A nice lady from the BBC Vision has just told us why 'the accused' is a great piece of work:
'The key isn't whether it's factual but whether it's a good piece of fiction that is important. Not only that but Jimmy McGovern's father was in the army and it isn't a 'docudrama'. This is merely a set of fictional stories about moral scenarios and we're sure that people can discern between fact and fiction.'
Let's look at some of the things said regarding this programme:
'I can't believe that elements of this don't go on.'
'The helpline number at the end of the piece serves to confirm that it went on, after all 'why would they ask people who have been subject to things in the programme to contact them if it hadn't happened?'
Think the BBC have nailed this one, don't you?
2 comments:
"This is merely a set of fictional stories about moral scenarios and we're sure that people can discern between fact and fiction."
Well, I expect my fiction to be well researched and to create plausible scenarios. Genres place certain expectations on the audience - I don't expect to learn much science from Doctor Who or Star Trek; I don't expect Police Academy to reveal great truths about American law enforcement. I do however expect series like Morse or Frost to give a reasonably realistic (if in some respects exaggerated or selective) depiction of police procedure and some of the stresses of the job. Most writers and producers would like those engaged in the line of work depicted to recognise their life in the work of fiction. And most of us know how irritating it can be when drama (even comedy) "gets it wrong" with something we know about ("Vicar of Dibley" vs. "Rev", for example).
The BBC (and Jimmy McGovern) seem to be trying to have their cake and eat it in this instance. Either it was not properly researched (in which case it should have been), or they should have stood by the points they were trying to make (and said, "this type of thing could happen"). The producer was very unconvincing and, to me at any rate, rather disingenuous this morning on the Today programme.
I was equally unimpressed, especially as the only yardstick was that it was 'good fiction'!
The facile addition that the writer's Father had served in the Army during the war and (proudly proclaimed) that he'd never fired his weapon in conflict had nothing at all to do with the story on offer last night either.
As you say - researched and accurate or fiction that stands as such but they have to decide which - cake cannot be retained after eating :)
PAx
Post a Comment