Doctor Who Ratings Rise in the US, Fall in the UK

[AbsoluteVirtue18]

...Huh. I was going to ask if I should try to get into this show this season since everyone on this site seems to love it.

[sub]Now I'm too scared.[/sub]

 

[Megacherv]

£500 says the reason it was rated so high in the US was because it was based in the US. Yanks take nationa... erm... "patriotism" to new extremes =p

More extremist than the Brits and the BNP? Doesn't the "N" in "BNP" stand for "nationalist?" At least the Yanks don't have a major political party proudly founded on the principles of racism and xenophobia.

They are nowhere near being a major national party. Please don't associate Brits with BNP, associate racists with the BNP.

I wouldn't be keen to have my country associated with that lot but the fact remains that someone over there likes them enough to vote for them in significant numbers. In 2008 the BNP polled an average of 14% across 593 wards contested having fielded 612 candidates. The total number of votes polled by the BNP stood at 240,968. The party gained 15 seats and had 55 councillors in all local authorities. (Source: wiki)

They're still not a major political party, and should never be associated with all British citizens

I'm not associating them with "all." Just the 250,000 British citizen that voted for them in 2008.

Yes, out of 62,041,708 people in the country, and let's say that maybe only half of them voted, that's still a tiny amount of people.

And this was back in 2008, their support has fallen a lot more since then.

I may not be a genius, but I can recognize "fuzzy math" when I see it. Total number of population is irrelevant. Total number of registered voters is what matters.

And if their support has fallen in the UK since 2008, it may have to do with the fact that they are now focusing on the EU elections -- where they continue to garner surprising levels of support.

That's besides the point that the BNP is neither a major political party (there are 3 really, Labour, Tory and Lib-Dem), nor did they have anything close to a large number of votes in our country during the last election.

FYI, in the 2010 General Elections, the BNP got more votes than the Lib-Dem candidate in the constituency of Barking (North London). Further FYI, in the 2006 council elections, the BNP gained 12 of the 51 council seats, making the BNP the party with the second highest number of councilors (Labour had 38 seats).

As more general FYI, The BNP put forward 338 candidates for the 2010 General Election, gaining 563,743 votes (more than double what they gained in 2008). Nick Griffin came third in the Barking constituency, behind Margaret Hodge of Labour and Simon Marcus of the Conservatives, who were first and second respectively. At 14.6%, this was the BNP's best result in any of the seats it contested.

Someone in Barking likes Nick and the BNP.

Wow, one constituency, well done.

Not a representative of the entire British society

 

[JDKJ]

£500 says the reason it was rated so high in the US was because it was based in the US. Yanks take nationa... erm... "patriotism" to new extremes =p

More extremist than the Brits and the BNP? Doesn't the "N" in "BNP" stand for "nationalist?" At least the Yanks don't have a major political party proudly founded on the principles of racism and xenophobia.

They are nowhere near being a major national party. Please don't associate Brits with BNP, associate racists with the BNP.

I wouldn't be keen to have my country associated with that lot but the fact remains that someone over there likes them enough to vote for them in significant numbers. In 2008 the BNP polled an average of 14% across 593 wards contested having fielded 612 candidates. The total number of votes polled by the BNP stood at 240,968. The party gained 15 seats and had 55 councillors in all local authorities. (Source: wiki)

They're still not a major political party, and should never be associated with all British citizens

I'm not associating them with "all." Just the 250,000 British citizen that voted for them in 2008.

Yes, out of 62,041,708 people in the country, and let's say that maybe only half of them voted, that's still a tiny amount of people.

And this was back in 2008, their support has fallen a lot more since then.

I may not be a genius, but I can recognize "fuzzy math" when I see it. Total number of population is irrelevant. Total number of registered voters is what matters.

And if their support has fallen in the UK since 2008, it may have to do with the fact that they are now focusing on the EU elections -- where they continue to garner surprising levels of support.

That's besides the point that the BNP is neither a major political party (there are 3 really, Labour, Tory and Lib-Dem), nor did they have anything close to a large number of votes in our country during the last election.

FYI, in the 2010 General Elections, the BNP got more votes than the Lib-Dem candidate in the constituency of Barking (North London). Further FYI, in the 2006 council elections, the BNP gained 12 of the 51 council seats, making the BNP the party with the second highest number of councilors (Labour had 38 seats).

As more general FYI, The BNP put forward 338 candidates for the 2010 General Election, gaining 563,743 votes (more than double what they gained in 2008). Nick Griffin came third in the Barking constituency, behind Margaret Hodge of Labour and Simon Marcus of the Conservatives, who were first and second respectively. At 14.6%, this was the BNP's best result in any of the seats it contested.

Someone in Barking likes Nick and the BNP.

Wow, one constituency, well done.

Not a representative of the entire British society

No, but it's kinda hard for me to readily dismiss the fact that more than half a million voters cast their vote for the BNP in a general election. It does begin to look as if all that "Fuck the Pakis!! Send 'em all back to Pakiland!!" rhetoric strikes somewhat of a responsive chord. Clearly it's not being totally ignored.

 

[FightThePower]

I actually missed this episode because I was busy doing other things. I watched it on iPlayer though, was a very good episode.

 

[JDKJ]

And that "strong racist, nationalist, principles are more present in the US political system than the UK political system" is also a matter for debate. At least the American politicians couch their hatred in code words and dog whistles. The BNP's candidates don't hesitate to call a Pakistani a "Paki bastard."

You think the dishonesty in the US system is an advantage? At least everyone knows what they're dealing with in the BNP.

Agreed. I'll take the obvious evil over the hidden one every time. But that has nothing to do with the assertion that "strong racist, nationalist, principles are more present in the US political system than the UK political system." I'll beg to differ with that assertion.

 

[Daveman]

now somebody fire Russel T Davies and we might have something decent to work with).

Russel left the same time David Tennant did so why are mentioning at him?

When I said fire, I meant out of a cannon.

But no, I must have missed that.

 

[JDKJ]

£500 says the reason it was rated so high in the US was because it was based in the US. Yanks take nationa... erm... "patriotism" to new extremes =p

More extremist than the Brits and the BNP? Doesn't the "N" in "BNP" stand for "nationalist?" At least the Yanks don't have a major political party proudly founded on the principles of racism and xenophobia.

They are nowhere near being a major national party. Please don't associate Brits with BNP, associate racists with the BNP.

I wouldn't be keen to have my country associated with that lot but the fact remains that someone over there likes them enough to vote for them in significant numbers. In 2008 the BNP polled an average of 14% across 593 wards contested having fielded 612 candidates. The total number of votes polled by the BNP stood at 240,968. The party gained 15 seats and had 55 councillors in all local authorities. (Source: wiki)

They're still not a major political party, and should never be associated with all British citizens

I'm not associating them with "all." Just the 250,000 British citizen that voted for them in 2008.

Yes, out of 62,041,708 people in the country, and let's say that maybe only half of them voted, that's still a tiny amount of people.

And this was back in 2008, their support has fallen a lot more since then.

I may not be a genius, but I can recognize "fuzzy math" when I see it. Total number of population is irrelevant. Total number of registered voters is what matters.

And if their support has fallen in the UK since 2008, it may have to do with the fact that they are now focusing on the EU elections -- where they continue to garner surprising levels of support.

That's besides the point that the BNP is neither a major political party (there are 3 really, Labour, Tory and Lib-Dem), nor did they have anything close to a large number of votes in our country during the last election.

FYI, in the 2010 General Elections, the BNP got more votes than the Lib-Dem candidate in the constituency of Barking (North London). Further FYI, in the 2006 council elections, the BNP gained 12 of the 51 council seats, making the BNP the party with the second highest number of councilors (Labour had 38 seats).

As more general FYI, The BNP put forward 338 candidates for the 2010 General Election, gaining 563,743 votes (more than double what they gained in 2008). Nick Griffin came third in the Barking constituency, behind Margaret Hodge of Labour and Simon Marcus of the Conservatives, who were first and second respectively. At 14.6%, this was the BNP's best result in any of the seats it contested.

Someone in Barking likes Nick and the BNP.

Wow, one constituency, well done.

Not a representative of the entire British society

JDKJ is just a grand idiot. He's trying to suggest that the UK is more nationalist than the US because of the existence of one very minor nationalist come fascist party while the US has none.

Which on the surface seems like a valid point.... If you don't understand how the British political system works.

Free assembly and all that.

The US has a 2 party system. (If you're vacant enough to actually buy that.)

In other-words his entire argument is based on a logical fallacy.

The reason there is no ANP is because they do not allow for a third party. So America's racists have to vote elsewhere. The UK allows for as many parties as we can think up.

.... He also seems completely incapable of admitting when he's wrong.

How am I wrong? My position is that the BNP enjoys enough support -- at least at the level of local representative government -- not to be dismissed as a bunch of cranks or inconsequential to the British political game. There are constituencies where they hold a significant number of seats in local councils. And they received half a million votes in the last general election. If you can point me to the part of that which is "wrong," then I'll gladly admit that I am wrong. But I'm just citing facts in support of my position. Facts which tend to support my position -- far as I'm concerned.

And I'll thank you not to call me "a grand idiot." That way, I won't be forced to involve your mother in the discussion.

 

[kurupt87]

Seriously? You're complaining that they used the word "gasoline" while they were in America? You people will complain about anything.

Yeah, like the Yanks would come here and call it petrol.

It's a perfectly valid gripe, it's a UK concept, filmed as a UK show, using public UK funds.
Too right we don't want your grubby fingerprints all over it.

...yes, a number of them probably would.

It's incredibly common for people to adopt the local alternant of characteristic word alternations like gasoline~petrol when they travel.

And you're right about the fact that it's a UK concept, filmed as a UK show, using public UK funds. You just seem to forget that the current episodes are being set in the US. They're having the characters behave as realistic travellers to the US.

If you're going to live there, yes, you'd alter your language whether you wanted to or not.

If you're there on a trip and talking between yourselves, hell no. If you did you'd make it obvious, saying gasoline followed by something like "oop, see what I did there? American, aren't I?" Especially a character like Rory. What you wouldn't do is just have it as a natural part of the sentence.

Plus, anyone with a sense of humour enjoys the moments where cultures clash. An Englishman going to a petrol station in America would ask for petrol. The attendant would helpfully go, "huh, oh, you mean gas." The Englishman would respond with something akin to, "Good lord no man. My car doesn't run on gas. I need petrol. It's a liquid, you can set it on fire and it smells. Surely you know the stuff?" That's fun, intentionally being dimwitted is a great British comedic tradition. And you don't give up opportunities like that.

For example, I want to go to America one day. Whilst there if the opportunity presents itself I want to ask a girl, in my best cockney accent, "can I come in your house?"

Spoiler

"house" in a cockney accent sounds remarkably similar to the American "ass"

 

[freakyalex]

...Huh. I was going to ask if I should try to get into this show this season since everyone on this site seems to love it.

[sub]Now I'm too scared.[/sub]

I'd reccomend buying last years series on DVD first (Or of course you could find them online and watch them illegally, but of course that would be illegal and I in no way condone such actions *suspiciousshuffling*) as several things in this series relate back to events last year. Please do try and watch it though, it's great!

In response to a lot of people, I don't see how the show has been 'Americanised'. Yes, they set a story in America, but that's been done before - the movie was set in San Fransisco and there was a Tennant story set in New York. Yes, they filmed it in America but they've also filmed stories in Italy and Croatia in the past. If anything, I think this episode was teasing America a bit, having a little joke about it, with lines like:

Doctor: *relaxed* You think you can shoot me?
River: They're American!
Doctor: *jumps up* Don't shoot! Definitely no shooting!

A lot of people on this thread have been talking about how Rory said 'gasoline' at one point. Now, I can't help but notice that prior to meeting the Doctor in Utah, he had been backpacking across America with Amy for who knows how long - surely he'd have picked up a few Americanisms on the way? Even in England, we get a lot of exposure to American culture, and people I know do sometimes substitute English words for American ones.

Though I am a fanboy, so I suppose ultimately I would be biased in Doctor Who's favour.

Edit: And why is there a BNP-based flame war occuring? Doctor Who, anyone? I think we were talking about that?

 

[Serenegoose]

I didn't watch it because I haven't watched TV in so long I forgot it was on. Having been reminded, I watched the episode on iplayer and it was rather good.

 

[JDKJ]

And that "strong racist, nationalist, principles are more present in the US political system than the UK political system" is also a matter for debate. At least the American politicians couch their hatred in code words and dog whistles. The BNP's candidates don't hesitate to call a Pakistani a "Paki bastard."

You think the dishonesty in the US system is an advantage? At least everyone knows what they're dealing with in the BNP.

Agreed. I'll take the obvious evil over the hidden one every time. But that has nothing to do with the assertion that "strong racist, nationalist, principles are more present in the US political system than the UK political system." I'll beg to differ with that assertion.

No one said that it was more present in the US's political system. The original quote that you were initially replying to was,

£500 says the reason it was rated so high in the US was because it was based in the US. Yanks take nationa... erm... "patriotism" to new extremes =p

The guy was making a cast away comment about America's patriotism....

some would have called it a joke.

Did you overlook the "more" in "strong racist, nationalist, principles are more present in the US political system than the UK political system?" You don't understand that to say -- regardless of what prompted it -- that racism and xenophobia are more prevalent in the US political system than it is in the UK's? And I'm the "grand idiot."

I don't know how "jokes" work where you're from, but where I'm from, jokes are expected to be funny. If they're not, they're something other than "jokes."

 

[Trogdor1138]

They did a bad job promoting it, I didn't even know it was coming back on until very recently when people mentioned it to me. I am yet to watch it (I always watch new episodes of Who with my girlfriend so I always wait until we're ready to sit down and watch them) but I'm looking forward to it, especially with a guy like Neil Gaiman doing an episode. I'm a little worried about this supposed Americanizing though :/

I hate it when franchises take that direction, especially something as iconic as Doctor Who.

 

[JDKJ]

£500 says the reason it was rated so high in the US was because it was based in the US. Yanks take nationa... erm... "patriotism" to new extremes =p

More extremist than the Brits and the BNP? Doesn't the "N" in "BNP" stand for "nationalist?" At least the Yanks don't have a major political party proudly founded on the principles of racism and xenophobia.

They are nowhere near being a major national party. Please don't associate Brits with BNP, associate racists with the BNP.

I wouldn't be keen to have my country associated with that lot but the fact remains that someone over there likes them enough to vote for them in significant numbers. In 2008 the BNP polled an average of 14% across 593 wards contested having fielded 612 candidates. The total number of votes polled by the BNP stood at 240,968. The party gained 15 seats and had 55 councillors in all local authorities. (Source: wiki)

They're still not a major political party, and should never be associated with all British citizens

I'm not associating them with "all." Just the 250,000 British citizen that voted for them in 2008.

Yes, out of 62,041,708 people in the country, and let's say that maybe only half of them voted, that's still a tiny amount of people.

And this was back in 2008, their support has fallen a lot more since then.

I may not be a genius, but I can recognize "fuzzy math" when I see it. Total number of population is irrelevant. Total number of registered voters is what matters.

And if their support has fallen in the UK since 2008, it may have to do with the fact that they are now focusing on the EU elections -- where they continue to garner surprising levels of support.

That's besides the point that the BNP is neither a major political party (there are 3 really, Labour, Tory and Lib-Dem), nor did they have anything close to a large number of votes in our country during the last election.

FYI, in the 2010 General Elections, the BNP got more votes than the Lib-Dem candidate in the constituency of Barking (North London). Further FYI, in the 2006 council elections, the BNP gained 12 of the 51 council seats, making the BNP the party with the second highest number of councilors (Labour had 38 seats).

As more general FYI, The BNP put forward 338 candidates for the 2010 General Election, gaining 563,743 votes (more than double what they gained in 2008). Nick Griffin came third in the Barking constituency, behind Margaret Hodge of Labour and Simon Marcus of the Conservatives, who were first and second respectively. At 14.6%, this was the BNP's best result in any of the seats it contested.

Someone in Barking likes Nick and the BNP.

Wow, one constituency, well done.

Not a representative of the entire British society

JDKJ is just a grand idiot. He's trying to suggest that the UK is more nationalist than the US because of the existence of one very minor nationalist come fascist party while the US has none.

Which on the surface seems like a valid point.... If you don't understand how the British political system works.

Free assembly and all that.

The US has a 2 party system. (If you're vacant enough to actually buy that.)

In other-words his entire argument is based on a logical fallacy.

The reason there is no ANP is because they do not allow for a third party. So America's racists have to vote elsewhere. The UK allows for as many parties as we can think up.

.... He also seems completely incapable of admitting when he's wrong.

How am I wrong? My position is that the BNP enjoys enough support -- at least at the level of local representative government -- not to be dismissed as a bunch of cranks or inconsequential to the British political game. There are constituencies where they hold a significant number of seats in local councils. And they received half a million votes in the last general election. If you can point me to part of that which is "wrong," then I'll gladly admit that I am wrong. But I'm just citing facts in support of my position. Facts which tend to support my position -- far as I'm concerned.

I highlighted it for you.

1.9% of the total votes cast is inconsequential.

Until they gain a seat in parliament, they have no power.

Their existence is clearly a problem. One I wish we could just shoot dead and forget about. But that problem is unfortunately universal.

I also highlighted the general issue with your attitude.

They have significant power at the level of local government. Have you never heard the old saw: "All politics is local?" Why are you operating under the mistaken assumption that a seat in Parliament is the begin all, end all. When so many aspects of your daily life (e.g., housing, trash collection, business and other licenses, education, etc., etc.) are functions of local government?

You may want to go easy on the highlighting before I am forced to highlight problems with your ancestral family.

 

[That's Funny]

Its funny how a thread about Dr.Who, has started to discuss fascist minority parties.

OT: I too did not watch it when broadcast (I was in the car coming back from Cornwall), but I did catch it on iplayer, and well to be honest, it opened really well, but it slump in the middle. Also I didn't mind the 'gasoline' part as I barely noticed it, but maybe they should try to refrain from doing that in the future.

 

[JDKJ]

And that "strong racist, nationalist, principles are more present in the US political system than the UK political system" is also a matter for debate. At least the American politicians couch their hatred in code words and dog whistles. The BNP's candidates don't hesitate to call a Pakistani a "Paki bastard."

You think the dishonesty in the US system is an advantage? At least everyone knows what they're dealing with in the BNP.

Agreed. I'll take the obvious evil over the hidden one every time. But that has nothing to do with the assertion that "strong racist, nationalist, principles are more present in the US political system than the UK political system." I'll beg to differ with that assertion.

No one said that it was more present in the US's political system. The original quote that you were initially replying to was,

£500 says the reason it was rated so high in the US was because it was based in the US. Yanks take nationa... erm... "patriotism" to new extremes =p

The guy was making a cast away comment about America's patriotism....

some would have called it a joke.

Did you overlook the "more" in "strong racist, nationalist, principles are more present in the US political system than the UK political system?" You don't understand to say -- regardless of what prompted it -- that racism and xenophobia are more prevalent in the US political system than it is in the UK's? And I'm the "grand idiot."

I've not read anyone saying that nationalism is more prevalent in the US political system. If they have said that. I haven't seen it.

You did however insinuate that it's more prevalent in the UK. As a country. Which is completely bogus.

The only reason that we have overt racists in our political system is because - and I've said this many times now - we have a multi-party system. Any idiot can set up their own party for whatever reasons they see fit.

You're conveniently ignoring this fact because it moots your point. The UK isn't any more racist than the US. (as a whole) We just have a political system that allows the racists to create a party that they can all vote for. A Political system that is admittedly not perfect. But one I'd take over yours any day of the week.

I don't know how "jokes" work where you're from, but where I'm from, jokes are expected to be funny. If they're not, they're something other than "jokes."

Are you actually saying the US has a better sense of humour than the UK?

The UK is pretty much renowned for it's sense of humour. We have successful comics from all sides of comedy. Including a massive amount of love for American comics. Breeding comedy and allowing it to grow is essentially what we do.

Christ. Where'd you learn to read? What, pray tell, does "strong racist, nationalist, principles are more present in the US political system than the UK political system" mean to you? That's not an ambiguous statement. And before you rush to answer, read it over a few times first while wearing your thinking cap (that would be the cap that's not conical in shape with a pointy top -- that's a dunce cap).