Barrowman the outspoken...

[fajrdrako]

I love the way John Barrowman says what he thinks. The Sun has tried a little rabble-rousing by making a controvesy out of what he was quoted as saying in Doctor Who Magazine, stirring up the notion that his comments were inappropriate.

Personally, I like it that "John also spoke of how he fancied former Doctor Christopher Ecclestone and 'sexy' current star David Tennant." Well - yes! The man has taste. Of course he fancies them, as do several zillion other fans and (no doubt) acquaintances. (Form a queue on the right.)

Controversy presumably means sales for both The Sun and Doctor Who Magazine, and publicity for Barrowman - not a bad thing. On the obverse side, seems to me that playing this up as a bad thing caters to homophobia, which is a shame. Would anyone complain if Billie Piper called them sexy? Well, no - she has, and they didn't. So it goes.

Comments

[femme-slash-fan.livejournal.com]

The sun has it's head stuck so far up it's ass it's laughable.

[fajrdrako.livejournal.com]

We have a local daily publication called The Sun, and it's even more stupid. It's a certain regrettable side of journalism that seems to exist everywhere.

[femme-slash-fan.livejournal.com]

Yeah. I find myself interested in how such bollox can sell...

[fajrdrako.livejournal.com]

People love to be scandalized, even when there't nothing to be scandalized about. Innuendo is fun. Controversy is fun. Gossip is fun. So this sort of thing sells well.

[femme-slash-fan.livejournal.com]

I am ashamed of us as a race... geez. Such rubbish sells so well and yet good writing is hard to get hold of.

[fajrdrako.livejournal.com]

Just look at the lists of books on the best-seller lists, or the paperbacks being sold at the bus depots. Not just bad writing, but unintelligent thought.

Still: if the formula is that "90% of everything is crap", then there's still that 10% of good stuff we can treasure. And foster, as long as we can tell the difference.

[femme-slash-fan.livejournal.com]

That's true....

I keep saying...

[dewline.livejournal.com]

...that Ottawa needs a third, centre-left paper to editorially counter and kick-start both the Citizen and Sun into doing their best rather than their worst.

Re: I keep saying...

[fajrdrako.livejournal.com]

That would be a terrific thing for Ottawa. Are you too young to remember the Ottawa Journal? Back in those days I preferred the Citizen, but thinking back, both papers were better than the Citizen now is.

Sadly, this is an age in which print journalism is struggling to survive and tends to go various routes to do so: (a) sensationalism and mindlessness like the Sun, (b) free advertising-based handouts like the Metro, (c) respectable conservatism like the Citizen.

All are unsatisfactory.

A Good Third Ottawa Daily...

[dewline.livejournal.com]

...would, I hope, steal blatantly from the Toronto Star's Atkinson Principles (http://www.thestar.com/aboutUs/atkinson) while still operating as an independent paper. It shouldn't be owned by any chain.

Re: A Good Third Ottawa Daily...

[fajrdrako.livejournal.com]

Yes, I believe chain-newspapers are a really bad thing. I understand why it is economically efficient to operate that way, especially for those making a lot of money from newspaper production, but it's not a good thing for the product or the readers.

As to the Journal...

[dewline.livejournal.com]

...it doesn't predate my birth, but it does predate my arrival in Ottawa as a full-time resident. I've heard of it, seen the building it used to work out of...and I wonder what I've missed.

Re: As to the Journal...

[fajrdrako.livejournal.com]

Oh, it was just another newspaper, not particularly remarkable, but it was from the days when journalistic integrity seemed more generally prominant than it is now, and there were fewer media venues for news, so papers were more inclusive and less prone to games and trivia.

[(Anonymous)]

It's The Sun. I find it's existence reassuring, because I don't know anyone who reads it and I don't agree with any of the things I've ever read in it and therefore get to feel like I'm not yet a total moron.

[fajrdrako.livejournal.com]

That sums it up rather well! I wouldn't read The Sun even if I had the chance, but I do rather enjoy chuckling at its antics from afar.

[medelle.livejournal.com]

From reading the article, the complaint was not him simply stating that he "fancied" both of them, but was more over his comments regarding the alleged size of his genitalia, and over the fact that he stated he woke up aroused from a dream.

In that particular instance (if those things are true) then I agree with him being asked to pull it back a little. Doctor Who magazine IS a magazine that is designed to be accessible to younger viewers, and in this particular instance John's comments made it less accessible.

Even as an adult, while I may find his comments amusing on the one hand, there is still such a thing as TMI and I think this falls under that category.

[(Anonymous)]

... but it wasn't him that printed them, surely? So less a case of 'bad comments' as 'wrong magazine'?

[fajrdrako.livejournal.com]

Right. One expects the interviewer to know what he or she is doing.

[fajrdrako.livejournal.com]

Seems to me its fair for anyone to say anything he wants to for a print interview - then its up to the interviewer, or their editor, to judge what is appropriate for any given publication.

Definitely Barrowman is a man for the TMI, but I don't think he should start trying to censor himself - and as far as I can tell, his comments on television and radio have always been appropriate to the venue and the audience. He didn't make the same kinds of comments on the religious show as he did on Jonathan Ross, for example, and his stint as fin-in CJ for Elaine Paige was quite different from his style on "Buzzcocks". He's a man who plays to his audience. I think perhaps he was counting on more discretion from the writer of that article than he actually got.

And though "Doctor Who Magazine" does generally try to aviod sexual content, it isn't aimed at kids - that's "Doctor Who Adventures".

[medelle.livejournal.com]

I agree to an extent with both these statments.

The magazine DID have a responsibility not to print comments that might have been innapropriate, but I think John should be a little more aware of some of things he says.

I adore his cheekiness, I adore his tounge in cheekedness and I wasn't in the interview, so maybe the interviewer had no problem with it, but my point remains that one does not need to share every tidbit of one's personal life.

OTOH, as has been pointed out it IS the Sun reporting this so the whole thing could be completely out of context.

I guess all Im saying is I see both sides of it. :) (Which I could have just said and not been so long winded)

[fajrdrako.livejournal.com]

I suspect it is blown up out of context. And in all likelihood, Barrowman probably thought some of these comments were 'off the record'.

I think generally there should be more responsibility in journalism - and less sensationalism. It could be that the reporter was taking advantage of Barrowman's love of talking.

I don't think it's the duty of a popular entertainer to watch what he says, just as it's not the duty of a novelist, poet, singer, or playwright.

I guess we're agreeing here that it's a matter of context. I would add that it's a matter of intent, too.

[silverwhistle.livejournal.com]

The Sun still publishes photos of topless glamour models on its page 3 every day, but purports to be a family newspaper...

[fajrdrako.livejournal.com]

Hmm - seems to me we have a rather obvious inconsistency there. I'm sure their basic philosophy is "anything to sell papers - anything at all".

[silverwhistle.livejournal.com]

And though "Doctor Who Magazine" does generally try to avoid sexual content, it isn't aimed at kids - that's "Doctor Who Adventures".

Yup. Everyone I know who reads DWM is over 35...

[fajrdrako.livejournal.com]

I suspect kids generally can't afford it! And the articles have more depth and substance than most such magazines, I find. Or maybe it's that the magazines from the UK have more substance than the American ones.

[silverwhistle.livejournal.com]

It's a magazine for adults, largely because it was the audience of the old series who kept it going in the long Who-less years... We are all now middle-aged.

[fajrdrako.livejournal.com]

Yes. I've known many Doctor Who fans in Canada for decades and they are all my age, or older, or close to it.

[cupati.livejournal.com]

The Sun. So called because they believe it is shining out of their own arses.

[fajrdrako.livejournal.com]

Hee! How - heliocentric!

[cupati.livejournal.com]

Yes, that too.