I wasn’t certain whether to post this in ‘The Archers’ or ‘Not The Archers’ but as it was his behaviours in TA which got me so riled over a long period here seems right.
I never watch East Enders, I haven’t for 20 years. There are better ways of depressing oneself. I am, however, delighted to read today that he was called into the Beeb Continuing Drama offices on Thursday and told to pack his bags … more or less immediately.
This follows a year of controversy during which he’s ripped old storylines to pieces, introduced deliberately controversial new characters and stories, binned off established fans favourites and generally upset more or less everyone involved … oh, & lost 30% auduence share
Being SO’C of course he has a different version … that his real love is film (well it was clearly never radio) and he’s been working on some film projects which have unexpectedly picked up pace and with deep regret he needs to move on.
“Pants on Fire”.
My only deep regret … apart from his very existence … is that he’d not yet taken Baisy Dadger to Walford with him. Still … one can’t have everything.
Is leaving Enders - obviously been the same rip-roaring success as he was in TA. Off to pursue his career in films, it seems.
A comment in the Sun
For too long there has been dire issues which I swear were just written so the PC BBC could put up help line numbers after each episode. I think they found the help line numbers first then wrote overly long story lines around just that focus… lol…
He could have learned from the reaction to TA but he’s obviously too arrogant to listen. Ditto the BBC - they just ignored us; bet they wished they’d paid us more attention.
[quote=“Used2B, post:2, topic:459”]Don’t be too sure.
He’ll be back. To further ruin TA.[/quote]He’s going to be farrrrrrrr too busy on his films.
Naive of me maybe but he was more or less binned overnight on Thursday. So he’s seriously p’d off some big players. I’m hoping he’s toast there now and some embarrassed people are wishing they’d listened.
It was amazing arrogance on the part of the BBC establishment to disregard what we had to say. I wonder if his little coterie of worshippers will be hitting the keyboards to say his sacking proves how brilliant and talented he is?
The answer is that anything added to the other thread goes there, so your and my Mark Gatiss comments are there in spite of its having a padlock on it; I don’t know how that can happen…
The choice will have been, “Resign effective immediately, and we will give you some severance pay. Refuse to resign, and we will sack you. Your choice.”
[quote=“HedgeSparrow, post:17, topic:460”]
Then I saw what he did when he got his sticky fingers on Doctor Who.
[/quote]He’s very talented, but extremely self focused and his work always veers into that one style.
It’s a good style, but gets tedious.
… and he’s redefined “smug”. I cant imagine the smuggidity of the pair of them together.
Anyway, my sole interest will be in how much of a cock of it SO’C can make.
[quote=“Fanta, post:13, topic:460”]The choice will have been, “Resign effective immediately, and we will give you some severance pay. Refuse to resign, and we will sack you. Your choice.”[/quote]I have had many “thin envelope, fat envelope” discussions in my career.
His cintract wi have a notice period in it and as he’s gone more or less thete & then it’s clear he’s been paid in lieu & told to go there & then. As a ‘senior talent’ that could easily be 6 months. It’s likely he will be privately employed to them so it’s probably contract cancellation rather than dismissal from employed status.
Not quite the stuff of Gross Misconduct as that allows no notice but the speed suggests something alarming as wheeling in a substitute is both disruptive and costly.
Thank goodness we can rely on Mr O’Connor to give us the full truth over time