To not quite understand the fuss over Eastenders

[MistletoeMush]

This may have already been done, but I just don't understand all the fuss. Its a story, the people involved are not real. Surely one of the purposes of drama is to explore situations, dilemas, emotions etc which it would not be possible to explore in real life. Also are soaps not famous for tackiling difficult issues, murder, teen pregnancy, rape, kidnap, violence, disasters, adultary, death by various means. Why is this storyline so much worse?

I agree about Kat and Alfie's scenes, EvilTwins. I love Jesse Wallace's acting when she's not just shouting at people.

'It is a story - it is not real.'

Agree 100%. The MN involvement seems OTT. It also worries me that posters have been told they are not able to put their views on other threads.

No publicity is bad publicity. I wonder how many people REALLY turned off or in fact how many tuned in to see what the fuss is about, be interesting to see their ratings for the current week and next few weeks.

Ticketty - from what I've heard on the radio, the ratings have gone through the roof. I guess controversial storylines will do that for a programme...

The pompous prick from EE on the radio today did say out of 11 million viewers only 6,000 complained.

"The pompous prick from EE on the radio today did say out of 11 million viewers only 6,000 complained." And I wonder how many of those 6000 actually watched it. Because there are certainly people on mn who have said they've complained even though they hadn't watched.

Perhaps. I know people like to complain for the sake of it. as i am one of them.

I'm torn on this as it doesn't sound a very nice storyline and I can see the potential offense it could cause those affected by cot death. That said soaps regulary have episodes that involve suicide/murder etc so is this any different.

what bugs me is people that are NOT anti EE are told by some that they dont give a shit about bereaved parents! one was told that when she experienced a death only then would she understand, such a vile thing to say IMO

i also agree that the furore is making this worse for the poor souls who I am sure are avoiding EE with barge pole

I agree with porca and evil twins.

The acting in the Moon household has been awesome and has really brought home to the public what a devastating issue this is.

And Ronnie is not parading her swapped baby around - she is avoiding everyone and is in this big hole of her own making and wants to try and make it better but is finding it more and more difficult.

I have watched all the episodes and really do not find it as far fetched as people are making out. Ronnie was wondering round with her baby trying to find some help on NYE and no one was around and then wondered in to the pub after hearing a baby crying thru a window ( ok - that wouldn't happen as she would not hear it!) She had a moment of madness and then regretted it and tried to put it right but was intercepted by Jack.

There is no way she has been portrayed as evil or malicious - she was bereaved and alone and didn't know what to do. And she has also had a terrible past.

It's just another workout for all those knuckle-dragging brain donors who aren't happy unless they've got something fundamentally unimportant or hugely fucking obvious to scream and shit themselves about.
ANyone who complains about a TV programme they haven't actually watched is really too dim to be let out of the house or near communications equipment without a keeper of some description, though.

I think that Fallout and others are right. We are being shown another perspective of grieving parents in Kat and Alfie. Also Ronnie regretted her decision immediately and tried to fix it but it was too late. She is not happy with her decision. There is therefore a consequence for her actions of sorts, in that she feels guilty and is unhappy. It also shows that children are not interchangeable as what Ronnie really wants is her own baby, she is no happy with the baby she is 'swapped'.

I can understand why people are upset, but am sad we are not "allowed" to discuss it, I also was suprised that mn hq got so involved(although understand they felt they had too)
I don't like the story line, I think what Ronnie is doing is evil tbh.
but you can't discuss it as if you do you are shouted down or as I have seen called names.
I respect the people who watched it and complained as is their right.

I don't do soaps, but I would have had to live under a rock not to know what the story line is about, and I am in the 'switch it off if you don't like and desist from the melodramatic reaction' camp

With a utterly dimissive 'fgs' added to the end for good measure

I posted this here yesterday

'

I know it's only a soap.

I know it's not real.

I know i could switch the TV off.

BUT

Have you ever seen or been affected by something that's so abhorrent, that's so offensive and crass, and just well... plain wrong that you feel you have to do something, anything?

There comes a time when you have to stand up and be counted, when you have to say 'This is wrong, and i want my voice to be heard'

Ok, they may not listen. They may try to sweep you under the carpet because it's easier than actually being answerable or accountable...

But we have to try.

Because if we don't... if we do nothing and say nothing, then we are in effect saying 'Oh, it's ok, do as you like' and next time they will do more, go further.

We have to try.'

And i still stand by it today.

It saddens me though, that this seems to be turning into an 'us and them' scenario. Those who feel compelled to complain, and those that feel compelled to tell us at every oppertunity that 'It's not real, it's just a soap, and to turn the TV off'

If, for example i had shoddy service in a shop, i would complain. If in a restaraunt the service was slack... i would complain. I pay my TV licence, and i find something distasteful - so i complained.

Why exactly is my complaining so wrong? Yes, i've seen some episodes. But i will not be watching anymore.

TBH some of the attitudes on here, from regular poster, who i would have thought better of are really bloody disgusting. It's made me see them in an entirely new light, and that's a shame, i feel.

[http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-1344862/Samantha-Womacks-Eastenders-cot-death-plot-turns-tragedy-hysterical-fantasy.html]

YABVVU

www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-1344862/Samantha-Womacks-Eastenders-cot-death-plot-turns-tragedy-hysterical-fantasy.html

This storyline was very well flagged in advance so no one could have accidentally found themselves watching it. If people (understandably) felt it was upsetting or distasteful they should just have refused to switch it on.

That's true they can avoid it - what they can't do is stop other people from watching - the people who will think that bereaved parents = baby stealers!

YABU and Bel Mooney's article above puts it far better than I could. I have never suffered the death of any of my children. I have watched EE regularly for several years. I found it horribly offensive.

Look at the number of people now say "Ah well, she's had so much trauma in her life and so many bereavements, it's understandable this cot death has sent her over the edge". These people are buying it! They're saying it#s plausible. Trying to say "Well, of course this doesn't apply to real bereaved parents" is then just stupid. What about real bereaved parents who've experienced multiple miscarriages, or infertility, or child abuse or the death of their own mother or father recently? These people do exist. If it's seen as plausible for a fictional character, why on earth do people not accept that some will see it as plausible in real life?

For goodness sake, bereaved parents on MN have told us on other threads how these very suspicions have been directed at them by other people, including health professionals .

Why, why, why not just do a straightforward SIDS story with one family. That would have been drama enough. Add this swap is sick, and in my view demeans the real experiences of bereaved parents.

But I think the OPs point was why have people picked on this particular storyline and not on others as being unrealistic and unfairly portraying a difficult situations?

If you were to believe soaps, most people seem to recover from bereavements after a couple of weeks and have moved on and met someone else or are sitting happily down the pub having a laugh with the neighbours. This is clearly not true in real life so why is the ongoing suffering of people who have lost a parent or spouse portrayed so unsympathetically? Likewise, alcoholics and druggies seem to develop their addiction over a couple of weeks and recover in an equally quick time or reach rock bottom and die very quickly. Again, not true and comes nowhere near an accurate portrayal of the ongoing suffering, trauma, stress and worry of having an addict in the family.

I agree the Eastenders storyline is not realistic and unfairly stereotypes mothers in this situation. But that kind of thing has been going on for years in soaps, so I think the OP is just curious as to why this particular storyline.

It just annoys me that the swap thing is so stupid, but because of all this it must be one of Eastenders' most successful storylines for getting people talking and ratings soaring.

'people who will think that bereaved parents = baby stealers!'

You really think that most TV viewers are that dim?

Have you read the thread??? Have you read any of them? Time and again bereaved parents have said that they have been treated as a risk, or are preceived as a danger .............

It's not dim it's fear.

I am a bereaved parent - I have been watched closely by people whose baby I have been near. I am neither deranged, mad or even evident bar for my honesty about my son!