To be hurt and annoyed at being dropped by the BBC?

[Ladyof2025]

BBC contacted me asking me to speak on camera about an aspect of local history I happen to know a bit about. I agreed and spent the next few days brushing up on the facts and then writing and rewriting a script and reading it out loud again and again until I knew it by heart and could speak confidently to camera as though I'd never said it before.

I do not have a pretty face, and am in my 60s and rather podgy, but I went to the trouble of going through my wardrobe for the perfect outfit that flattered my podginess, and had my hair cut specially and put on some make up, so I could be the best possible version of me that I could.

The production team visited, took me to the site and filmed me speaking. I did it smoothly and confidently and was glad that I had put in all the rehearsal so I came across as knowledgeable, professional and confident of my material. They said my performance was perfect, thanked me profusely and left.

After about a week they rang me to say that due to time and space issues the section of the programme that featured my input had been dropped. I felt absolutely gutted, not because I want to see myself on TV but because I had used up a lot of my valuable free time for several days preparing and rehearsing for it (for no fee I should add).

A few months later the programme I was dropped from came on TV and to my utter astonishment an attractive, slim young lady appeared, at the same site I was filmed at, and she spoke the exact words I had written and rehearsed! I nearly fell off my chair - the absolute bloody cheek of dropping ME but stealing the script that I had written. Thinking about it, I realised that they wanted my expert input, but not my saggy face or ample figure.

AIBU to be hurt and angry?

Maybe OP was rubbish but the BBC should have been transparent and professional about it instead of coming up with lousy excuses.

Maybe not every single word was the same but she mentioned a string of details that I had said in my speech that the programme makers did not know.

Specifically, I named some people (ie historical figures) who I had discovered were associated with the house; this was completely new, unpublished material turned up by me in my private hobby research.

I’m sorry this happened to you. People on here love to gloat but I’d be shocked if anyone thought they were going to be on TV and didn’t put a bit of extra effort into their appearance. I don’t think that makes you vain, although it was obviously your choice. As for people saying you’re making it all up, just why?? I don’t think you’d have anything to gain from that, what a bizarre accusation. If I were you, I’d politely email asking what happened and noting that someone else was filmed saying your script in the same spot, and take it from there.

No she wasn't another local person who had also researched the building. She was part of the team making the programme.

How did they caption her, OP?

You can compromise ‘Dear BBC time wasters, I recently became involved in your filming for X program. I prepared a piece and filmed on X day, at a cost of my personal time and expertise. I was told there was no longer running time for this work, which was disappointing but understandable. However, I have found you have since used my work, presented by Miss X Jones, broadcast on X date. I understand that I may not have been the most natural on camera, however if my work and words were still used, I expect this to be credited fully. I hope to open a discussion to find a resolution for this matter as soon as possible.’

I hope you receive an apology at least!

That's the real problem here. You told all your friends you'd be on TV and now have egg on your face because it's not. It's like straight out of Gavin and Stacey when Mick's whole family gather round to see his 'interview' which gets cut to a 2 second comment! It could have been worse OP!

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&opi=89978449&url=www.facebook.com/StreamOnU/videos/gavin-and-stacey-mick-on-the-telly/496459165864263/%3Flocale%3Dhi_IN&ved=2ahUKEwjxiu7ZpMCLAxUMZ0EAHVqPFEMQwqsBegQIChAF&usg=AOvVaw30YicxO2mO5EOJ4BZ-ddLs

Hugs OP. I would have done exactly the same thing...

I can understand why you would be so upset. I had a similar experience but was just dropped from the slot rather than replaced and was disappointed. In your position I would be outraged.

A couple of suggestions:

• is it possible it was voice related rather than appearance related? Did you maybe talk too quickly or were difficult to understand in some way?
• is it possible your segment was unusual in some way and so they had to reshoot? Some kind of noise interference like an aeroplane flying overhead?

Given they have plagiarised your unique material I would consider legal action honestly. Go by the mantra, “what would a man do in this situation?”

I would definitely contact them, please don’t feel humiliated, you did nothing wrong, you put a lot of effort into it, be proud of that. We’re a nation of sneery put downers, you see enough of it on here. If you’re absolutely sure that they used your script word for word then put up a fight. The very least they should have done was thanked you for the input, informed you it would be used by one of their presenters, but they would give you credit for the information during the broadcast. Otherwise, yes, they have stolen your research.
This has obviously knocked your already depleted confidence, you did something they thought worthy of broadcasting, hold your head high, be proud of that achievement and make that contact today.

Why be like this? Why bring people down?

O for goodness’ sake, it’s not like she was appearing on Bargain Hunt! (Not that there’s any shame in that).

Which is why the OP’s telling of this is unlikely to be correct.

History documentaries get experts (or local history enthusiasts) to talk about their area of expertise. The don’t ask them to read from a script, because that doesn’t make for engaging TV.

So what likely happened is they recorded the OP, she was over-rehearsed and wooden or just didn’t work on camera (lots of people don’t) so they booked another expert or local enthusiast to re-do the job - in which case they’ll have talked about the same topic, but they won’t have used the OP’s words.

IF the show had an expert presenter, it’s possible they decided just to have them give the information, and they might have used a phrase or two the OP used - but it won’t be a repeat of the OP’s script, not least because the OP’s script won’t have been engaging TV and also because when presenters give info to camera like that it’s kept short.

It’s really disappointing for contributors when they get dropped, but programme makers primary job is to make good programmes, so sometimes it has to be done. No one asked the OP to get haircuts etc. I do understand why she’s upset but I think it’s unlikely she’s been wronged.

What a nasty post @Namechangey23 the OP is obviously already lacking in self confidence and you’re just making it worse. Think before you write, there’s a real person behind these posts who has already said this morning how upset she is.

100 per cent this.

Maybe not every single word was the same but she mentioned a string of details that I had said in my speech that the programme makers did not know.
Specifically, I named some people (ie historical figures) who I had discovered were associated with the house; this was completely new, unpublished material turned up by me in my private hobby research.

This complicates it. Facts aren't copyrighted. Can you prove that there was no way anyone else could have done similar research and come to the same conclusion as you?

I get that you are annoyed that you made an effort and have been screwed over, but this sort of behaviour is common. The media reuses material but usually in a way that can't be proved to be plagiarism.

@theduchessofspork how are you so clever that you KNOW they didn’t use most of the OP’s script, were you actually there, Stop surmising things you know absolutely nothing about and stating them as fact!

The info I revealed in my scripted speech is not on the internet! That is why they wanted me on the programme: to reveal this additional information as a "talking head" on camera.

They found me after they contacted my local council (the house has a plaque) and the council phoned me because they know I have done all the research on the house and asked permission to hook me up with the programme researcher. It was then that I told them I had all this new info that is not on the net. They were excited about that, especially, and said well this is your big chance to tell the world what you found.

Contrary to what others have said I wasn't interested in being on TV to feed my supposedly enormous ego - I was terrified. And I wasn't interested in getting any money for sharing my hobby subject.

Sorry that referred to duchess

The Op took it upon herself to write a script but this is not the way to approach a tv interview. It almost certainly came across as stilted and wooden.

If this is true you should complain.

OP, can you post a link to the programme?

Get in contact with the BBC today. Focus on the fact they have a) plagiarised your research and b) lied that the segment was being dropped, when actually they just blatantly replaced you.

See what they have to say. Tell them you are currently on a well-known social media platform discussing this issue and you will be reposting their response on there because people are very interested.

Thanks, that makes me feel so much more confident about myself! Not. So, I am stilted and wooden, so should leave TV appearances to the smooth, confident professionals. I'll remember that in the future and turn down any future opportunity to share my passion with the world because, clearly, I am just not good enough!

I’m sorry you got dropped from the programme OP - it’s upsetting when that happens.

For whatever reason, your contribution didn’t work - perhaps you were over-rehearsed, or perhaps they just needed the same information said much more succinctly.

If you don’t think the person who ended up delivering that section was also a contributor then sounds like the programme makers used some of your research in the presenter’s script?

If it was a length documentary with credits, then there is a thanks section which they could have put your name in - so there is nothing wrong with writing in and saying that you think they should have done that - or if there wasn’t, then written to you to thank you.

It is possible of course, that you are not the only person who turned up this information about the house, in which case you’ll get a letter back saying that it also came from the national trust archivist (or whoever).

Really not my intention, actually just showing it could have been worse like in the Gavin and Stacey example where he invited all family to watch and then at that point in front of them all finds it's been cut.. also that is the main problem here, like it or not is..a bruised ego. It sucks but time will heal and lesson learned about giving away your hard earned research for free!

I do think she should have been made aware that anything she said on camera could be used as research which is clearly what's happened. She should really as a minimum have got a credit for her research.. they've basically used the fact she was excited to be on TV to extract information for free. They appeal to your ego, it's a user tactic. If someone came up to you on the street and asked to use your research in their book, you'd think a bit more carefully, but no, mention TV and suddenly people are like putty in their hands.. It may not have been their intention originally, but they should have fessed up when they dropped her. I suppose there is a chance it could be an accident if it was written down as a transcript and no record of where it came from?

You have entirely misunderstood my post.

I have not complained of plagiarism.

The reason I mention that I had spoken about certain historical figures being associated with the house is to demonstrate to a previous poster HOW I know that the replacement presenter used my words.