In a previous post I talked about the complaint I sent the BBC concerning LGBT representation in ‘Sherlock’ and how the reply I got was some form letter about Johnlock that didn’t address anything I’d said. Needless to say I was unhappy about this and wrote back the following:
My previous complaint was about how only villains seemed to be gay or queer on ‘Sherlock’ and how there are no positive depictions to balance them. The response I got back was all about how fans had been complaining how John and Sherlock weren’t a couple and how the BBC supports the writers’ decision. If someone had actually bothered to read my complaint, they’d know I did too, this is directly from my previous message: “Then there’s the way the show treats the idea of a potential relationship between John and Sherlock. I respect the writers’ wish for the show to maintain true to the original stories in this, but do they have to turn the idea into a joke?”. I literally say I respect their decision, the only issue I have is how they go about it. I am aware of fans’ disappointment, but I can assure you I never saw any kind of template going around. Maybe you shouldn’t dismiss all angry ‘Sherlock’ fans as angry shippers? I believe the BBC and the writers support LGBT rights, but it doesn’t seem to translate to the screen. Go ahead and tally all appearances/mentions/occurrences/references/etc. See how many of them are villains, how many of them are positive, how many jokes. Be sure your actions match your intentions before you say there’s nothing to complain about.
This perhaps a bit less polite and a bit less forceful, but still a perfectly valid response. It once again clarifies my initial complaint, but also my problems with their response. I suppose I was expecting too much when I expected a more contrite reaction this time, because I just received this answer:
Thank you for your further comments about ‘Sherlock’. We’re sorry to learn that you were disappointed with our previous reply.
The BBC received feedback from some viewers unhappy with our ‘Sherlock’ statement, and most of these raise a number of similar/related issues. In line with the BBC’s complaints framework we are again issuing one response to all complainants.
We realise you may be disappointed, but we can only reiterate that the BBC does not accept any of the allegations levelled at ‘Sherlock’ or its writers, and we wholeheartedly support the creative freedom of the writers to bring their vision to the screen.
We will register your continued disappointment about the series.
At this point we must explain that there’s little more we can usefully add in response to your concerns. We do not believe your complaint has raised a significant issue of general importance that might justify further investigation. We will not therefore correspond further in response to additional points, or further comments or questions, made about this issue or our responses to it.
We realise you will be disappointed to hear this but hope this explains why we are not able to take your complaint further. If you remain dissatisfied about our decision you can appeal to the BBC Trust, the body which represents licence fee payers. The Trust has asked that we should explain to complainants that the BBC’s Royal Charter draws a clear distinction between the role of the Trust - which determines the overall scope of the BBC’s services and sets its standards - and that of the BBC Executive - which runs the Corporation and decides what to broadcast and publish.
Then it goes on a bit about The Trust and how to contact them, but I figured that wasn’t relevant here. What is relevant are the bits I highlighted: they do not accept? What’s the point of letting people make complaints if you’re going to dismiss them? And not important? People are saying one of your shows is misrepresenting people, but it’s not important? Wtf?
Sadly enough, I don’t know if I can push this further. I don’t live in the UK, so while I pay for the BBC (along with lots of other channels) I’m not technically a licence fee payer. If there are others who feel similarly though, I will absolutely support them. If not by taking this further with the BBC, then maybe the press? If I recall correctly, several publications/sites were upset about this issue as well, they might want to follow up on this.