No doubt the show will lerch from one musical performance to the next with very little other content if it's like the last few years.
Gabby will probably be very loud and over the top and Terry will do his usual bewildered 'am I on/what camera is on/I don't know what's next' act his been doing for years.
I'm not sure why they insist on having it going on all the way until 2am either, does anyone still watch until the end?
I agree, I shall not donate to cancer research as I'm discriminating against people who have bad hair, old fashioned views and a surname that upsets swear filters
Well, Wales has just opted out with 'Party for Pudsy' from Wrexham. I presume the England regions are sticking with Terry and Gabby?
I want to watch the show from London, but I only get Wales up here and the TV downstairs (which recieves West) is in use. Plus it'd mean I'd have to leave the computer, which isn't easy.
Sco-Bal-cal-now-wow.....*splutter*
They finally have an incentive for me to donate!
Edie Mcredie has reliably informed me on the Scotland opt that should I phone in with a donation, then I, (yes, just me - as I remember it) will get to visit Balamory and prance about merrily with them all.
Ga-ga-ga-ga-ga-PHONE!
I agree, I shall not donate to cancer research as I'm discriminating against people who have bad hair, old fashioned views and a surname that upsets swear filters
Post reported. And this from someone who claims to want a better TVF.
I agree, I shall not donate to cancer research as I'm discriminating against people who have bad hair, old fashioned views and a surname that upsets swear filters
Post reported. And this from someone who claims to want a better TVF.
would they rather people kept their money in the pocket?
No - WE (the recipients) would prefer it if people got their wallets out and directed their payments towards better projects and disability causes. For example, an INTEGRATED nursery in which disabled children learn and play alongside non-disabled people as equals. SEGREGATED nurseries are not the answer.
A segregationalist methodology keeps disabled and non-disabled apart and does nothing at all to engender equality. It only serves to reinforce the non-disabled attitudes of people towards disability; ignorance, fear, prejudice and stereotyping. Ignorance has led in the past to severe and sometimes life-ending bullying of disabled people. there was also the story of the airline steward twit that told a limbless woman (who as a result of her mother taking Thalidomide during pregnancy) that 'one head and a torso cannot fly on their own' (despite the woman having a fully-adjusted power wheelchair, driven through neck/chin movement that would have enabled her to do so). This experience was terrible for her. She was publicly embarrassed, her pride and dignity dented. She had a RIGHT to travel like anyone else regardless of her level of disability. This right was denied through ignorance.
There is also the ignorance surrounding what can be 'caught' and what can't be 'caught'. These questions wouldn't need to be asked if society was better educated regarding the differences between a genetic condition (achondroplasia - check a dictionary), a genetic disease (cystic fibrosis), a disorder (dyspraxia) and a syndrome (like Asperger's syndrome). The only things people CAN 'catch' from a disabled person are the usual bugs and viruses, and HIV/AIDS if not careful (and yes, sex CAN happen between a non-disabled person and a disabled person; love transcends all boundaries). You won't hear Children in Need debunking these myths tonight, that's for sure!
The only feelings that will compel the viewing public to get their wallets out is to play on their guilt and pity with the so-called 'plight' of the facility-deprived disabled. We're darn lucky if we can manage to get five minutes out of the usual sad celebrity pantomime parade of a show that is CiN to chare our story with the viewing public! It is the DISABLED and other groups of disadvantaged children who SHOULD be centrepiece tonight. But we're not are we? The usual people will be, namely those poor, sad celebrities degrading theirselves in an attempt to get more publicity and hopefully another million-pound project out of the night. I bet most of them have no idea which groups of children get the dough! And why do they stop at CHILDREN in Need? Children in need go on to become adults in need. And from the disability side, the switch from childhood to adulthood is far from a pretty affair, with us being shoved from one project to the next with no continuity and a lot of needless bureaucracy. Will Children in Need ease those problems? No! How many of those watching and donating tonight will even remember to give us any further thought during the rest of year, return to their comfortable, non-challenging televisual fast food regime and will only donate again next year because it makes them look charitable to their mates? They're STILL going to be harbouring all kinds of inaccurate nonsensical thoughts about disability in their minds! While they've meandered back to Cosy-Toes 'Soap Opera and Reality TV World' for another 364 days per week, people like me will REMAIN disabled. We can't switch off our disabilities at will.
What Children in Need raise funds for (ramps etc..), these are things that the government, along with county, city and borough councils SHOULD be providing for us as a RULE anyway, through the Disability Discrimination Act. As regards new direction of raised funds, I suggest ALL of the money apportioned to disability projects gets directed towards parents fighting court cases so that their disabled child can flourish in an INTEGRATED educational/vocational system, to a fund set up to give disabled children (and adults) a bill of RIGHTS to as good a standard of living as non-disabled people and the right to live a life in society free of other peoples' ignorance, fears and prejudices to achieve our social, vocational and intellectual potential would provide a REAL, LASTING and PERMANENT difference to our lives.
Finally, it should be the disabled that are in control of, and have the final say on how any fundraising money for us should be spent. It should also be the disabled that are in charge of telethon content as well. I'll end by quoting from disability comedian Laurence Clark, and his thoughts on 'Stars in Need':
Quote:
The All-Star Charity Show sent up telethons for disabled people. You see, whenever I watch Children In Need - despite it being for charity and all that - I just can't escape that gut feeling that I'm watching utter crap.
However, the people I really feel sorry for in this tragedy aren't the disabled children, after all I was one myself once. No, the real victims here are those poor, sad, has-been celebrities. Every year they're forced to degrade themselves in this outdated spectacle, in a pathetic attempt to revive their dying careers. I was so moved by their predicament that I decided to do something, as a form of repayment for all of their years of hard work on our behalf.
Stars in Need was my way of giving something back to the people who need help the most! I mean, you've probably never thought about the issues, but what happens when your TV series ends, your material's dated, or you just start talking b*****ks?
So every performance of The All-Star Charity Show was a charity fundraising event for Stars in Need. I encouraged audiences to search their hearts and give generously, as every penny raised went to help underprivileged stars. Throughout my show I would pass around collection tins with Terry Wogan's face on them. You'd be astounded at the number of people who instinctively donated their coins, despite the show obviously being a send-up. I could always tell at the end whether people had 'got' the show by how much was in the tins: the lower the total, the more they'd got it. I also ran appeals for various afflicted stars, narrated by Mat Fraser.
As with our counterpart, Stars in Need also had a mascot. Although the original Pudsey Bear had a visual impairment just in one eye, our bear was impaired in both, hence requiring heavy-duty NHS prescription glasses. Our bear also had a mobility impairment, requiring him to use a wheelchair. Finally, we had him wear an incontinence pad, due to his tendency to wet himself. This led to his choice of name ... Puddles!
I'd read a Children in Need annual report stating that: "22% of able-bodied people feel self-conscious and awkward when with a disabled person". This got me thinking, and I decided that Stars in Need should do some equivalent research. It turned out that 100% of disabled people feel self-conscious and awkward when with Terry Wogan and Gaby Roslin. They also said they weren't too keen on the bleeding bear either!
Society responds to different problems in different ways. To address issues in the Middle East, we send in the army, the marines, the navy and the air force, costing millions of pounds. To address disabled people's issues, we send in Paddington Bear, Sooty, the Wombles, Bugs Bunny, Daffy Duck and Tweety Pie, costing our spare change.
I know this particular forum page(s) are for BBC Children in Need logo, but does anyone know off-hand who is vision mixing for 'BBC Children in Need'?
If someone is up when it finishes at 2.00am, then could someone please be so kind in taking a capture of the ending titles with the vision mixer's name on? If you could, then I will be very grateful. I unfortunately do not have a capture card.
