Quote: Trabs @ March 13 2012, 6:00 PM GMTLooks like they may not agree with you.
From Twitter: Two jokes in 10 minutes about the recent murder and dismemberment of a young woman. This is GOLD, guys.
Some news stories you just don't touch. It should be pretty obvious which ones those are.
Quote: Hennell @ March 13 2012, 2:12 PM GMTIt might just be turn of phrase but staring at news won't help. Reading it, thinking about it, rereading and questioning it are my preferred techniques (depending on time). Failing that pun-spotting.
That's essentially my process too, although it's more reading it, thinking about it, getting distracted, then remembering I'm trying to write a joke and getting annoyed with myself. Very few proper jokes come out of it.
Quote: Hennell @ March 13 2012, 2:12 PM GMTMaybe after Newsjacks finished (Not sure people would share as much while its on) we should choose a single news topic and all try writing jokes/sketch ideas on the same thing - sharing the thought process that got us there? I always fear some jokes are 'too obvious' then find other people haven't thought of them at all - I'm sure it'd prove interesting.
I like this idea a lot.
Very impressed with the prolific output of my fellow BCG writers. This week I managed my first ever sketch in 6 series (about the American/British captain of the GB athletics team) and three flimsy JackApps. So far I've been unrewarded by BBC accountants for my creativity. May I ask those blessed with selection what they think gave them the edge?
The production team thought they could use it. That's really the only answer that counts.
Quote: lippy @ March 13 2012, 8:38 PM GMTHmmmm. Someone apologised on twitter for covering that story. I have to say I did too
but not in a way that I thought was anywhere as close to the knuckle as 10oclock live would do. But perhaps that's not a good benchmark.
It did seem a really hard week for jaunty news stories and perhaps I touched upon it in despearation as there seemed a logical link to the axing of the Chinese execution TV programme. I hope that didn't sour their mood looking at my other material - but I guess it probably would....
People will submit all sorts, don't feel too bad about doing it, just don't expect them to use it, heh.
Newsjack is way too light hearted for that. I found it difficult to write this week through all the depressing news (judging by Twitter, as did Nadia Kamil, who has starred in a few Newsjack eps this series).
Definitely a bad week for funny news. When it's like that, I just tend to poke fun at the coalition, or like this week have a member of public say something stupid about Red Meat, and crufts.
Quote: RJ @ March 13 2012, 9:05 PM GMTSome news stories you just don't touch. It should be pretty obvious which ones those are.
Yes it is, I covered the possibility her brother has been arrested - I didn't go close to the knuckle at all - and frankly sometimes is it good to test the boundaries to see what is acceptable. There are so many stories, major stories that you can't touch because they're depressing/distasteful - whereas theoretically nothing should really be untouchable as long as you do it in a tasteful, satirical funny angle. Yes maybe I should have cut it ... but I think on occasion it's worth taking the risk.
You might think you were being tasteful/considered/edgy/satirical but you went past the knuckle and right up to the throat just by even mentioning it.
There's no maybe about it. Some stories you just don't touch. The brutal murder of a young woman is one of them.
By all means keep sending in gags along such lines if you wish. They will never be used and, more importantly, they'll just result in a black mark against you.
This may sound harsh, but it is such an important lesson to learn. So much of the material sent to open door shows is, frankly, unsuitable for broadcast merely in terms of taste. Don't lump yourself in with that lot.
I found it a harder week than last but still sent 17 one liners
(I didn't realise it was that many as I'd binned 6 or 7)
Not sure they're any good, but don't think they're that bad either otherwise I'd have binned more.
Yes I guess your right RJ, I as a rule, never touch tasteless subjects, whether in stand up or this - this was an exception, and I dearly hope the inclusion of it hasn't black marked me, it would seem a little harsh if the black mark some one on a single occasion approaching a tasteless subject. I wouldn't imagine they would but certainly repeat offenders I'm sure do get black listed. Still the line becomes blurred over what we can write about - Syria is an important subject, and a good writer shouldn't shy away from satirizing it if they can tackle it in a strong, clever way - not the brutal murders of course, but to mock the tyrannical regime. Or would you personally stick to the lighter subjects and avoid anything that's brutal? I'm asking so I know where the line is - up to this point I've been playing it very safe and I was concerned that may have been a negative in itself.
Ultimately, only you can decide where the line is. That line will come from the brief of the show. You know Newsjack. Do you honestly think they'd ever use a joke about a girl being murdered in such a fashion?
Of course you can make a joke about it. You can make a joke about anything. But, ultimately, you're trying to sell that joke to someone. A broadcaster with very specific rules about what they can use.
In terms of taste, there's never any harm in playing safe. Writers often think they'll get noticed by pushing the boundaries of taste in comedy, when they should concentrate on getting noticed by the strength of their joke/sketch construction, avoiding obvious and easy angles and having something of interest to say.
Syria is a very important topic and, yes, there is room for satire, but it requires a delicate touch.
I don't think Newsjack has a particularly whimsical tone. Given a choice between NHS reform and a murder, I wouldn't automatically choose the second as more edgy and controversial.
There is no way 10 O clock live would cover the McCluskie murder in any way.
Quote: RJ @ March 13 2012, 11:08 PM GMTUltimately, only you can decide where the line is. That line will come from the brief of the show. You know Newsjack. Do you honestly think they'd ever use a joke about a girl being murdered in such a fashion?
Of course you can make a joke about it. You can make a joke about anything. But, ultimately, you're trying to sell that joke to someone. A broadcaster with very specific rules about what they can use.
In terms of taste, there's never any harm in playing safe. Writers often think they'll get noticed by pushing the boundaries of taste in comedy, when they should concentrate on getting noticed by the strength of their joke/sketch construction, avoiding obvious and easy angles and having something of interest to say.
Syria is a very important topic and, yes, there is room for satire, but it requires a delicate touch.
Quoted for truth
Absolutely RJ, and up until this point I've kept within the line -as I said I've never gone out to be edgy (even with this joke) - joke/sketch construction, avoiding obvious and easy angles and having something of interest to say - all the things I've concentrated on. I guess I fell into the trap of when you hit a clever angle, and succinct and witty joke (subject matter aside) you can be blinded that as a subject matter it should not be done. Again it didn't feel like I was joking about a murder - if that struck me - I'm making fun of someone dying I wouldn't have even given it a second thought. I thought I was satirizing the arrest of a family member and parody that has with EastEnders, perhaps that is semantics but I still feel it's an important one, because you can cover a subject in two ways - you can go edgy on a tasteless angle, or you can satirize the absurdity (Syria for example). I really felt I was playing in the line because I wasn't trying to mock the deceased. I know I'm trying to justify a mistake, but as I said I wouldn't dare make fun of a poor soul, and up to this point I didn't think I was - though I am depressingly aware that despite my good intentions that's probably how it read.
If I had heard a joke on that subject, whatever it was, on NewsJack.
I would have noticed & been surprised.
It was a tricky week this week - managed three sketches, but one of those was not much more than a one liner.
A dozen one liners, mostly cranked out in a meeting room at work at quarter past four.
Most of it was cack - but sometimes it gets on.
I like Hennell's idea of doing an open writing session after the series is finished. That's if I can be bothered reading the news after the series is ended (last series it took me two months to face the weekend paper again).
On the taste in comedy debate think we could fill this thread with a myriad of different opinions. Obviously got to bear in mind NJ's brief which states 'tastefully make fun of the news from the last seven days'. Although one could argue what is tasteful - some may find sexual innuendo (which has been in the show) as tasteless as some of the stories discussed.
From a personal point of view I'd say the butt of the joke is the key thing rather than the news story.
I remember a Mock the Week episode after the Beijing Olympics in which Frankie Boyle was talking about Rebecca Addlington. I can't remember exactly what he said but the general joke was about her being ugly. A safe subject but for me a tasteless joke because it was just having a go at a young girl for not having supermodel looks (and ignoring the fact she was the best in the world at her discipline).
Conversely after 7/7 I remember Dara O'Brien doing a routine about how Londoners reacted to the bombing (in short immediately thinking of a new route to get them to work). A difficult story but an interesting and funny angle, and I would say a tasteful one.
So perhaps some stories aren't immediately off-limits. Although I'll admit you'd be hard-pushed to find the tasteful 'butt' of the joke in a 'young person murdered' story.
