in the 'show' he has.

I am not even going to bother commenting n the show itself, it is just wrong on so many levels.
And no, I am not putting up a defence for Glitter either.

[U96]

Originally Posted by FERAL SHARKEY

im no glitter fan myself he is a bad man ,
however this programme unsettles me .

From my TV mag.
Monday 9th Nov. C4 9pm. 'The Execution of Gary Glitter'.

'Drama set in an imaginary Britain in which the death penalty has been re-introduced,demonstrating the possible consequences of capital punishment in the UK.
An upsurge in public anger forces an amendment to the Human Rights Act,and the first person to be tried under the new Capital Crimes Against Children legislation is Paul Gadd,better known as Gary Glitter'.

I'd put money on it,there's an injunction to stop it being broadcast.

[cazmac]

Shame it's only fiction as far as i'm concerned.

[SpecialClub]

This sort of programming is what Channel 4 is best at. Can't wait.

Hope it's as realistic as possible.

[U96]

Originally Posted by SpecialClub

This sort of programming is what Channel 4 is best at. Can't wait.

Hope it's as realistic as possible.

Double standards by C4.
They throw out poor Emily from BB (in the early hours of the morning).For innocently saying the 'N' word in conversation to Charlie.No questions asked.

Then they show this.I guess the PC lynch mob runs C4.

[alternate]

Doesn't the trailer claim that half of the counrty wants to bring bang hanging? I would like to see the evidence of that survey. Was it a Sky News viewer poll?

[Dr. Jan Itor]

Channel 4 argue that the show takes a look at what might happen if those who wish to see convicted paedophiles face the death penalty got their way, and I think on that basis I think such a show is a good idea. However, having Gary Glitter as the paedophile rather than a fictional character appears to be only about publicity, and for me detracts from what could otherwise have been an interesting programme.

[c0lefax]

Originally Posted by alternate

Doesn't the trailer claim that half of the counrty wants to bring bang hanging? I would like to see the evidence of that survey. Was it a Sky News viewer poll?

"Before making the show, Channel 4 commissioned a study in which it found 70% of those surveyed said the death penalty should be reintroduced for certain crimes." Source: Link on OP.

I think there would be a quite a big number but 70% sounds a bit high to me. I've no idea on a figure but I really doubt it would be over 50% if there was a proper poll.

[U96]

Originally Posted by Dr. Jan Itor

Channel 4 argue that the show takes a look at what might happen if those who wish to see convicted paedophiles face the death penalty got their way, and I think on that basis I think such a show is a good idea. However, having Gary Glitter as the paedophile rather than a fictional character appears to be only about publicity, and for me detracts from what could otherwise have been an interesting programme.

Totally agree.By using a real life person,they are opening up a huge can of worms for themselves.
I hope they have good lawyers.

[phil solo]

Originally Posted by U96

I think Gary Glitter is a bad man.
However.I did a double take when i saw the title of the programme.I think it's on this week?.
I wouldn't allow it to be broadcast.Purely for the sole reason,that it's possible it may incite extreme physical violence to said person.And that's simply not on.
Yes.We all know what he's done.But he's commited the crime and he's done his time.What next?,lynch mobs and vigilanties?.

Kind of think that is the point both of the show and the provocative title, to make us think about and perhaps re-think, some of our more savage attitudes toward crime and punishment.

[phil solo]

Originally Posted by Dr. Jan Itor

Channel 4 argue that the show takes a look at what might happen if those who wish to see convicted paedophiles face the death penalty got their way, and I think on that basis I think such a show is a good idea. However, having Gary Glitter as the paedophile rather than a fictional character appears to be only about publicity, and for me detracts from what could otherwise have been an interesting programme.

Let's face it, the slavering vengeance-seeking tabloid mob would never watch such a show about a fictional capital execution, and consequently wouldn't be encouraged to think about the real implications and issues.

Choosing a real-life 'demonised' individual is deliberate. Many people will watch this specifically wanting to see Glitter "get what he deserves", ideally the film will throw this back at the audience and expose them to the idea that such emotional responses are not a suitable basis upon which a system of justice can reasonably be founded.

[Tiffani]

So are CH4 going to accept responsiblity if Gary Glitter is attacked by someone after this programme airs. The only reason they are using Gary Glitter and not some fictional character is because they know loads more people will be watching.

[starsburn]

The premise is an interesting idea but by using a real life personality as an example is taking it way too far. Without the Gary Glitter aspect I might have watched but as it is I will find it far too uncomfortable.

I'm no Glitter fan/defender either. I just think involving a real figure in something like this is a huge no-no. I'm not a supporter of censorship but C4 have crossed a line here.

[silentNate]

Channel Four did a brilliant faux-umentary on 'The Assassination of George Bush' so I expect this will be more of the same. If its a fact that the British people want to bring back the death penalty then I'm all in favour of the issue being explored rather than seeing it put into action.

[RussellIan]

Pity it isn't Tony Blair.

But then, as sick as Glitter's crimes are, I suppose the fact that C4 deem him the figurehead that would strike more 'accord' with the GBP over what the programme confronts is valid social comment in itself.

[duke_toaster]

Originally Posted by silentNate

Channel Four did a brilliant faux-umentary on 'The Assassination of George Bush' so I expect this will be more of the same. If its a fact that the British people want to bring back the death penalty then I'm all in favour of the issue being explored rather than seeing it put into action.

I don't think it was produced by Channel Four themselves, but it certainly was rather good.

[tauran_shammy]

Originally Posted by U96

From my TV mag.
Monday 9th Nov. C4 9pm. 'The Execution of Gary Glitter'.

'Drama set in an imaginary Britain in which the death penalty has been re-introduced,demonstrating the possible consequences of capital punishment in the UK.
An upsurge in public anger forces an amendment to the Human Rights Act,and the first person to be tried under the new Capital Crimes Against Children legislation is Paul Gadd,better known as Gary Glitter'.

I'd put money on it,there's an injunction to stop it being broadcast.

hmmm the death penalty is allowed now in europe in times of "war" and "civil unrest" (blame the lisbon treaty) and this show is just propaganda to pave the way to make this acceptable.
They chose Glitter as a stooge because nobody likes him now.

[pierre_gustave]

Just trying to forget the odious Glitter.

[Radical Joe]

Originally Posted by tauran_shammy

hmmm the death penalty is allowed now in europe in times of "war" and "civil unrest" (blame the lisbon treaty) and this show is just propaganda to pave the way to make this acceptable.
They chose Glitter as a stooge because nobody likes him now.

What are you on?!

Are you seriously arguing that the underlying premise of this programme is to make people more likely to accept the Lisbon Treaty, or to accept the death penalty in times of 'war' and 'civil unrest'? Care to elaborate on your argument?

[the_saint_2005]

Originally Posted by Doll Feet

As far as I'm aware he isn't a pederast.

Who said he was? I thought he was convicted of attacks on young girls.