Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

to think that 2016 has been no different to any other year for celebrity deaths....

26 replies

caroline161 · 27/12/2016 18:59

Has it been worse than any other year ? Or now in the age of social media are we just a lot more aware of what's happening? I know it's controversial but just interested in your thoughts.

OP posts:
UnoriginalNN · 27/12/2016 19:00

Mmm maybe not more, just more iconic people.

MistresssIggi · 27/12/2016 19:00

Well I think we were in the age of social media last year too and I don't remember people saying "I hate 2015" so I suspect this year has been worse. How would you add it up though?

OfaFrenchmind2 · 27/12/2016 19:00

Actually, i think thay statistically, it has been worse. Can't be bothered to look for it, but I think somebody made some report on this.

Lightsoffplease · 27/12/2016 19:02

YABU.

MyCatIsABiggerBastardThanYours · 27/12/2016 19:02

I believe that in the first half of the year there was a much higher percentage than previous years, then it evened out later in the year, but given the 5 that I know of in the last few days that may have upped it again.

I'll see if I can find the link.

Floralnomad · 27/12/2016 19:03

According to the BBC they have used more of the pre written obits this year , so very unscientific but it would appear that 2016 has been a particularly bad year .

BravoPanda · 27/12/2016 19:03

Currently we're up 4x the normal amount. There's a report on the BBC.

TheFutureSupremeRulersMum · 27/12/2016 19:04

More or Less on Radio 4 did some analysis on this www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-38329740

aforestgrewandgrew · 27/12/2016 19:04

Several huge legends died this year. That doesn't happen every year.

I think the media / social media is amplifing the deaths of the less well known stars as it's now a topical story but the number of legends dying is more than usual.

MyCatIsABiggerBastardThanYours · 27/12/2016 19:10

Here it is

[www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-38329740]

Not scientific but interesting.

I think for people in the UK it seems a lot more noticeable as a lot of these people were icons.

Original poster
caroline161 · 27/12/2016 19:12

Just seen a similar thread above, sorry for double post. At least I'm not the only one to think it even if I ABU. Lol

OP posts:
DurhamDurham · 27/12/2016 19:17

There was a report on the radio that said that's although the number of celebrity deaths isn't unusual the fact that the year started with such an iconic death (Bowie Sad) every time another celebrity dies we count back to that first one so that it seems like there have been more.
I was gutted about Bowie, we will be in London in Jan when it would have been his birthday and the anniversary of his death so we're going to see Lazarus and a Bowie tribute to remember him.

Ellisandra · 27/12/2016 19:18

I listened to the More or Less piece when it first aired. It was interesting - one point it made was that we are now in an era of the mass creation of celebrities because of TV, and that as that boomed in the (50s?) we are now coming to the age where stars made then would be dying (especially as there is a wide range of ages that aren't stand out for death... I think that's relative to our age, but my own reaction is usually:
90 - good innings
80 - natural age to die
70 - early, very sad but not especially notable
60 - very early but not a surprise
50 - bloody hell so young)

I think they concluded that on pretty unscientific measures it was more than usual. But such is the nature of randomness.

By now, we're definitely getting into people noticing and keeping a mental tally more. And whereas before you might miss a news day, and not know for ages (ever) now, you know as people are putting it on Facebook for days!

My friend just posted about Carrie Fisher without naming her. So I checked out BBC to see Liz Smith and Richard Adams too - both 90s so not shocking (though still sad for friends and family). Without 2016 having this "reputation" I'd probably have heard about Carrie Fisher next week, and Adams and Smith not at all.

Original poster
caroline161 · 27/12/2016 19:53

This is what I was thinking

OP posts:
lljkk · 27/12/2016 20:04

baby boomers & the birth of celebrity age & globalisms ,tsk tsk, 2016 is different and things will mostly continue like this (relatively many deaths of high profile people just because people tend to die as they get older).

But so what.. people die. Especially when age 50. These people had great lives. Nothing to be sad about. Argh.

StealthPolarBear · 27/12/2016 20:07

Yes I'm sure it's been higher than usual for the biggest names. Weren't prince a d Victoria wold within 24h of each other? Ditto rick parfitt/George michael/Carrie fisher.
that doesn't mean there's anything dodgy going on. If you toss a coin a thousand times you will almost certainly get a run of five heads.

BoneyBackJefferson · 27/12/2016 20:07

I don't think that it is particularly any different numbers wise (as such) but the people that have passed are icons and have had some sort of affect on many peoples lives.

kilmuir · 27/12/2016 20:09

Definition of 'celebrity ' is a bit thin at times

JustDanceAddict · 27/12/2016 20:11

It's been bad as loads have died young, plus they were from our era.

Callaird · 27/12/2016 20:28

According to this article in the guardian there were

162 in 2016.
124 in 2015.
106 in 2014.

I think it's the greats we've lost this year that strike a cord. There are a lot more people on the 2015/14 lists that I haven't heard of.

Flisspaps · 27/12/2016 20:32

It also seems more because there are more and more celebrities in general, and people who became well known as the cult of celebrity started years ago are now getting old.

ClashCityRocker · 27/12/2016 20:42

I do wonder how many people on my FB would have known that Carrie fisher was the Princess Leia three weeks ago...judging by the number who think she was in Star Trek, not too many I'm guessing.

But yes, I do think this has been a particularly bad year for icons. Bowie, Prince, Victoria Wood, George Michael are all household names. People like to jump on to an idea, and now they've got the idea that 2016 has been an exceptional year for celebrity deaths, no celebrity death is passing unnoticed when perhaps in previous years they wouldn't have generated so much attention.

still, it's all someone's family/friend/loved one. And whether they're 50 or 100 it's still sad for the family.

EnidButton · 27/12/2016 20:50

A lot of the people who have died were iconic and unique. There aren't any others in contemporary media and arts that can match them or 'replace' them. Celebrity now seems very throw away.

Bowie was a huge shock and I think that set a precedent for how people have reacted to the deaths that followed.

Some were older and more expected yes but a lot were fairly young and had kept their illnesses out of the public eye so felt sudden.

A larger than usual number of icons have died this year, they were not the usual 'celebrities'.

EnidButton · 27/12/2016 20:52

And I think the '2016 has been a fucker' thing is just people's way of coping with it. Of finding reason. It's been a It if an odd year politically which ever side you come down on and along with the many deaths I think a lot of people in America and the UK feel less secure than usual. Being able to blame something abstract just helps them frame it.

dustarr73 · 27/12/2016 21:18

There does seem to be more iconic deaths this year.And a few of them are quite close together.