Svar från Colin

Det får bli ett eget inlägg.
Hi JH,
I would agree about Diane had her reappearance been a total surprise, but Bernice pre-announced it anyway. People have been waiting for her to return for a long time. I was careful not to say exactly which day it would be (and if only she had appeared on Wednesday or after I'd have written "next month"), I thought that as I was discussing sad news, it might be nice to put a fairly vague good news comment. Actually I did write "next month" at first, in error, and explaining the change to Marie I wrote the following: "I suppose its technically a spoiler but I know people have been very keen to see Diane back, and I haven't said exactly which day it will be so I thought a vague note would be OK. Plus it's always nice to write something positive when talking about bad stuff so I thought 'Alan's going, but Diane's returning' would make the message more upbeat!" I'm sorry it was spoiled for you, but I hope you can see my reasoning?
As far as Leo is concerned, personally I wish it had never been announced on here at that time. The news of Harry's death was deliberately kept from the UK public until after he had made his final appearance, over a week after his death. We didn't know until we saw the caption that Marie included in her message. It was very shocking and upsetting news, but at least we in the UK didn't have to watch his happy smiling cheerful face for another 12-odd months knowing what sad fate had become of him. I felt in this particular circumstance that reassurance that a 3 year old with Downs' Syndrome wasn't killed off just because of a real-life tragedy was acceptable. To be perfectly honest I was actually surprised to see so many people worried that Leo might be killed off. Emmerdale (as with all soaps) has a long history of recasting children (Alice Bates; Belle & Samson Dingle; Robert, Victoria & Sarah Sugden to name just a few). Yes the circumstances were different this time, but I never had any doubt that Harry would simply be replaced (indeed Harry was already the second Leo) so to confirm what was already the most likely outcome and reassure a few worried people barely even seems to be a spoiler to me. I'd be interested to hear how some of those who were concerned about Leo being killed off feel about my reassurance?
Generally I do think very carefully about my posts. I made a couple of minor errors early on - if I recall correctly none of them were things that would have been recognised as spoilers at the time of writing, but if remembered at a future time could have been seen as such. But this was three or four years ago. They were accidents and I learnt from them. I have never wanted to spoil anything for those who want to watch completely "blind", though I do take news events such as actor death or illness into consideration and try and alert people of these as and when you reach that point in time. It is my keenness to preserve story secrecy, and the outcome of those stories, that led me to warn not to assume that Paddy, Marlon and Rhona are all still in the show. Occasionally I'll mention a character in a way that suggests they are still in the show, such as Victoria. I consider such references very carefully. I have in my head what I call "The List". This is simply anyone who has a storyline which suggests they may leave the show for any reason, whether it actually happens or not. If you take the whole of 2012 as an example, the list would have included not just the likes of Aaron, Carl and Alex, but also people like Paddy, Marlon and Rhona who of course were considering moving to New Zealand (in fact I'd have found news of Harry's death being announced on here before that story particularly troublesome, since Leo was obviously due to leave in that story too). I don't normally mention on the blog which people are on The List, but (at least) one of those three (i.e. Paddy, Marlon, Rhona) definitely is, and I don't want people watching the relevant storyline to think 'well they must be staying because of what they said when Harry died'. So I have advised that this could be a false assumption to make. Hopefully then you can see that I DO think carefully about what I write, and I do my best to avoid stories being spoiled not just by me, but by things like news items such as those linked to when Harry died.

In short, I'm sorry that on this occasion you feel I said a little too much, but I hope you can understand why I decided to write those comments. Hopefully a situation such as that with Leo will never arise again, and with Diane-like situations I will take greater care. I'm pretty sure I didn't pre-announce Betty's last return in that manner, so I think the desire to say something positive amongst the gloom perhaps clouded my thinking a little. I hope anyone who was annoyed by what I wrote will accept my apology and won't be put off reading my comments in the future :)
P.S. That reminds me, even the decision to link to the article showing Chris Bisson with his new baby was carefully considered. I did advise people not to read it and just look at the pictures, but of course I was aware that even by accident people might see phrases like "comes to a head this week" and that it was dated April. Had the real truth of Archie's parentage really come out that week, I probably wouldn't have linked to that article - it wouldn't have been worth the risk of someone accidentally finding out the story outcome and when to expect it, just for the sake of linking to a few cute baby photos. For those who missed it and are wondering what I'm talking about, here is the article again: You can all read it now too, if you like!

Postat av: Andrea

I agree whith you Colin.

2014-10-07 @ 17:22:47
Postat av: Anonym

I like your comments.

2014-10-07 @ 17:23:46

Kommentera inlägget här:

Kom ihåg mig?

E-postadress: (publiceras ej)



RSS 2.0