Should classical music be a more forgiving world than other forms of culture ?

[french frank]

There are some general "Moral Maze" type issues here. I think it would be better if they were argued as generalities rather than as specifics. What individuals feel impelled to do is up to them.

[Mandryka]

The man is guilty; the work is innocent.

[ahinton]

Why should it be a joke? Whatever you may think of them, they are read by millions every day. No doubt you feel that those publications, and the readers of them, are some way below your intellectual level; although it seems a bit rich for you to opine on the moral rectitude of newspapers whilst at the same time wishing to gloss over Mr. King's appalling crimes against children.

Because the proportion of Sun and Mail readers - millions indeed, as you rightly observe - who ever listen to CD Review is vanishingly small and that which gives a monkey's cuss about Radio 3 not a whole lot greater, for starters - and don't accept my word about the moral rectitude or otherwise of these papers when Leveson's already had his say on one of them and the other is arguably not so very much less guilty of immorality of one kind and another; as to my allegedly "glossing over" Mr. King's crimes, please read with greater care my posts in which I make my position on them as clear as it needs to be.

[Lateralthinking1]

I have just e-mailed the Mail, specifically referring to the McGregor programme and the BBC's responsibilities. It is for the newspaper to decide.

[ahinton]

You will know that the BBC has no scruples in terms of rejecting music of merit by decent people even when it is acclaimed and timely.

How much money and airtime does it have to broadcast everything that is deserving?

You keep saying that I haven't addressed some question of yours about whether the ex-convict should ever be allowed to make music or perform it. I didn't say he shouldn't do so. I said that the BBC should not require licence payers to promote him.

OK - well, that's at least a partial explanation. However, if you believe that Mr. Kind should indeed be free to continue his career, which is in part a public one, what do you believe should happen about public and published critical reception of what he does? Should it be censored in some way, either compulsorily of voluntarily? If not, why should BBC do so when everyone else doesn't and doesn't have to? Do you think that CD Review should have ignored the recording or that it should dishonestly have reviewed it adversely purely because of the past criminal acts of its principal artist

You ask for clarification on the word "perpetrator". The philosophy you put forward shares many of the characteristics of a child abuser's approach to shutting up a child. That was what I meant by your lengthy posts sounding like a perpetrator's speech. He will find any way to stifle discussion or to distort anything that is said until the time when there is an outright accusation which he will encourage. He will then use it to drive him from the "house". I find that uncanny coming from you of all people as I said before.

There could easily be a discussion here which goes along the lines "I disagree with your argument because" and there is even scope for a political angle as with other things. The BBC is political. The difference is in your approach to argument - "you will be laughed at", "no one will believe you", "ahinton's version of what another said, while inaccurate, is to be the authorised version".

I requested nothing of the kind, I know well what the word means. If by your use of it you consider that my views as expressed here are synonymous with those of a child abuser, so be it but, once again, you have no factual knowledge about this and might be wise to take a little more care in how you write what you do.

[Barbirollians]

I am sorry I raised this . I thought it was a serious matter but I am afraid lateralthinking's posts have made it very clear that it was a mistake .

I should have thought raising it via Radio 3 would have been a much better idea than racing off to tabloid newspapers who want to kick the BBC and Radio 3 at every opportunity .

Perhaps this thread can be closed FF - I should have not said anything

[Lateralthinking1]

I said "You ask for clarification on the word "perpetrator"."

You say:

I requested nothing of the kind, I know well what the word means.

And you said earlier:

"A "perpetrator" of what? Don't beat about the bush, please - just say what you mean without equivocation."

[Nick Armstrong]

There are some general "Moral Maze" type issues here. I think it would be better if they were argued as generalities rather than as specifics. What individuals feel impelled to do is up to them.

Agreed, though one can't help feeling (and saying) that tabloid rabble-rousing is hardly the best way out of the Maze...

[Lateralthinking1]

I am sorry I raised this . I thought it was a serious matter but I am afraid lateralthinking's posts have made it very clear that it was a mistake .

I should have thought raising it via Radio 3 would have been a much better idea than racing off to tabloid newspapers who want to kick the BBC and Radio 3 at every opportunity .

Perhaps this thread can be closed FF - I should have not said anything

It's the shut up job again. Lateral's posts are what have made it non-serious. You have seriously got to be joking!!!

Now for the truth of it. Your concern is about the future of the programme. It wasn't something that you envisaged when opening the thread. The possible loss of your enjoyment is more important to you then any other aspect of the matter. The question of whether King should have been promoted is for debating in your book. The idea that the promotion of a child abuser should lead to the closure of a programme, with the support of standard-setting tabloids (oh the irony) is not for any discussion. Great country!

Let me introduce a new concept here. It is about a sense of responsibility taking precedence over self-interest. We can give it a name. Elitist in the absence of anything else being elitist. Everything about the responses indicates what is rotten in Britain today.

(Responsible programming standards = no tabloid "rabble rousing". Punk rock stances among the Mozart = scope for tabloid action).

[MrGongGong]

The man is guilty; the work is innocent.

as Bryn will no doubt know

http://www.matchlessrecordings.com/no-sound-is-innocent

[french frank]

I regard this as an act of kindness to close this thread.