Slashdot Mirror
The BBC Is Heading To Court To Hunt Down a Doctor Who Leaker (gizmodo.com)
After someone leaked an incomplete scene featuring Jodie Whittaker's Thirteenth Doctor, the BBC headed to court to track down the perpetrator. Gizmodo reports: In fact, the corporation has filed an application in a California court this week in an effort to expose the person who put the leaked footage online -- hoping California's Federal Court would put pressure on Tapatalk, whose messaging service was used to upload and disseminate a non-final, 53-second clip of Whittaker's Doctor in action. The BBC isn't accusing Tapatalk of any wrongdoing; rather, it just wants details on the user that uploaded the clip, so it can attempt to isolate just where in Doctor Who's long line of production the clip got leaked.
In a statement provided to, well, itself sort of, the BBC said that it was taking court action so that fans could "enjoy the final and fully completed version of the episode when it premieres," but it's about more than the integrity of the fan experience here, given that the clip was allegedly pretty clearly unfinished. And while the BBC would prefer that no sneaky footage of one of the most highly anticipated seasons of Doctor Who in a while is out there before it says so, it especially doesn't want it out there if it's footage that's not been edited into the version fans will eventually see on TV.
In a statement provided to, well, itself sort of, the BBC said that it was taking court action so that fans could "enjoy the final and fully completed version of the episode when it premieres," but it's about more than the integrity of the fan experience here, given that the clip was allegedly pretty clearly unfinished. And while the BBC would prefer that no sneaky footage of one of the most highly anticipated seasons of Doctor Who in a while is out there before it says so, it especially doesn't want it out there if it's footage that's not been edited into the version fans will eventually see on TV.
The leaker was a Dalek.
Could always ask the GCHQ as it is in the nation interest. On the grounds of national security.
Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
The BBC has long since addressed this error. Quit wasting your time--or at least quit wasting ours.
Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
The Doctor, at one point, was given a choice about the body he would regenerate with. At the end of The War Games, the Timelords punished Patrick Troughton's Doctor and forced him to regenerate. They offered him several possible appearances, all of which he declined. After that, the Timelords chose for him.
Doctor Who has a much bigger problem than a female Doctor, which I'm not sure is a problem at all. The real issue is that the stories just haven't been that interesting the past few series. The format of the show doesn't help here. Classic Doctor Who told longer stories, allowing for more complex and more interesting plots. That was part of the appeal of the show, at least for me. The stories were simpler under Davies due to the shorter length, but were at least still interesting and compelling. When Moffat took over, the writing seemed to decline and the plots became increasingly confusing and less interesting. I don't have a whole lot of confidence that the new showrunner will improve things, and that's unfortunate. I don't care that the Doctor is a woman. I do care that the writing sucks.
You assholes erased many hours of old video already, and now you care about a 53 second clip somebody shared online.
Fuck.
You.
Re "This idiocy confirmed it."
Canon is what keeps fans returning to an old series. Change that and people find a new series. Go back to old classics.
Want a new totally new series with a modern plot? Create a totally new science fiction show and populate with new roles as needed in 2018.
The new series will be accepted or not.
Totally altering an existing series is not going to create a new show and fans will notice the needed deep plot change.
Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
Now this is a reason for bothering courts, unleashing lawyers and inquisite online activities: finding out who dared to desecrate a few unfinished seconds of a silly show.
When I first read the title this is what I thought it says: "The BBC is heading to court to hunt down a doctor who leaker". A doctor who what? When I read the summary the correct interpretation turned out to be: "The BBC is heading to court to hunt down a Doctor Who leaker". This is a nice illustration of why I dislike the habit of capitalizing almost every word in a title. The information normally conveyed through correct use of capitals is lost.
The show jumped the shark when it became all about Clara. Especially the episode where Matt Smith spent a thousand years at the Christmas planet? What the fuck?
Only the State obtains its revenue by coercion. - Murray Rothbard
Still no official explanation. ae911truth org
Does it really have to be spelled out for you?
Okay, fine: who do you know who lives in the UK, is frequently seen on the BBC, and has the ability to send information backwards through time?
I don't care if it's 90,000 hectares. That lake was not my doing.
Dr. Who, as it is in demand worldwide, makes the BBC, and effectively the UK tax payer, a profit. So defending it is defending that revenue stream. However, I am not sure a 53 second clip makes much odds to that revenue stream.
The show jumped the shark when it became all about the Doctor.
The show was at its best when he was a clever resourceful time-traveller who landed unexpectedly in interesting situations and helped people. Then Moffat retconned him into an omniscient god who was literally the reason for the existence of the Universe.
Doctor Who has a canon?
Those who do not learn from commit history are doomed to regress it.
+1. Making a lot of noise around the release of a few non-vital seconds of that show smells desperate publicity.
Slashdot, fix the reply notifications... You won't get away with it...
And by "doctors", you mean "alien expats with a narcissistic moniker they gave to themselves"? I'm sure they can.
Ezekiel 23:20
Moffat's biggest problem is that he never gives you the pay-off. Every episode feels like it's building towards something big, but it never comes. The end is always just some nonsense deus-ex-machina and setting up the /next/ big thing for next season.
Anyway, he is gone now so maybe things will improve.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
I think after Lost writers realized they can succeed by making things confusing, instead of having an actual plot. Keep it confusing enough and then come up with a Deus ex machina at the end. As a bonus, you can keep it going as long as people keep paying. I'm looking at Mr Robot and the new Star Wars here specifically.
As a counterpoint, the Marvel stuff is turning out to be coherent beyond expectations, even though they don' t need to.
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
Most series attempt to keep to their canon (fiction) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
British have a gun held to their heads and are forced to pay BBC subscriptions.
Well, you're supposed to pay it and they talk big about fines but it's fairly easy to avoid. Especially as cuts mean less people out checking. Fuck the BBC though, their content is daytime filler crap and the occasional dead horse they won't stop flogging and they want me to pay for it just because I technically have the ability to receive it. No, fuck off.
Wanna buy a shirt?
https://www.redbubble.com/people/stealthfinger/shop?asc=u
Woman can be doctors and men can be nurses. They're not gender specific jobs.
But you're right, how dare a TV show adjust its stories to align with their target demographic!
This doctor isn't that kind of doctor, or any kind really as far as I can tell but there is a big difference between adjustment and pandering.
Wanna buy a shirt?
https://www.redbubble.com/people/stealthfinger/shop?asc=u
How it became a cult hit in the UK, I will never understand.
Because we love how shit some things are.
Wanna buy a shirt?
https://www.redbubble.com/people/stealthfinger/shop?asc=u
The BBC is worth it for their news alone. It keeps everyone else honest, by providing a reliable source of information that can be compared to bullshit like RT. The benefit to democracy is huge too, especially with programmes like Newsnight.
Where the BBC tends to suck is entertainment. But entertainment is also where it tends to pay for itself through commercial sales overseas and merchandise.
So on that basis I'm okay paying for it, although it might be better done through general taxation rather than a licence fee.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
I think after Lost writers realized they can succeed by making things confusing, instead of having an actual plot. Keep it confusing enough and then come up with a Deus ex machina at the end. As a bonus, you can keep it going as long as people keep paying. I'm looking at Mr Robot and the new Star Wars here specifically. As a counterpoint, the Marvel stuff is turning out to be coherent beyond expectations, even though they don' t need to.
I'll admit I haven't seen all the old Doctor Who, but I've seen all the new ones. The series basically got three choices:
1) Ignore the implications of time travel and every episode is some random time/place disconnected from the rest of the universe. This is possible, but kinda boring because there's very little story arc and character development. It worked before the age of VHS/Netflix because you had to wait a week and forgot most the show, as a binge watching experience it's terrible.
2) Take time travel "seriously" and try to make up meaningful rules of why you just can't go back to any time and change anything an unlimited number of times, which would be the ultimate deus ex machina. It will be terrible, arbitrary and stupid with lots of quasi-mumble and building up a terrible burden of canon that would eventually lead to painting yourself in a corner.
3) Just don't give a fuck and make it up as you go along, I mean half the point of Doctor Who is trying to be an enigma. What's he really, a man travelling the world to fix small injustices here and there? A destroyer of worlds, a killer without a gun? With all the other time lords gone, is he some sort of demi-god, the lone master of space and time? Is he the good guy against the villain the Master?
The problem is that you have to struggle really hard to give meaningful drips of information/insight for season after season while still keeping him an enigma. We kinda got him figured out now and that's really what's killing the show. I mean I don't know this episode's story, but I kinda feel I know what the Doctor's part will be. So they have to throw in some other plot twist to make it interesting which is rather hard in the long run.
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
Quite what the fuss is about Dr Who I have no idea. The storylines are childish (but then it is really a kids show I suppose), overblown and never live up to their promise - the season denouement is usualy more a "meh" that a "wow!", the dialogue is often amateur to say the least, the special effects are dire (and there's no excuse for that in 2018 when even a standard graphics card can do some pretty impressive stuff), and now the BBC have bowed to feminists and made him a woman. Hint - there's a reason he's called a Time Lord and not a Time Lady. I watched a couple of series then gave up.
Maybe it used to be when it at least pretended to be impartial, these days it's just another thinly veiled tory mouthpiece. Look at the blatant plants on QT, the massive discrepancy between tory coverage and coverage of any other party. Just look at how many ex tory ministers get parachuted into top level bbc jobs. Channel 4 seems to becoming the new gold standard as worrisome as that is. I would be more than happy for bbc to go subscription or ad supported but you can tell just how beneficial it is to the tories as that is the one thing they won't consider for privatisation anytime it comes up.
Wanna buy a shirt?
https://www.redbubble.com/people/stealthfinger/shop?asc=u
1. Doctor Who cannon had time lord (the fictional species that Doctor Who is) regeneration where Sex change was a possibility. It was casually brought up in the old series. Then in the new series with the start of the Matt Smith Doctor he first thought he regenerate into a woman because of his long hair. Then The Master (a reoccurring villain who is also a Time Lord) had regenerated into a woman. Then a random Time Lord General had the same thing. Writers have been preparing the viewers for this for over a decade.
2. I work in a teaching hospital about 2/3 of the student are women who are going to be doctors. Also male nurses are on the rise and are being more common.
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
The classic Who had the problem that these stories needed to last 3 or more episode in length (each episode was 1/2 hour) vs 1 hour today.
This put in a lot of filler with the bad guys drinking tea, or just normal office politics. A lot of it didn’t do much to the story except express the bad guys weren’t actually evil people but just doing shortsighted or evil things.
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
It was Reuters fault is not an official explanation, and wtc7 is the least of the problems with the pre written scripts they were all reading from. Osama Bin Ladin anyone?
What news? the Big Black Cock is the UK statetelevision channel for the british crown,the last time they did actual news David Kelly had to be murdered.
Other, of course, than cynical opportunism, cashing-in on the mood, as it were, and demographic shifts of the audience?
Or maybe they've just gotten with the times and realised sexism isn't as acceptable as it once was?
Also, have people started using the expression Nurse Who yet?
Why would they? Last time I was in hospital my nurse was male and my doctor was female. I also used to dive with a doctor who was maleish ,... I do wonder if she got her surgery yet I haven't seen her in 2 years.
When you're ready to grow up, come join us in 2018.
Have you seen Doctor Who? It's nothing like "most series". Only snobs care about canon in Doctor Who. Back during the classic run, things were being reinvented or reimagined when it suited and most people liked it well enough.
Only did it go off air than come back on again did the snobs try to stake ownership of Doctor Who and imagined a past that never was.
Those who do not learn from commit history are doomed to regress it.
There were some good stories about the Doctor and the Time Lords back in the classic era.
The problem is that the new era keeps hinting at interesting stories about the Time War and what happened to that race, but then never delivers. I guess they are trying to keep the Doctor mysterious but eventually you get fed up of being teased.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
Doctor Who has a much bigger problem than a female Doctor, which I'm not sure is a problem at all. The real issue is that the stories just haven't been that interesting the past few series. The format of the show doesn't help here.
This, its down to lazy writing and larger FX budgets being used to compensate. Just throw in another Angel/Dalek/Cyberman story and move on. Its become as bad as Star Trek. It doesn't bother me about the Doctor's gender, what bothers me is that it was thrown in to compensate for crappy writing.
Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
Some would argue that keeping the doctor male would have been pandering to demographics that prefer women be inconsequential sidekicks that required rescuing all the time.
Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
You mean the "Time of the Doctor" special Christmas episode the BBC released on Christmas Day 2013? [sarcasm] How dare they relate it to Christmas![/sarcasm]
Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
I suspect the worry is; if whoever leaked it had access to that 53 seconds- what else did they have access to- and could they leak whole shows in the future. This is plugging the small hole in the dam before it becomes a massive hole.
"That's the way to do it" - Punch
I live in the US and rely on BBC to give me impartial news IN the US. In the US you have the choice of Fox, ABC, and CBS which all have deliberate right wing bias- or PBS, CNN, and NBC which all have deliberate left wing bias.
It's nice to have news which isn't (deliberately) biased. BBC world service is the only way to get unbiased news about the US from within the US.
"That's the way to do it" - Punch
The show jumped the shark when it became all about Clara. Especially the episode where Matt Smith spent a thousand years at the Christmas planet? What the fuck?
I liked Clara in the beginning but he saccharine tones and voice really grated on me by the end. I was glad to be rid of her. There again, that Scottish guy was annoying. Electric guitar, sonic sunglasses... how do you make doctor who annoying by trying to make him "cool" to youngsters- and not even understanding what youngster even think is cool these days. Capaldi the worst doctor.
"That's the way to do it" - Punch
There were some good stories about the Doctor and the Time Lords back in the classic era.
The problem is that the new era keeps hinting at interesting stories about the Time War and what happened to that race, but then never delivers. I guess they are trying to keep the Doctor mysterious but eventually you get fed up of being teased.
They've covered what happened a few times now.
"That's the way to do it" - Punch
Frustrating? Take this example from today. Vote Leave found guilty of breaking 4 laws during their campaign, not accused of, this is the verdict and the very top thing is vote leave's guy offering up excuses and complaints about the process which are also intermingled with the article itself.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-...
And that's just one small thing among many. Don't even get me started on Kuenssberg.
Wanna buy a shirt?
https://www.redbubble.com/people/stealthfinger/shop?asc=u
I would argue the pandering was not the casting itself but acknowledging and making such a big deal out it. I'm all for strong characters but unless it's actually relevant to the story somehow the gender of the character really doesn't matter but when they're going look we have a woman aren't we progressive it just highlights how unequal things really are instead of trying to actually make progress.
Wanna buy a shirt?
https://www.redbubble.com/people/stealthfinger/shop?asc=u
Sadly, you are all too right. And we've thanked the Brits by sending them F35s -- the 21st Century equivalent of laying a white elephant or two on them.
You can't see ANYTHING from a car, You've got to get out of the goddamned contraption and walk...Edward Abbey
That's because the story is actually that Vote Leave admitted to it ahead of publication of the report. When the report comes out there will doubtless be more coverage of what the report says and any action taken over it. Sadly I doubt there will be any real punishment or redress for this.
I think Vote Leave actually screwed up here by jumping the gun. They made the top headlines today, first item on the Radio 4 news, and when the actual report comes out they probably will again.
Kuenssberg is annoying but no more so than any other news programme. Humphries is more of a problem, he really needs to go.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
I liked Capaldi because hew as kind of grumpy like the first doctor. He plays guitar in real life so I guess that carries into the show.
Only the State obtains its revenue by coercion. - Murray Rothbard
They are all shameless party rags and you are kidding yourself if you believe otherwise. You're just drinking a different flavor of Kool-Aid and belong to a different cult.
A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
> Some would argue that keeping the doctor male would have been pandering to demographics that prefer women be inconsequential sidekicks that required rescuing all the time.
Completely ignores a number of the female companions from the original run of the series in the 70s,80s, and 90s. Also ignores female antagonists from the same time period.
Modern token female characters actually tend to be WORSE than their 70s counterparts. The Last Jedi is a great example of this.
A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
Remember that episode where The Doctor visits the U.S.?
Neither do I.
Just wanted to add that the episode BLINK was my absolute favourite of the modern Doctor Who series, an absolutely perfect little piece of scary SF.
What says you?
Because if different sources do not present a unified message, its much harder to manipulate public opinion to run illegal wars and not let people question why a single family gets hundreds of millions of pounds a year in state benefits and exemption from inheritence tax.
Hey guys, WHAT IF they also put this much time and effort into finding an actor to play Doctor Who who takes the role seriously and with respect and doesn't leave after a year or two to "do something else" or "find something better" aka massively disrespecting their role as the lead in one of the biggest and most important and successful TV shows England has ever made?
Examples of what you call "full of shit" would have helped your post; link to specific stories and clearly explain how they are so severely bad that the entire channel is rightly dismissed with such a criticism.
Digital Citizen
In fact, I'd argue that the publicity of this will end up increasing the revenue stream. Many of us who've never watched the show, may finally tune in to see what all the fuss is about.
Just another day in Paradise
Except I don't recall that they say anything of which you allege. People have reacted that way, but it didn't come from the BBC or the show runners. The only thing I've seen is the big reveal video.
Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
Don't feed the Russian trolls
Just another day in Paradise
I'll agree with you on Fox. As for the others, including the BBC (which I also enjoy watching), you're viewing them through your liberal rose colored glasses...they're clearly not impartial.
https://www.washingtonpost.com...
Just another day in Paradise
Um are you going to equate fiction where the characters have been established with a particular trait with the main character of a show that changes every few years? It sounds like the same outrage when Rue in the Hunger Games was an African American: Nonsensical.
Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
I'll agree with you on Fox. As for the others, including the BBC (which I also enjoy watching), you're viewing them through your liberal rose colored glasses...they're clearly not impartial.
https://www.washingtonpost.com...
"Pew has basically taken the average viewer/consumer of all of these media outlets and plotted them on a continuum, trying to ascertain which outlets are favored by which side of the political spectrum."
That's measuring audience (who watches) not how biased the media is. Those are two different things. I'm also not a "liberal", I'm a centrist, so no "liberal rose colored glasses" for me.
"That's the way to do it" - Punch
" I'm a centrist..."
Most of us, myself included, who think so, probably are not. But then, it also obviously depends upon your viewpoint regarding what that means. From a mostly worldview, the vast majority of America is right wing, and I'd certainly fall into that category. But solely from a typical American POV, I'm pretty centrist, except in fiscal matters.
Just another day in Paradise
I was slightly right of centre when I lived in the UK. Moving to the US I realized I was centrist here. (I think the UK itself has moved to the right quite a bit in this same period of time too- I think UK's centre is a lot closer to the US's now- but the difference is you don't have as many people far off centre over there. Most people in the UK are fairly centred as opposed to one end of the spectrum or the other here).
It's hard to measure because it really depends on the topic to me- but in general I average in the middle (some-things I'm on the right, some-things I'm on the left). My typical voting at the polls at a major election usually includes one or two votes for democrats, one or two votes for republicans and the rest going to independents and 3rd party candidates.
I absolutely despise Trump though. If he becomes the new norm for Republicans then I suspect I won't be voting Republican much in the future.
"That's the way to do it" - Punch
I'm certainly to the right of you, but also couldn't bring myself to vote for Trump. On many issues though, I find myself at odds with the right,
Just another day in Paradise
You think CBS and ABC have right wing bias? Maybe compared to the New York Times or Slate. Compared to anybody else, not so much.
Well if they're target audience is all of the people who never watched Who before I guess you're right. If they're target audience is all of the people who have been watching Who for the past decade or so or the decades before that, then I think they've really screwed the pouch here.
Lucasfilms seems to have had the same ideas about Star Wars and the audience numbers for Solo pretty much showed them how that worked out.
Amazingly people don't want to watch entertainment that lectures to them. I suspect Jodie Whittaker to be the Sylvester McCoy of the New Who era.
Verity Lambert, the first producer of Doctor Who once described the problems with McCoy's era as being that the production company got the idea that they were smarter and more sophisticated than the fans, and so played down to them.
What she was describing, though she didn't call it that at the time, was that they were condescending to the viewers, acting in a patronizing manner. Practically the definition of both Lucasfilms handing of Star Wars since they've been owned by Disney, and the way Who has been since Capaldi, with its overextended lecturing on the evil of capitalism and in your face LGBT propaganda.
And before anybody goes crazy Captain Jack was Bi and it was handled very well by the show, in a way that was neither lecturing nor an intrusion to the plot. One never felt one was being lecture to because John Barrowman was in a scene.
With the possible exception of Fred who was Capaldi's companion there isn't a single companion in the New Who which would qualify as an inconsequential sidekick who need rescuing all the time. Considering that every Doctor but Capaldi actually had Male (Captain Jack, Mickey, Jackson Lake, Craig, Rory) companions as well as female companions it seems likely to me you've never watched the show.
Except that is not factual at all. The Doctor's first companions were Ian and Barbara (and his granddaughter.) Throughout the classic Who run the Doctor had many male companions: Ian, Ben, Jamie, the Brigadier, Sergeant Benton, Mike Yates, Harry Sullivan, Adric, Turlough. New Who had Adam Mitchell, Jack Harkness, Mickey Smith, Jackson Lake, Rory Williams.
The real problem isn't that the Doctor will be female, but the reason the Doctor will be female. No one would have blinked an eye if a female had been chosen instead of Capaldi. But after making the Master female and then practically budgeting viewers with the whole subject no one with a brain thinks that Whittaker being given the role is anything more than virtue signaling. The Doctor will be female not because it makes any sense in the story, but because of Political Correctness.
You think CBS and ABC have right wing bias? Maybe compared to the New York Times or Slate. Compared to anybody else, not so much.
They at least used to when I had cable. It is possible they've moved to the left over the last 7 or 8 years- but yeah, they at least used to be to the right. Not like fox- crazy propaganda right, but certainly had a right wing bias.
"That's the way to do it" - Punch
Then apparently it seems they're trying to expand their fan base.
The diehard fans will always be diehard fans. Not even Jar Jar Binks could scare away Star Wars fans.
And how would you know what I've watched and haven't watched? My point which you've seemed to miss is that when the show started in the 1960s, Doctor Who was male. Period. Even after the regeneration was devised as a way for multiple actors to play the part of Doctor Who when actors left the show, the Doctor must be male. Period. No other reason has ever been given as to why the Doctor couldn't be female. Over the years we've seen the companions drammatically change from the damsel in distress to companions that had much more autonomy. Male companions, gay/bisexual companions, companions who were not Caucassian. In ALL of those changes, the Doctor had to be male. Why?
Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
The Doctor will be female not because it makes any sense in the story, but because of Political Correctness.
And how can you possibly know that unless you were in the casting meetings? Peter Capaldi was leaving; they needed another Doctor Who. According to you they picked a female because of political correctness. Do you know what criteria was used? For sure the only criteria I can be certain is that Doctor Who should be from the UK. Do you know that the show didn't audition both male and female actors and Whittaker was the better actor?
Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.