Noel Clarke is suspended by Bafta after 20 women accused him of sexual harassment
 

Cancelling shows in hindsight is ****ing daft to be honest. Is iPlayer going to pull the Tennant-Piper era of Doctor Who? :think:

Netflix and Prime to remove all movies that feature someone who turned out to be a dodgy bastard? There’ll be none left.

By all means, refuse to work with the guy in future, his behaviour is disgusting but removing content that has already been made - and no doubt involved hard work from COUNTLESS others - is in no way right or fair.

You know I didn’t mean you bots :hee:

yeah, the argument was going around Spacey at that time too. People are free to choose not to watch something if they dislike the actor, but Spacey didn't suddenly become a bad actor over night. The right of individual choice is being taken away from people. A body of work that other actors, producers and directors were involved in is being withdrawn when they are blameless. Like it or not it is cancel culture that is the catalyst for this because the media distributers think they will get blacklisted if they don't comply with the demands of the warriors

...I think it’s a difficult one tbh...(...I’m not fully decided on it...)...the whole labelling thing is so bad...if it’s negatively labelled with cancel culture then it becomes wrong to do so but if it’s more labelled in a positive of being supportive toward potential victims to put a hold on for the moment...it’s the exact same thing but it’s presented entirely differently...

So many inconsistencies like I said .

They never stopped showing Glee when one of the actor's vile paedophilic background was revealed ( yes I know he committed suicide ) but still.

Amber Heard still gets work despite her being a horrible person.

And people seem to forget Mike Tyson is a convicted rapist , even catchphrase used his face for a game phrase :facepalm:.

...I agree about absence of consistency, GoldHeart...as I say I’m quite undecided...isn’t it more or less the equivalent to being suspended from a job while accusations/incidents are ongoing ...and that’s fairly widely done and reasonable to do so....

It's one thing to stop hiring someone, but to try and erase/ limit projects they've been in is just stupid and unfair to other actors involved.

Yes, good point, it does seem unfair to everyone else involved

...there is always inevitably going to be ‘unfair’ though if something is suspended or someone is suspended in their work/job while serious allegations have been made and while it’s an ongoing thing...I mean, that’s not a ‘cancel cultures’ that’s new, surely...


...anyways, I’ll leave you all to the debate, as I say...I’m very undecided atm, I can see many layers to this...

SIR – Why should we ever watch an ITV serial again if, on a virtue-signalling whim, it can cancel the final episode of Viewpoint staring Noel Clarke on the day it was scheduled to be broadcast (report, May 1)? What is the point of a serial without its finale?

While the allegations against the actor may be serious, they are, as yet, unproved. Has ITV never heard of “innocent until proved guilty”?

Dr Roger Litton
Harrogate, North Yorkshire

SIR – As a youngster I was taught that I would be innocent until proved guilty.

Some years ago, the then Director of Public Prosecutions told the Crown Prosecution Service that those alleging crime should be called victims and believed by the police. This resulted in senior members of the public being charged on the word of a fantasist.

We now have progressed to guilty as alleged until proved innocent. The Royal family and our Prime Minister are examples of this reversal of the presumption to guilty until proved innocent. When will we revert to innocent until proved guilty?

His Honour Lord Parmoor
High Wycombe, Buckinghamshire



SIR – What has happened to our world‑renowned legal system? We used to presume innocence until proved guilty. Now users of Twitter, Facebook and Instagram instantly make their minds up about rights or wrongs, with each subsequent post getting more hysterical.

A series of celebrities have been suspended, sacked, vilified, and on Friday night the finale of a popular series was pulled because of alleged activities of the lead actor.

Did anyone give thought to how the rest of the cast felt – or the viewing public? It was reported that ITV’s decision followed “media pressure”. Had Noel Clarke been charged and found guilty after due process, this could be understood, but there was no more than a kangaroo court.

Doug Prewer
Yateley, Hampshire



SIR – I, like many people, had been enjoying Viewpoint – although, for full disclosure, I did fall asleep for a few minutes during three of the four episodes, so was not totally sure what was going on. (I made plans to watch last night’s finale of Line of Duty standing up.)

It is good that the finale of Viewpoint was put on the ITV Hub for 48 hours. However, nothing sums up the strange world that we now live in better than its press statement that said it was available “for a limited time for any viewers who wish to seek it out, and watch its conclusion”. Why use such pompous language?

James Sneath
Eastbourne, East Sussex

(Letters, DT)

...as I say, it’s effectively a suspension while serious charges are ongoing...when it’s said to be a cancel culture thing that can be very disingenuous and an applying of a label from those who appear to oppose labelling...being suspended in a job when a serious allegation has been laid against is something that’s always been, it’s not a new thing at all and is completely appropriate to the situation ongoing...


...a similar thing in a school would be...a teacher had had serious allegations made against them...but though, they’ve taught your child for much of the year so we feel they should continue until absolute proof of guilt...or we suspend them, we understand the impact on your child’s learning but we feel we have no choice atm and that’s for the best...I think we all know the ‘acceptable’...SIR...

but what itv did was basically suspend the whole school, that can only be described as cancel culture

fear of blame

...because its a structure that doesn’t operate the same...nothing is identical and one size fits all in the exact same way...they can’t apply a suspension that would only apply to a few people and that wouldn’t make sense anyway...it doesn’t change that it’s very commonplace and always has been to apply suspensions for very serious accusations in a workplace even when something hasn’t yet ‘been proven’... and to apply a ‘cancel culture’ term/label...is IMO, quite disingenuous in its accuracy...we can describe it as cancel culture, of course...but for me that would not show accuracy as I say...and feeding into something by people who would usually oppose that very thing of ‘labelling’...

but they can stop him from doing further work until the matter is sorted, that is the equivalent. Stopping the the last episode of a series was cancel culture at it's finest

...or as I say, it was making a decision to suspend for the moment...which putting that episode or whatever out wouldn’t have done...and that’s always been a very commonplace thing in any workplace with such serious accusations ...you can keep throwing cancel culture at me from every which way but I’m just not catching it, sorry...I’m not grabbing these society damaging ‘labels’ until and unless I’m sure they apply...

...’they’ can only make a decision within their control over that programme and they did, that’s exactly what they’ve done...they’ve suspended for the moment because of the severity...whether proven or not, this is very serious and action was felt necessary...

taking away people freedom to make their own decisions on what they can and cannot do based on social media pressure couldn't be a better example of cancel culture. We will have to agree to disagree because I think it is totally inappropriate action for itv to take and is a very slippery slope

...I don’t think that ‘social media pressure’ applies for this particular instance...it’s a decision made within a workplace because of some very serious accusations and an ongoing case and that’s something that has always been commonplace...there is no slippery slope for this and if there was..?...I would say that in trying to apply a label here that doesn’t entirely accurately fit...that in itself could be termed the slippery slope...

Whether or not some of the more serious accusations are proven to be true is largely irrelevant in this case to be honest; some of the stuff that is definitely true (because it was all over his own Twitter) is justification to not want to be involved with him professionally. No court of law needed. It was right there (and fairly recent, not historic).

For example, possibly (probably) filming or at the very least sharing footage without consent of people having sex, taken through their window, for comments/“jokes” on social media.

That alone would be enough to warrant refusal to work with him again.

But again all that said; not working with him again is one thing, cancelling projects that are already complete from airing, or removing old projects, is just daft.

Whilst I do agree there is something to be said for not erasing things from the past because one individual turned out to be unsavoury, I do think there's more important things RIGHT NOW than moaning over that one show being taken down because it's brand new due to what is now a very serious investigation into very serious allegations.

His new show being taken off itv hub because they currently don't want an association with what's currently happening is not really a big deal IMO. And the backlash to that seems to be overshadowing the actual allegations in some places which is odd.

Edit - And no, this isn't a dig at any individual forum members, before I get predictable replies.

...you say it so much better than I do...:love:...I do think that ‘cancel culture’ is an incorrect labelling in this case and that’s the damaging thing with labels...they’re not identifying enough with specifics involved and this is a very serious case with the allegations ...I can’t think of any other type of employment where a ‘suspension’ wouldn’t also apply to any and all projects while investigations continue...and yeah, I agree ...real issues are being clouded while labelling seems to take the prime seat in some cases...

I mean, I get what you're saying, but on top of (but separate to) what I was saying before I have another issue with this;

Examples of his character were ALL OVER his open social media.

ITV "currently don't want an association" with something that has hit the press and become very public ... when ITV chose to work with him, there are really only two options;

1) They failed, as a massive media company, to do proper background checks that any 15 year old with a phone could do in 15 minutes... or

2) They knew fine well that his twitter (at the very least) was full of toxic, aggressive misogyny (and there are examples of worse) and they just didn't really care until it turned into public backlash.


So I think it is a pretty big deal that they currently don't want to be associated. Understandable that they don't, sure... but y'know. Tough ****. They are.

Personally I have no issue with him being yeeted to the moon given some of the stuff I've seen since this broke, cancel away... I just personally think you can't "cancel in hindsight". You can stop working with someone, but you can't hop in a DeLorean and change things to pretend that you NEVER worked with them because you find the association uncomfortable. Again, I understand why they would WANT to, but that doesn't mean it works that way.

Oh 100% I agree with you there. Even within his circles it's becoming more apparent how open and known a lot of his behaviour was and either just accepted or ignored. The whole industry needs to look at itself really.

I just think the focusing on his new show being taken down (for now) is a little bit of an unnecessary complaint. It's not banned and gone forever. (Regardless of the fact the show was less than mediocre really :hehe:) To me it just distracts from the accusations, and makes Noel somehow seem a victim of "cancellation" or whatever. Kind of like the twitter users who are going with the notion that all these women are lying because they're so racist they can't stand to see a successful black man or something. :umm2:

my gripe is for all the others involved in that project... it could potentially have been their big break, and now it's gone to rat for them.

I'm completely unaware of his twitter , I don't know what he's been saying . But if it's offensive then obviously that has to be addressed. And the allegations obviously need to be looked into further.

I know some don't think it's a big deal about viewpoint.

But I cant help but think would they take the same measures if it was a big popular show like Line of duty?? ,if an actor in that TV show had been accused of multiple allegations hmm .

I think there'd be a bigger reason to take the show off the air (for the time being) if it was an actor in a major show. Their presence on TV during a time when the allegations were made would be a much bigger deal.

It seems extraordinary to me that people who claim to have been sexually assaulted would go to the newspaper and not to the police.

Another valid point ,but then again if you're in the public eye it's all going to come out in the papers anyway .

They should've made a thread on here really shouldn't they, with their wild claims?

Well like I said if he's been saying and doing inappropriate things in front of people and on social media, then it's all out there already:shrug: .

thats not even hinted at in the post you refer to, so how you can come up with that response is beyond me.

You didn't understand my post? Ok.

The BBC has said it is "shocked" to hear allegations by several women that actor Noel Clarke sexually harassed them on the set of Doctor Who.

Mr Clarke played Mickey Smith in the BBC drama from 2005 to 2010.

The Guardian has quoted five women, including an unnamed actress, who it says have claimed that he touched them inappropriately or made sexual remarks.

He denied all the claims. He has previously "vehemently" denied sexual misconduct or criminal wrongdoing.

The latest reports come a week after 20 women told The Guardian that Mr Clarke, 45, had harassed or bullied them during his career as a TV and film actor, writer, director and producer.

Last week, he said he understood that "some of my actions have affected people in ways I did not intend or realise" and said he was "deeply sorry" to those people. But he denied that his actions constituted sexual misconduct or criminal wrongdoing.
He told The Guardian that he strongly denied the latest allegations. His representatives have not responded to a BBC request for comment.

A BBC spokesman said: "The BBC is against all forms of inappropriate behaviour and we're shocked to hear of these allegations.

"To be absolutely clear, we will investigate any specific allegations made by individuals to the BBC - and if anyone has been subjected to or witnessed inappropriate behaviour of any kind we would encourage them to raise it with us directly.

"We have a zero tolerance approach and robust processes are in place - which are regularly reviewed and updated to reflect best practice - to ensure any complaints or concerns are handled with the utmost seriousness and care."

Last week, Sky "halted" its work with Mr Clarke, including on the fourth series of crime drama Bulletproof, while ITV dropped the final episode of his drama Viewpoint from its broadcast schedules. The BBC said it would "not be progressing any projects with Noel Clarke at this time".

Bafta has suspended his membership, weeks after giving him an outstanding contribution award, and the Metropolitan Police have said they have received allegations of sexual offences from a third party.

Meanwhile on Friday, Doctor Who and Torchwood actor John Barrowman was said by The Guardian to have repeatedly exposed himself on set. It said that was regarded as "larking about" and "joking" rather than sexually predatory behaviour.

A video of Mr Clarke joking about Mr Barrowman's behaviour at a 2015 sci-fi convention resurfaced and went viral last week.

In 2008, Mr Barrowman apologised for exposing his genitals during a live BBC Radio 1 broadcast. At the time, he said he "was joining in the light-hearted and fun banter of the show and went too far".

In a new statement to The Guardian, he said his "high-spirited behaviour" was "only ever intended in good humour to entertain colleagues on set and backstage".

He added: "With the benefit of hindsight, I understand that upset may have been caused by my exuberant behaviour and I have apologised for this previously. Since my apology in November 2008, my understanding and behaviour have also changed."

Mr Barrowman added that he was never made aware of any allegations against Mr Clarke.

Mr Barrowman has not responded to a BBC request for further comment.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-57021060

--------------------

Doesn't seem like the BBC has been learning many lessons

There's not really much the BBC can do if it wasn't reported at the time?

[Fury as police drop sex harassment and bullying probe
against Bafta star Noel Clarke:
Campaigners condemn Met Police who say allegations
from up to 20 women
'don't meet threshold for criminal investigation'



Noel Clarke, 46, will not be subject to a
criminal investigation, the Met confirmed
The actor had up to 20 sexual harassment
and bullying allegations against him
These do not 'meet the threshold for
a criminal investigation', the Met said]


https://i.dailymail.co.uk/1s/2021/07...7288401384.jpg
[Mr Clarke pictured with his wife,
former make-up artist Iris Da Silva,
at the 70th EE British Academy Film Awards
at Royal Albert Hall in February 2017]



https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...el-Clarke.html


Sign Of The Times

:conf::huh:

But yet it seemed his career was ruined, ITV even took his program off air . So now all those allegations don't matter?. I don't get it.

Yes


He should try Netflix
they are making a film a week.


Also
ITV got into a panic mode