Deliberate lying for amusement

Post by **spot** » Fri Jan 13, 2017 3:23 am

"sky arts" "Urban Myths" jackson taylor brando "Ben Palmer" "written by Neil Forsyth"

That was my search string.

Anyway.

There has developed a trend whereby a writer makes up a fiction and pretends it relates history. Regardless of how many warnings may be placed around the depiction, the inside of the frame shows events occurring to real people which didn't happen.

Americans call this a satire, apparently. I have no idea why they call it that.

It is lying at its most obscene because it defends itself by claiming humor as excuse.

What it achieves is muddied water and insult. Every time. There are no exceptions. It is grotesquely tasteless and diminishes culture.

Neil "I’m sure it will find another home in the future" Forsyth should be ashamed of himself. Ben Palmer should never work in the entertainment industry again. Both have left the world slightly more stained than it was before they pranked it, and if Sky Arts ever needs an epitaph that will do nicely.

And yes, I did listen to Bob Servant. Though I disliked it I took no exception to it because it didn't pretend to be history - unlike Urban Myths.

https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radi ... el-jackson

The only reason this Urban Myths episode was pulled is because they had a white actor playing Michael Jackson and some people made a fuss about that. I don't give a damn whether Michael Jackson was being played by his own long-lost identical twin or by Sarah Ferguson, that isn't the problem. The problem is lying into the historical record.

Ahso! · Post by **Ahso!** » Fri Jan 13, 2017 6:01 am

I suppose it's the fast track to content instead of having to develop characters. Most viewers of the shows you describe are obviously not as critical as you concerning cultural and personal ambiguities.

I'm often reluctant lately to refer to Wikipedia as a source, however, in this instance the site offers pretty good insight and information on satire. I know you understand what satire is and that was not why you commented on it as you did. I just thought I'd throw it in.

Calling personal character assassination satire is indeed abusive of the definition and demeans any social construct.

Satire is a genre of literature, and sometimes graphic and performing arts, in which vices, follies, abuses, and shortcomings are held up to ridicule, ideally with the intent of shaming individuals, corporations, government, or society itself into improvement.[1] Although satire is usually meant to be humorous, its greater purpose is often constructive social criticism, using wit to draw attention to both particular and wider issues in society.

A feature of satire is strong irony or sarcasm—"in satire, irony is militant"[2]—but parody, burlesque, exaggeration,[3] juxtaposition, comparison, analogy, and double entendre are all frequently used in satirical speech and writing. This "militant" irony or sarcasm often professes to approve of (or at least accept as natural) the very things the satirist wishes to attack.

Satire is nowadays found in many artistic forms of expression, including literature, plays, commentary, television shows, and media such as lyrics.

[...]

Satire and irony in some cases have been regarded as the most effective source to understand a society, the oldest form of social study.[10] They provide the keenest insights into a group's collective psyche, reveal its deepest values and tastes, and the society's structures of power.[11][12] Some authors have regarded satire as superior to non-comic and non-artistic disciplines like history or anthropology.[10][13][14] In a prominent example from ancient Greece, philosopher Plato, when asked by a friend for a book to understand Athenian society, referred him to the plays of Aristophanes.

Post by **spot** » Fri Jan 13, 2017 6:21 am

I agree entirely with the quoted discussion of satire. I have no problem with any of that. What I object to is the construction of a lie in the semblance of reportage. I object just as much to the mislabeling of a lie as satire. Parody, burlesque, exaggeration and the rest need to be based on honest reality, not on falsification.

Bruv · Post by **Bruv** » Fri Jan 13, 2017 7:51 am

I think you are confusing 'entertainment' with 'history'.

Why didn't you complain about "Braveheart" for instance ? Or Ring of ring of roses ?

Saint_ · Post by **Saint_** » Fri Jan 13, 2017 7:55 am

Are you referring to the "Post Truth" Era? The problem with lying, even for entertainment, is that if it is done too much, you begin to believe it yourself and act accordingly.

Post by **spot** » Fri Jan 13, 2017 8:54 am

Bruv;1505315 wrote: I think you are confusing 'entertainment' with 'history'.

Why didn't you complain about "Braveheart" for instance ? Or Ring of ring of roses ?

The entire concept of Braveheart is repellent. I spit on the film and all who made a profit from it. There's not a single aspect of it that I'd defend. It was a deliberate lie from end to end with anachronistic and plain fictional plotlines throughout.

The reason I despise the "Urban Myths" program on Jackson, Taylor and Brando even more is that it deals with people still in living memory who cannot sue only because they're dead but have nevertheless been disgustingly insulted and gratuitously traduced. The real-life named people - Jackson, Taylor and Brando - have been pilloried in effigy in full view of their friends and relations.

The blurb from Sky claims their series to be "A COLLECTION OF ORIGINAL COMEDIES EXPLORING REMARKABLE EVENTS THAT MAY OR MAY NOT HAVE HAPPENED" - complete with capitals. No, Sky, it didn't and you knew it didn't. It is entirely fictional and the abuse of these real people is a disgrace.

Post by **LarsMac** » Fri Jan 13, 2017 10:04 am

Oh, come on. Braveheart was a fun flick. A pretty good fictional story in which only the names reflected real characters and places from historic fables.

Post by **spot** » Fri Jan 13, 2017 10:10 am

LarsMac;1505319 wrote: Oh, come on. Braveheart was a fun flick.

I wouldn't know, I haven't seen it.

Saint_ · Post by **Saint_** » Fri Jan 13, 2017 10:13 am

spot;1505317 wrote: The entire concept of Braveheart is repellent. I spit on the film and all who made a profit from it. There's not a single aspect of it that I'd defend. It was a deliberate lie from end to end with anachronistic and plain fictional plotlines throughout.

WHAT?! You mean to say it's not actual history? Whoa.

minks · Post by **minks** » Fri Jan 13, 2017 10:50 am

Spot it is up to us the viewer to determine how we perceive fact versus fiction me thinks.

I feel the same way about "Titanic" as you do about Braveheart.

I am taken back to a book titled "a million little pieces" by James Frey. An excellent book (now keep in mind Spot I suspect you and I have VERY different interests when it comes to what we may like to read). But this man claimed this was based on his life. This book went "viral" so to speak. It was even on Madame Oprah's hit list as an amazing book. Then one day Oprah lost her sh** on Frey because she found out that very few of the events and people Frey wrote about happened or existed.

Frey came back with a very basic "well that is how they happened in my mind"

Again, it is how the viewer or reader chooses to perceive it.

And perhaps history isn't so accurate either... somebody had to put that historical "event or person" into writing and back then it was "their interpretation".

Yes sometimes it is insulting to our humble humanness to see "crap" deemed as historical, or even loosely based on history, but hey unless we lived that history what do we really know.

All things are open to interpretation I suppose.

Bruv · Post by **Bruv** » Fri Jan 13, 2017 12:15 pm

spot;1505317 wrote: The entire concept of Braveheart is repellent. I spit on the film and all who made a profit from it. There's not a single aspect of it that I'd defend. It was a deliberate lie from end to end with anachronistic and plain fictional plotlines throughout.

spot;1505320 wrote: I wouldn't know, I haven't seen it.

So.....should we accept your critique as a little biased ?

Does that 'spit on' include the caterers and lighting crew ?

Seriously.......I can understand your disillusionment with such types of 'entertainment', but.......I don't think the show is designed to inform.

It's like reading the Daily Sport for the cricket scores.

magentaflame · Post by **magentaflame** » Fri Jan 13, 2017 1:25 pm

I dont know about anyone else but when i watch television or a movie i expect to see an artistic interpretation of 'a story'.

(I hold that same attitude when watching aljeezra, CNN, and my own respected news sources)

Post by **Bryn Mawr** » Fri Jan 13, 2017 2:03 pm

It's a real problem, there are far too many people who watch a tv programme or a file like that and say "it must be true, they must have researched it" - I frequently have discussions with my wife along those lines and she is loath to accept that a programme that is presented as fact can, in fact, be a total fabrication.

Clodhopper · Post by **Clodhopper** » Tue Jan 17, 2017 4:26 am

History is permanently rewritten, but it's rewritten properly by academics who spend a lifetime trying to tease the truth out of the stories.

Rewriting for entertainment is sloppy, and misleading and just wrong. I can forgive mistakes, but deliberate pandering to nationalism is wrong because most people aren't equipped to tell what is true and what is spiced up or plain false.

Rewriting for political purposes starts heading towards evil: Jews in the 20th century and it looks like Islam in the 21st. Personally I don't like Islam, but the vaaaaaast majority of Muslims are peaceful people who have no interest in violent extremism. Our Mayor, Mr Khan, is a good example.

magentaflame · Post by **magentaflame** » Sat Jan 21, 2017 5:32 pm

I think it was on the show QI where Stephen Fry said, a fact only lasts ten years.

Clodhopper · Post by **Clodhopper** » Sat Jan 21, 2017 6:20 pm

Because if it hasn't changed, perspective on it has. Yeah I can see that.

magentaflame · Post by **magentaflame** » Sun Jan 22, 2017 2:00 am

Clodhopper;1505626 wrote: Because if it hasn't changed, perspective on it has. Yeah I can see that.

Or.............. confidential files have been leaked or opened. lol

Post by **spot** » Thu Sep 28, 2017 2:27 am

Huzzah. God has voted.

US 'fake news' kingpin Paul Horner found dead at 38 - BBC News

Horner defended his work as "political satire", according to the article. He can take my Huzzah as satirical too if he likes. It's not, it's delight at the outcome, the world now has one less antisocial lying git to contend with.

G#Gill · Post by **G#Gill** » Thu Sep 28, 2017 4:04 am

When I was much younger, I used to truly believe that what was printed in the newspaper and reported on the TV News was true ! At that time, I could not see what the point was in fabricating 'stories' - wasn't there enough happening in the world to furnish these news outlets with genuine material ? Perhaps I was a little naive then. Nowadays, I have a large bag of salt beside me when I read/watch news reports. It is a shame that newspapers, in particular, feel the need to 'flower up' or even make up stories in order to sell their papers.

Bruv · Post by **Bruv** » Thu Sep 28, 2017 5:36 am

spot;1512884 wrote: Huzzah. God has voted.

US 'fake news' kingpin Paul Horner found dead at 38 - BBC News

Horner defended his work as "political satire", according to the article. He can take my Huzzah as satirical too if he likes. It's not, it's delight at the outcome, the world now has one less antisocial lying git to contend with.

Not very nice to cheer the death of another human being, whatever their ethics.

Have you considered the death report might be satire too ?

Post by **spot** » Thu Sep 28, 2017 7:45 am

Bruv;1512886 wrote: Not very nice to cheer the death of another human being, whatever their ethics.I'm not annoyed by politicians, not even American politicians, nor by their Generals, nor by the leaders of the The Free Presbyterian Church of Ulster nor its American branch the Westboro Baptist Church. What gets under my fingernails is people who lie because they think it's funny to dupe people and confuse the record, and then add insult to injury when caught out by trying to justify their lies as satire.

For anyone else's hearse I'd take my hat off as it passes but not this one, Paul Horner chose to live beyond the pale, he doesn't qualify for a civilized response.

Neither would that bogus manipulator Steve Bannon for exactly the same reason. I could add other names. Kellyanne Conway. Ann Coulter. Some people just step over an edge and there's no way back. These are people who design lies.

magentaflame · Post by **magentaflame** » Thu Sep 28, 2017 4:47 pm

spot;1505312 wrote: "sky arts" "Urban Myths" jackson taylor brando "Ben Palmer" "written by Neil Forsyth"

That was my search string.

Anyway.

There has developed a trend whereby a writer makes up a fiction and pretends it relates history. Regardless of how many warnings may be placed around the depiction, the inside of the frame shows events occurring to real people which didn't happen.

Americans call this a satire, apparently. I have no idea why they call it that.

It is lying at its most obscene because it defends itself by claiming humor as excuse.

What it achieves is muddied water and insult. Every time. There are no exceptions. It is grotesquely tasteless and diminishes culture.

Neil "I’m sure it will find another home in the future" Forsyth should be ashamed of himself. Ben Palmer should never work in the entertainment industry again. Both have left the world slightly more stained than it was before they pranked it, and if Sky Arts ever needs an epitaph that will do nicely.

And yes, I did listen to Bob Servant. Though I disliked it I took no exception to it because it didn't pretend to be history - unlike Urban Myths.

https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radi ... el-jackson

The only reason this Urban Myths episode was pulled is because they had a white actor playing Michael Jackson and some people made a fuss about that. I don't give a damn whether Michael Jackson was being played by his own long-lost identical twin or by Sarah Ferguson, that isn't the problem. The problem is lying into the historical record.

And yet they teach Shakespeare in schools.

What are they thinking????

FourPart · Post by **FourPart** » Sun Oct 01, 2017 12:34 pm

I've seen quite a few very touching epitaphs on FaceBook - for people that never even existed. Yet they always seem to get some sort of sympathetic reaction about how the world will be worse off for his/her loss.

xfrodobagginsx · Post by **xfrodobagginsx** » Sun Oct 01, 2017 4:05 pm

Why lie when you can tell the truth? When you lie, people will begin to distrust you. It ruins your reputation.

Post by **spot** » Sun Oct 01, 2017 4:09 pm

xfrodobagginsx;1512947 wrote: Why lie when you can tell the truth? When you lie, people will begin to distrust you. It ruins your reputation.

Coming from a biblical fundamentalist that's quite funny.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-41466140

xfrodobagginsx · Post by **xfrodobagginsx** » Tue Oct 03, 2017 12:26 pm

spot;1512950 wrote: Coming from a biblical fundamentalist that's quite funny.

Wimbledon station commuters flee train in 'Bible' panic - BBC News

Why would that be funny? Fundamentalists actually believe what they preach. It means that they are actually truthful about their beliefs.

Post by **spot** » Tue Oct 03, 2017 12:59 pm

xfrodobagginsx;1513011 wrote: Why would that be funny? Fundamentalists actually believe what they preach. It means that they are actually truthful about their beliefs.

It's still bogus scary claptrap though. The fact that they hold such a belief is a comment on their capacity to delude themselves with arrant nonsense - the idea that something claiming to be true is necessarily true because it claims to be. What kind of sense would you call that - common sense or nonsense?

xfrodobagginsx · Post by **xfrodobagginsx** » Tue Oct 03, 2017 2:16 pm

spot;1513016 wrote: It's still bogus scary claptrap though. The fact that they hold such a belief is a comment on their capacity to delude themselves with arrant nonsense - the idea that something claiming to be true is necessarily true because it claims to be. What kind of sense would you call that - common sense or nonsense?

It's not arrogant nonsense. Are you kiddiing me? I have been studying the Bible all of my life and I still learn things daily. I learn how much I don't know daily. It's amazing how it fits together. There isn't a person on earth who could have put it together without God Himself. It's not just because it claims to be. It's backed up by the evidence. I call it common sense.

Post by **spot** » Tue Oct 03, 2017 2:23 pm

A person? Scribes, lots of them. There is no God, there never was a God, all there ever was is lots of people believing there was a God.

I didn't say the delusion that God exists was arrogant nonsense, I said it was arrant nonsense, as is your suggestion that there is evidence to the contrary.

I've been reading Simon Schama's The Story Of The Jews this month, it's a triumph.

magentaflame · Post by **magentaflame** » Tue Oct 03, 2017 2:38 pm

No no no no no........ the spagetti monster excists!!!! I know because ive seen images and depictiins of him. Ive seen what his diciples have written.

Ahso! · Post by **Ahso!** » Tue Oct 03, 2017 2:40 pm

xfrodobagginsx;1513026 wrote: I have been studying the Bible all of my life and I still learn things daily. I learn how much I don't know daily.[...] I call it common sense.It sounds more like a comprehension issue to me. Twice or even three times - okay - but an entire lifetime and still not getting it? Comprehension!

Of course, the delusional part includes the belief that you actually are understanding even just a little bit of it.

Bruv · Post by **Bruv** » Tue Oct 03, 2017 3:09 pm

magentaflame;1513033 wrote: No no no no no........ the spagetti monster excists!!!! I know because ive seen images and depictiins of him. Ive seen what his diciples have written.

You don't need a Bible, you need a dictionary.

Sorry.....

magentaflame · Post by **magentaflame** » Tue Oct 03, 2017 9:21 pm

Nope. Smaller thumb.

Bruv · Post by **Bruv** » Wed Oct 04, 2017 2:16 am

magentaflame;1513057 wrote: Nope. Smaller thumb.

That'll do it.

xfrodobagginsx · Post by **xfrodobagginsx** » Thu Oct 05, 2017 1:06 pm

Lying bad. Truth good.

Post by **spot** » Thu Oct 05, 2017 1:22 pm

That would be a better tombstone epitaph than "Gone to his just reward".