Jump to content

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 273
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Paid Members

The whole thing has been frankly bizarre tbh. I'm in no way a fan of 'Dapper' & I'm less of a fan of people trying to get things banned that they don't like or people pretending that someone who’s job is not being serious is being serious.

 

 

My expectations of DL & his fans was already pretty low but having seen acts I like & respect act exactly the same way as people they criticised when Frankie Boyle was in the firing line has been pretty depressing. I can’t help but think the best approach would’ve been to ignore him, let him have his 15 minutes & fade away. Rather than giving him oodles of free publicity & letting him become another ‘victim’ of ‘PC Culture’. By the very nature of his fan demographic & material I doubt he’d have had a long & lucrative career, as proven by his viewing figures. I’m willing to bet decent money that the second leg of his tour in bigger rooms has had a ticket boost from all this media traffic.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Paid Members

But you can't take that approach with everything that is wrong, can you? He made some downright offensive jokes and comments and yes highlighting the issue has brought him in the limelight even more, but that's always going to be a repercussion isn't it? I don't think you can take the 'ignore him and he might go away' stance. Otherwise that blurs the precedence of what is and isn't an acceptable thing to do and say whilst getting away with it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Paid Members

No, you can’t take that approach with everything that’s wrong. If a policeman, politician, teacher, judge etc said those things it’d be a completely different situation than if a comedian said it. It’s a matter of situation & context. If we’re going to start taking things seriously that people say, solely & completely in jest. Knowing full well that they’re said in jest then it’s going to be a big task. What's 'offensive' & 'acceptable' is completely subjective. If I don't like something I don't watch it.

 

This whole thing strikes me as little bit of using DL as an easy target to avoid a much wider & uncomfortable discussion. Why is there seemingly a rise in misogynistic behaviour? And more importantly, why do young women believe this is acceptable? ‘Fuck that, let’s just blame Childs Play 3 & have done with it’.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It just reminds me of the Daily Mail's campaigns against Jerry Springer the Opera and Brasseye, albeit probably more well meaning. Let people be adults and judge for themselves. Let's face it, if you are one of the 100k watching it on ITV2 then you are way beyond saving as a human being. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

It just reminds me of the Daily Mail's campaigns against Jerry Springer the Opera and Brasseye, albeit probably more well meaning. Let people be adults and judge for themselves. Let's face it, if you are one of the 100k watching it on ITV2 then you are way beyond saving as a human being. 

 

I expect a good chunk of that 100K were under 16 years old, though. Yes they will still follow people like Dapper Laughs on social media but broadcasting companies have a moral duty to protect their younger, easily influenced audience from material like that. 

Edited by Undefeated Steak
Link to post
Share on other sites

Whilst I dont think they are altogether comparable, it reminds me of when Nick Griffin was going to be on Question Time. Now, I was all in favour of the BBC not giving him a platform but in hindsight, it was the best thing to happen to speed up the demise of his party.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Paid Members

10pm I think? Definitely post watershed

 

Whilst I dont think they are altogether comparable, it reminds me of when Nick Griffin was going to be on Question Time. Now, I was all in favour of the BBC not giving him a platform but in hindsight, it was the best thing to happen to speed up the demise of his party.

 

 

I think that's a pretty good example. I was in favour of Griffin being given a platform as I'd rather he be challenged on his policies than being made a martyr & having the defence of the 'liberal media silencing him'. Let's get it out in the open & let the public decide. Which in the case of Dapper Laughs & his paltry ratings was on the way to happening anyway.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

It just reminds me of the Daily Mail's campaigns against Jerry Springer the Opera and Brasseye, albeit probably more well meaning. Let people be adults and judge for themselves. Let's face it, if you are one of the 100k watching it on ITV2 then you are way beyond saving as a human being. 

 

I expect a good chunk of that 100K were under 16 years old, though. Yes they will still follow people like Dapper Laughs on social media but broadcasting companies have a moral duty to protect their younger, easily influenced audience from material like that. 

 

 

Part of growing up and becoming an adult is coming to your own conclusions about things. Besides banning stuff just makes it more exciting. When I was a kid in the mid 80s, I might never have been a moustachioed leather clad Frankie Goes to Hollywood fan had Mike Reid not banned it from radio one. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
×
×
  • Create New...