Ru Paul's Drag Race FOI request?

[WineIsMyCarb]

Given that the BBC does not allow 3rd party advertisers, is an FOI request the right way to go about finding out if the headline slot on BBC iPlayer for RuPaul's Drag Race is paid for? Have had wine, am cross. Sick of the fucking sight of him. (Follows previous thread about iplayer not having an algorithm and others' about drag being misogynistic in large parts).

But their wider strategy has to be responsive to criticism of its out-put; certainly as a public broadcaster using public funds. The debate about drag is growing, and it is not just on Mumsnet.

Absolutely but unlikely to make any difference until much much bigger. People are offended by BBC output all the time. It would be impossible to react to all of it.
When you have a programme going out, the press team put together all the clippings, previews, reviews etc. I have never seen mumsnet or any other online forum included.
This programme is obviously doing well enough to be recommissioned.

Mumsnet is a gathering place for all sorts of people; from all fields and walks of life.....people who jobs, occupations, skills, experience qualify them in all sorts of ways.The quaint idea that it is just white, middle class mummies bears no relation to reality. It obviously provides a few people with a laugh, though

Not sure if this is aimed at me - if so I have never had a pop at mumsnet. I am on mumsnet! The idea that someone at the BBC would be following a mumsnet thread and would decide not to promote a show based on comments here did make me laugh though.

*People are offended by BBC output all the time. It would be impossible to react to all of it8

Yes, individuals will makes complaints about things they personally have an issue with..... but when the complaints become more organised, more numerous and more consistent in tone then they will have to respond.

It will be interesting to what response I get to my complaint......

I'll definitely be pursuing it further, though.

*I have never seen mumsnet or any other online forum included.
This programme is obviously doing well enough to be recommissioned8

It has been recommissioned on a wave of LGBTQI plus visibility and promotion....... and there is definitely a concerted effort to try to appeal to a new, younger demographic - who would not normally watch BBC - but who like the rest of us must pay for a license if in possession of a TV.

Good luck with your complaint @Justhadathought
But bear in mind that there are lots of people who think that the RuPaul show is a good thing, inclusive, accepting, promoting tolerance etc. You will probably need to outnumber these opinion-holders significantly if you are going to get anywhere.

This programme is obviously doing well enough to be recommissioned

mmm, Jim'll fix it got recommissioned again and again

the judgement of the commissioning department does seem to be seriously flawed at times, no?

But bear in mind that there are lots of people who think that the RuPaul show is a good thing, inclusive, accepting, promoting tolerance etc. You will probably need to outnumber these opinion-holders significantly if you are going to get anywhere

Greater public visibility of drag will inevitably end up holding it to greater scrutiny. so far, it has been a mainly gay audience, along with allies and friends. I know - because I was a friend and an ally - even though I always found it distasteful and unfunny.

We are in interesting times!

@BernardBlacksWineIceLolly not sure what this argument is really - are you suggesting that children are being abused by someone on the RuPaul show?

don't be daft hangonamo

I'm really suggesting that

'it got recommissioned' does not equal 'it should have been recommissioned'

lots of pretty racist crap got recomissioned back in the day

lots of pretty sexist crap gets recomissioned now

Because it seems to me, in a lot of the cases the fathers were not accepting, originally of their homosexuality and especially not of drag.
They could have found other men in the family who were supportive, or a friend even, if that were the case. It would have made a more powerful statement, and would have made more sense with the challenge of the task itself. It seems women always have to be the supporting cast members when men cause problems for other men, doing all the emotional labour and often at their own expense. That's what I'd call bringing on the female family members and female guests, emotional labour. How about men do something to end homophobia instead? Also, it's not much of an argument to state that a lot of women are OK with it - that doesn't mean we should be. Drag is beneath most women's radar for one thing, they haven't been much exposed to it and haven't thought about it too much. Add to that female socialisation, there will be a reluctance to question it in order to support gay men. I mean, it's all glitter and sparkles, and nobody wants to be a party-pooper.

The point I am making is that some people being offended on a forum would be unlikely to make any difference to the BBC's decision to commission another series. The BBC tries new shows all the time - if they do well they get recommissioned. Whether or not they do well is generally in the hands of the viewing public. Lots of people have enjoyed this show, so they have commissioned another series. It's hard to argue, for example, that anyone in their right mind would find it offensive, when lots of people have liked it.

My dds think it promotes tolerance and diversity and they like it.

How does it promote tolerance to women?

On the US version, brothers and fathers have been on and been dragged up. It’s not always the female relatives.
Myself and my OH enjoyed the series, I’m 41 and he’s 36 if you are still wondering about demographics. Is the conga line still going? I’ll tag on the end.

The BBC tries new shows all the time - if they do well they get recommissioned. Whether or not they do well is generally in the hands of the viewing public

Exactly

On the US version, brothers and fathers have been on and been dragged up. It’s not always the female relatives.
Good! I still hold all the same criticisms about sexist references to women and their bodies that I saw from some of the drag queens on the show, however.

The point I am making is that some people being offended on a forum

As I've said we exist off this forum too. We exist as individuals and as a part of other groups and organisations. I didn't sign off my complaint with a 'mumsnet' signature.

Woman's Hour did a piece about drag last week......it is gaining in traction.

It's hard to argue, for example, that anyone in their right mind would find it offensive, when lots of people have liked it

you're still making the same argument. Popular = good

loads of shit things are popular (in that lots of people take part in them) - vaping, violence against women, casual racism, 'ginger' jokes

it doesn't mean they're good though, does it? or that no-one in their right mind would find them offensive?

Female genital mutation is popular in West Africa

Would no one in their right mind find it offensive? (One for the cultural relativists there)

No, my argument is not that popular=good but that good viewing figures = another series and that it's hard to beat that with "but we find it offensive".
I am trying to explain how commissioning / promos work. Prompted by someone suggesting that the RuPaul banner had been taken down off iPlayer in response to this thread.
If it was discussed on Woman's Hour then that's a neat defence to your complaint isn't it..

So if you find something offensive you shouldn't complain, you should just accept what the BBC spoons out?

or if you find something offensive but lots of other people don't you're 'not in your right mind'?

No, if you find something offensive you should feel free to complain but you should understand that other people might find it really great. And that they might feel that the BBC belongs to them just as much as it belongs to you.

or if you find something offensive but lots of other people don't you're 'not in your right mind'?

Not sure where you have got that from, it's not what I said.

it's not what I said

It’s what you said:

It's hard to argue, for example, that anyone in their right mind would find it offensive, when lots of people have liked it

Yes let's see if you understand it like this:

When lots of people like something, it's hard to argue that any sensible person (or person in their right mind) would find it offensive.

If you were to argue that, you would be saying that lots of people were not in their right mind.

Can you see the difference between the above and: offended = not in your right mind

You’re still arguing majority rules @hangonamo (I’m not quite sure how you think shifts in attitudes occur by the way)

but thanks again for dropping by to tell us that if we find drag offensive we must not be in our right minds

In the 70s and 80s lots of people liked Bernard Manning

I expect all those hairy legged feminists who were offended by him weren’t in their right minds

It’s so good to get these things cleared up