Comic Relief before 9pm

[TittyGolightly]

6 year old DC came out of school full of Comic Relief chatter and asked to donate their week's pocket money to the charity. Fine and dandy, we switched on at about 8pm and they showed a short film about a child and their grandmother collecting rubbish in Nairobi. DC was even keener to donate, so we texted in to donate money from all of us. Watched a couple of skits and then they showed a video of a 13 month old girl dying of malaria. Actually dying on the screen despite CPR and being put into a body bag and wheeled away. You can imagine the effect that had on a 6 year old. We've been up half the night with them having nightmares about dying babies.

AIBU to think that wasn't suitable viewing pre-watershed?

Sookies I think she means putting more extreme content on earlier..

But the content showed why money needs to be raised. No point in showing lots of happy well fed children is there?

Actually there is Sookie

Show the kids who have been helped and the littler ones can feel happy that their money is doing good along with some of the kids who still need help.

Show the harder stuff after 9

Over £71 million raised. Worth offending a few, I think.

The last CR had some more child-friendly TV on BBC2 at the same time as more adult-focused TV on BBC1. Though it wasn't well publicised, as we were watching BBC1 with Miranda's Call the Midwife sketch and some other inappropriate TV with DC not realising 'their stuff' was on the other side. I don't know why they didn't do that this year as I agree that they encourage the DC to fundraise at school and get involved but don't put appropriate TV on for them from 7-9pm.

They showed a mixture noeuf.

They showed children who had been helped and who were happy.
I don't agree with protecting children from real life.
If I allow my DC to watch something that I know has the purpose of helping people going through horrific events which is what RND is about then I also take the responsibility of supporting my DC to deal with it.
I dont expect the BBC to parent for me

Well of course I meant they put the extreme content on too early. The 9pm watershed is there for a reason. My children had already got their wallets and given me all their money to donate after seeing the young carer clip. There was no need to show the death of a child and talk about child rape before 9pm. I, and most others I would assume, have enough knowledge and imagination not to need it shoved in our faces in this manner.

I have no objection to any of it being shown after 9pm but they need to be aware children will be watching earlier in the evening.

We didn't find it inappropriate, I think anyone who has lived in this country for a while should really be aware of the content of Comic Relief. II haven't specifically watched it in full for quite a while but the content, the funny and the upsetting, always gets masses of publicity before and after the main show.

Its hard to phrase this but I almost like the fact that its upsetting for the DC. Not only do I appreciate the luxury they have in being so far removed from it that they can watch it interspersed with comedy but I want it to make an impact on them.

I can't believe that we've watched a 13 month old die completely unnecessarily and heard how young orphaned children are fending for themselves to such an extent they're being raped and people are worrying about the watershed and offending the sensibilities we have the privilege of worrying about in our safe lives. This thread is monumentally depressing.

I did think the Vic Reeves part was crass but mainly just because it wasn't funny.

I disagree with you, and it's a lazy insult to suggest anyone questioning the BBC using that material before 9 is abdicating parental responsibility.

The watershed is very well known. There's a general assumption that after 9 anything goes.

Children don't have to watch other children dying in order to understand atrocity. I could, if I wanted to retaliate in the same manner, suggest that people should be able to explain why donations are necessary without the help of a video showing death.

Why is it lazy?
Surely is much more lazy to expect a TV show which is watched my millions of different people to parent for you?

I am not offended. My children were upset. They are not shielded from the facts, they are very aware and interested and want to help.

I can't believe that we've watched a 13 month old die completely unnecessarily and heard how young orphaned children are fending for themselves to such an extent they're being raped and people are worrying about the watershed and offending the sensibilities we have the privilege of worrying about in our safe lives

^^This

Sookies the watershed is there for a reason surely you can grasp that?

I was around for the first comic relief And I'm surprised by this content before 9pm. But yes the news is just as distressing.

My children never went to bed before 8.30 at the weekend. 7.30pm bedtimes scare me.

Was Vic reeves ever funny?

Of course I can. I dont expect sex scenes or harsh swearing before 9pm but the footage shown was none if those things. It was real life and showed why RND raises thd money.
Cant you grasp that?

Or is it all red noses and laughs for you?

Vic Reeves was last seen being funny in February 1991, yer honour.

Vanilla was he ever funny?

I agree sasha.

I agree with chimp that the graphic and shocking nature of the clips has indeed increased hugely since CR started.

No need to be all offended at the idea of 'ramping up'... remember this is a media driven charity campaign that stands or fails on its reporting and viewer engagement & actions.

It's not just a case of 'so what, this happens' so we must therefore broadcast and watch it. There is a whole world of hurt, pain, tragedy and cruelty out there and we don't indiscriminately watch every senseless awful act.

There is an industry at work turning 'this happens' into precisely positioned and targeted messages that will get people giving. That's the whole end point, turning viewing into giving... and that kind of persuasion needs materials that balance many different things such as the emotional connection and empathy, shock value and viewer gut reaction, the sense empowerment to help change, etc etc etc. Getting through barriers to donation takes skill and effort. They don't just get off a plane and start filming whatever comes their way. They hunt down stories, have finders who connect them with the right people etc. And they use celebrities who are at once influencers and 'like us' to connect the awfulness of certain situations with us the viewers.

I'm sorry if that somehow gets in the way of the purity of charity or the awful tragedy and u fairness of humanity, but charities are not segregated from our culture and the rest of the media we imbibe daily. They have to compete harder and harder to get the message across, like another poster said:

"CR have to put up more and more shocking images to compete with a world that is getting desensitised"

That's what's driven CR to show more and more graphic violence and tragedy, that need to get ahead of the desensitisation and touch people's hearts.

I actually think that's no reason to ignore the watershed and that so many children will be wanting to watch CR after being so involved at school. But I understand why they forgot that in the mission to get adults engaged and moved enough to donate.

Hopefully they'll get the balance right next year.

I don't have the same input as my DD is 1, so she was happily tucked up in bed.

But CR is supposed to shine a light on what is happening in these places, no holds barred. I think it's right that children should know these things and not be shielded from it. Saying that, I cried at the child dying from malaria, and if I had older children who were awake I can see how that would be distressing for them. But I guess it's all about framing it in an appropriate way.

Ed Sheeran's comment about rape was made at about 8:50ish? I don't think that was inappropriate. Mostly I think it would have flew over most young children's head, and those able to understand that language should use it as a talking point.

I didn't find any of the comedy funny. Mostly found it cringeworthy. Innuendo Bingo was forced and unfunny, French and Saunders fell flat, even the Love Actually bit was crap. I've always been a big fan of CR but I don't think I'll be watching it next year if it follows the same vein. Also, the sound was awful. Previously, when they've shown those hardhitting videos they've cut back to the studio and it's been silent - last night it sounded like they were filming from a pub and half the audience just weren't bothered!

Well said sookies

I stopped watching CR a few years back after a similar film was shown. I totally get the need to ensure donations are made by showing reality but actually showing a baby dying on film didn't sit right with me. I felt it was exploitative and they would not have shown a baby in the UK dying on screen.
I still continue to donate though, I just don't watch the programme, it's hard I think to balance comedy with tragic events in real life. I don't think the two sit very we'll together.

I agree with you OP. I fully expected a baby gets better scenario as I watched with my 10 yo. I also let him watch the Ed Sheeran part but am now left with explaining what rape is as he asked (which I confess I put off last night but will revisit today). The comedy was close to the wire too and not particularly funny. I thought the BBC overdid it. They could have said the baby died without showing her actually die. It just isn't something that needs to be shown on TV.

I am amazed that there has not been more outcry about showing the death of a baby on TV.
MN hates people putting photos of their children on FB because its disrespectful.

But a baby dying is fine on national tv is fine.
As long as its black and African.

I have no beef with CR but that was beyond decency.

If you need to see a child die in front of your eyes to give a few quid then you are rotten.

To add, we turned off at 9. Won't bother next year. Thought French and Saunders were crap and vic and Bob. Donated anyway through fundraising taking place thurs and fri at work and school.

I watched a bit of it, I am interested in the work they do and watched the death of that poor child in disbelief.

But I switched off shortly after watching French and Saunders being spectacularly unfunny in a car (twice), and that awful 'skit' with the 'timing' of an announcement (so long, so boring, so unfunny, can't even remember who was in it) and as for Billy Connelly...he has never been funny or even watchable.

It was all so boring and repetitive. Except for the actual documentary bits.