Did other Times readers notice the forum mention in the Times today?

It was in reference to the thread we had a while back about the use of the recorder tutor books of a convicted paedophile (the name is temporarily slipping my tongue...), and two quotes were taken from (unnamed) members here.

I can give more details if people want?

It's an interesting topic, still, though.

Oh how interesting...

Is the article online?

I saw an article about that in the Daily Mail - No mention of the forums though! Please, do tell!

Yeah, here it is:

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/e...icle2373749.ece



And I've heard through the grapevine that it was our very own Deborah that made the comment about Wagner, and Bach, etc!

Interesting! And interesting as well to see that we're more public here than we might realise!

'Tis true... I can't find the thread though.

What a non-story though - reporting on what someone said on an internet discussion forum two years about someone who's already several years into their prison sentence. I've encountered this sort of thing from The Times before - they want some views (often the more controversial sort), but just lift quotes from internet discussion boards rather than actually bother to leave the office and interview people. Journalism at its laziest, but what do you expect from a paper owned by R*p*rt M*rd*ch <spits>?

I believe the other comment was one of mine... I certainly started the thread. It may be a non-story Deborah, that thread was started over 12 months ago when the teacher in question was gaoled as I was using the books and worked in the same county that was affected. I am not at all surprised on the Step-daughter's reaction, this is typical of victims.

Personally I am glad that this topic has made the national press: News or Non-News.

JoD

The teacher was called Davey, or something like that.

This was the thread I do believe!

Surely they should have asked before publishing your comments though?

I agree. It seems wrong to me that they have printed your comments in a national newspaper without asking you first.

This forum is in the public domain, so anyone can see any comments. I would need to check, but I believe that guest users can read all posts, they just can't reply to them.

It's one of the reasons one of the other forums I'm on, is readable for some boards and is password protected for others. You can only get on the password, once you've contacted the forum master privately and you've posted on the open boards a number of times.

However, I wouldn't have thought that would really be a problem to a journalist, just means that they may have to wait a bit longer to get access.

I think that by having the password, any journalists would have to ask permission, but if the forums are viewable without passwords, they don't need to ask.

Should this place be password protected for reading posts? Possibly, but then you'd lose people who are looking to see if they want to sign up or if a particular question has been asked before etc.

No easy answer.

Rosemary: I'm mildly flattered and have just penned/typed a response to their forum. Personally I feel it shows Deborah and me rather well. Both of us have given a coherent arguement that they felt worthy of publishing. Question is if it causes a real hoo-ha, will the two of us be required to deal with the rest of the media?

However this is a public forum this has proven yet again that it is read by outside organisations other than the members.

I can not speak for Deborah, but I have nothing to hide, and stand by everything I've said on a serious topic on this forum. Personally I'm not ashamed of who I am.

Edited at 13:39 The times article has come out as a response to comments in the Guardian and Mail made by Ms Antoinette Lyons about the books. It was the only article to give a counter respsonse by music teachers rather than by Mr Davey's publisher/distributor. Its typical Daily Mail fodder that has spilt over into the other media. The less-balanced response is also published in the Sun.

This is typical media for you, as Deborah called it non-news. Typical tabloid sensationalism. I wouldn't be at all surprised for the tabloids to say that Deborah and I support paedophilia, which we certainly do not! (Deborah I'm sure you won't mind me answering on your behalf here!)

Lets look at the facts, the schools are going back lets try to find something we can put in our pages that is vaguely eduaction-related. Call me sceptial if you like!

However if anything as ludicrously as that is said, please can any forums lawyers come to our aide for the libel case, as it would certainly looses us our pupils and therefore our income.

jod, I wouldn't worry - I honestly don't think that's a problem at all. In my opinion, in no way does your response support paedophilia; that didn't even cross my mind. Also, you're completely unnamed! I wouldn't lose any sleep worrying about that one.

I think the most interesting thing about their lazy journalism (apart from their quoting of your comment) is that they apparently decided not to use the somewhat shorter Ctrl + C, Ctrl + V trick, as in their report, it is a replica but for the worse, i.e. omitting the hyphen in anti-Semitic and spelling 'disapprove' without the letter 'a' - mistakes which you quite rightly didn't make! So curiously, it seems they must have typed it out letter by letter instead.

I wonder if the relevant journalist is reading this topic right now, and how they managed to stumble across the other in the first place - did they just type the correct keywords into Google?

~Wobby~

Probably! If you enter "Brian Davey" as your search criteria in Google, the original thread is the first match on Google's list.

Just a further thought - how do the posters quoted and the AB itself stand in regard to copyright?

Hmm... rather intriguing is the international acclaim of this forum, as it is apparently the top link, even searching 'the Web' and not just the UK. But I guess the case itself is not so relevant to the rest of the world. I wonder if there are any other phrases that will bring the forums to the top spot - I know 'Grand Woohoo' does! Oh yes, and so does 'Platinum Blend'!

In regards to the further thoughts, you'll probably need someone more law orientated to evaluate the situation, but I don't really think there is much 'copyright' over the comments we make. The composition and performance recordings made on the Forum User Recordings website is probably more of a concern in terms of legal rights, I guess, though.

~Wobby~

So does "Lorna Linley"

I don't see why a journalist would need to google 'Brian Davey'. The journalist must have already been aware of this forum as a place where musicians' and music teachers' views are aired. It must have been a music journalist who already reads here - or posts!

Wow, Deborah, you are famous!!!

I wonder if I really get kidnapped, will you say "He was a school rugby player and so his kidnappers have to be rugby players too"? haha

Can I ask who "Lorna Linley" is please? I've seen her name crop up in many places on forums but havn't a clue who she is. Am i being completely ignorant and missing a point or is it something secret?
Please could someone inform me
Merci x

We should get Car Expert to put that in FAQs!
Sorry not to answer you right now; in a bit of a rush!

Use the music, read the books and leave the rest out of it is what I feel. If we start censoring what we use or read heaven knows where it will lead. Imagine an economics wizard publishing a great economic theory and then being imprisoned for robbing a bank or fraud.. Do we ban the book ?

If the material is suitable and we want to use it I can’t see why not. Let justice and the courts look after the rest. If not then before long it won’t just be what is illegal that will be the cause of censorship. It will be whatever any Tom #### or Harry doesn’t approve of.

I think this is just another example of pseudo- journalism looking for muck where there isn’t any.

Why can't you say Tom, #### or Harry?


Wow, it happened to me too!!!

That's exactly what I was thinking!

If they want a Music Story that is mildly educational, how about looking at the distinct lack of provision in many Primary Schools.

Some years ago I wrote a poem (it won a prize in the literary review!) entitled the poem not the poet. The gist is that a poet writes and publishes a collection of his works. It gets reviewed and then is rubbished because the poet is not female, or a refugee, or a victim of torture, or a survivor of civil war, or jewish, or gay, or black or handicapped or mad or ill, nor any other minority, so the reviewer felt that this poet had no right to poetry. The poetry itself was ignored. This poem was inspired by a real review (in the London Review of Books, if my memory is correct).

This thread and this subject reminds me of that review and that poem: If it is iniquitous to deny a poet recognition on grounds other than the peotry, it is equally iniquitous to suggest that a good teaching aid is no good because of the private life of the author.

That the authors private offences has been appalling has no bearing on whether the books are good or not. If you are the kind of person that won't take penicillin because it was tested on animals, then fine: don't read or use the books. It won't stop them existing and it won't undo the things he did. Alternatively you can make your own life and that of your pupils a little easier.

On the very rare occasions I use any of Brian Davey's books (there is a good page where the pupil can spell out words by reading the notes, and it is photocopiable) I simply tell the parent the man's background, and check that they are ok with it.

This seems to me to be a sensible compromise.

As well as being a recognised abbreviation for the name Richard, d!ck is a slang term for male genitalia in colloquial English. The auto-censor ####es it out by default. One has similar troubles referring to a '###### (blóódy) battle between two countries' or 'my cart is pulled by an ###### (áss)'.

Interestingly, on the other hand, it's American based so certain profanities used in the UK but not the US slip through without bother.

It is a wonder and a marvel to me the things this censor picks up! I was modded today for the 3-letter word beginning with b referring to the part of the anatomy that you sit on. It didn't even use the correct number of hashes! In the past it has objected to a d@mmit - I am not known for my foul language and am finding this all a bit curious. It may even lead to a thread by flippant posters on how to curse and swear without being spotted.

Mel

but personally I wouldn't start the thread for fear of the fury of the mods...

It did cross my mind after I had typed the offending word that it might get hashed but then, I said to myself, the abbreviated name would begin with a capital letter whereas in mid sentence the other usage wouldn't. But the censor is obvioulsy not that "censortive".

- so I had better leave it there.

Of course I'm famous! I shall be appearing on a television set near you this weekend

Oh, and has already been pointed out, I wouldn't try pushing your luck with the auto-censor, as it'll lead to a one-way ticket to moderation. Then again...

Hi, but you don't know where I am. Hehe. That's the beauty of the forum. I can be totally anonymous. Hehehehehe.

Returning to the original story of the thread. It was covered on the Anglia regional TV news last night. The story centred round interveiws with the step daughter who wants the books banned in schools. The books were repeatedly described as having been written "in order to lure his young victims". Which is an odd way to report it as I thought they were written in order to teach music.

It seemed to me as if it was being implied that the books being available made them potential lures that could be used by peadophiles in general. It was very much a case of - these books written to lure young children are being sold in music shops and used in many of our schools. I'm sure we will see a number of schools now banning the use of these books due to parental pressure as a result of this type of reporting.

It is tragic what happened to this lady as a child and his other victims but it really annoys me when a person with a particular agenda can get their view reported as "news" on TV and parroted by a reporter without the logic being challenged in any way at all. It seems to be happening increasingly on TV news.

Oh no Grumpy Old Man attack coming on - I must go and calm down

Being a victim of any sort means that nodody is allowed to publicly challenge your arguments. That's called political correctness.

And on that note I'll just say it here because I've never been able to before: I didn't enjoy "A Boy Called It" I thought it was overly graphic and disturbing, and the horror kept me so disgusted that I didn't get emotionally detached. I'm very very sorry he suffered through all that but I certainly won't be reading about it again.

But has anyone in the forum considered the feelings of the step daughter? How would she feel if she has to take the book written by her attacker to school and she's forced to see the attacker's name on the cover of the book and know that she's still engaging her attacker albeit in an oblique way?

We can't really compare what the step daughter is going through and other children as well with Schubert and all the dead composers. In the current case, the victims are still alive and can potentially be traumatised still.

I don't know what it's like to be attacked and abused but I imagine it must be quite bad.

I would not presume to make a judgement about what degree of emotional pain the lady feels and for how long. But just to clear up some confusion in your post the lady is in her 30s now (I estimate having seen her interview) so should not have to face using these books to learn recorder in school. Thankfully nothing like this has happened to me so I cannot really understand the degree of her pain. My complaint is not with her wanting to campaign against the books or for her using particular language.

My objection is that a reporter can repeat her phrases such as "written in order to lure his young victims" and "...books written to lure children, in use in the region's schools..." without question, thereby giving them emphasis and credibility.

I think it is lazy and biased reporting It is potentially a rather short step from that, to a parent whipping up a campaign in a school, questioning why a particular teacher has chosen to use one of the books given "the purpose for which it was written" which apparently was not to teach music at all.

oh, i thought the girl was my age or not much older. If she's already 30, it can't be so bad. She won't be forced to read any book at that age. No teacher above her, etc.

That's what happens when you don't read in full all of the information available


Ahem, some of us are over 30 and still have teachers and lessons, and need to make time to fit in practice around dull grown-up things. Read the Adult Learners' board for some inspiring tales.

But it's different for grown-ups. You can dismiss your teacher and get another or get none. You call the shots. So the 30 year old step daughter can easily insist on using a different book if she takes up the recorder.

Well, that's debatable. I still call the shots with my adult pupils. They of course have the option to leave (with the correct notice period given).

However, it's unlikely that any teacher would be using a book aimed at children with an adult pupil. And if one of my pupils had that kind of a problem with a book I would be very open to the idea of changing. It's all about communication rather than 'insisting'. If one of my adult pupils came in with such a high-handed manner toward me, I would seriously consider whether or not I would want to teach them.

but I have to mention that quite a few of my adult pupils use PianoWorld (full of beautiful, colourful illustrations), including an 85 year old student of mine!

Wow 85 and still learning to play the piano? That's admirable. 85 is 7 times my age. I've already lived for so long I can't imagine 7 times my lifetime!!! It's like Methusaleh in the Bible.

I definitely don't think they should have reported phrases like "written to lure children" - I very much doubt they were written for that purpose! Has he himself said that's why he wrote them?! If he has, then fair enough, but otherwise that's just speculation and hypothesis and shouldn't be reported without proper foundation and evidence - media hype as usual......... And I certainly think if his books are good, and there are no really good alternatives, then use them. I'm not sure whether he should gain financially from them - that's a tricky one........on the one hand maybe all profits from the sales should go to charity (as someone commented on the Times report have your say,) but on the other hand he won't be able to find work afterwards so instead of the taxpayer having to support him, maybe he should be allowed to receive from sales - otherwise if he were to fall into poverty and end up begging on the streets, what kind of temptations would there be then walking past him every day?

It's the use of the word 'lure' in this context that's inappropriate and unacceptable; if the books were written to appeal specifically to children then that's hardly surprising as this is the purpose of any tutor book aimed at children learning an instrument. If teachers who are perverts want to 'lure' children for illicit purposes, there is no particular need to write their own stuff to do so. I've just bought a Chester's Piano Tutor book, as I think it appeals to children, but it doesn't follow that my wanting to appeal to children constitutes 'luring'.

If jounalists feel a moral obligation to dissuade teachers from using these particular books, and want credibility for their statements, then they should stick to reasonable arguments - like it perhaps being wrong for Brian Davey to continue to make money from the sale of the books, but then this opens up another whole can of legal worms. Should the assets of every criminal be confiscated in order that they come out of prison on the dole and with no home? Jeffrey Archer wrote another best-seller whilst in prison - should this have been illegal? Should we still be able to buy Bernhard Matthews' chicken?

I think the reason there is so much negative response from teachers to this article is because of the nature of the report rather than because we are defending Brian Davey. It's the nature of our sensationalist media, which underestimates the intelligence of the reader, disregards logical argument, and paints everything as black or white.

And now the BBC (lazy journalists extrodinaire) have picked it up too: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/6979731.stm

Knowing at least one music teacher who worked with Brian Davey, I think the step daughter is being rather disengenuous. Davey was an inspired teacher and called to teach. Unfortunately he was also a pervert. The books were a product of his vocation, not his perversion.

I shall continue to use them, and interestingly, when asked, none of my pupils have objected.

I have doubts that the books were written 'to lure'. Surely, if that was his only intention, it would have been easier to use some kittens?

Well, the stepdaughter is quoted as saying:
"In my opinion they were written with one aim - to get to children."
And so "lure", if not actually said by the stepdaughter, sounds like a reasonable paraphrase.
The fact that the complaint about the books comes from the stepdaughter is what makes it a story, so I think it's unfair to call the journalists "lazy".