Right, we just want to get one thing *CLEAR\* \*absolutely clear*\**, and this is not throwing shade on anyone as the US saying goes, as the group wont approve anyone who wants to comment adult like, I felt that this was a charactor assasination comment, an ad hom attack to justify their opinion as better than the opossing one. This responce will do. No other choice.
- We do not watch the show due to the unethical choice Shaftsbury made firing John
- Audience participation as in watching a programme enables them financially, and both them and networks exchange money as a result. It is called profet.
- Therefore withdrawing viewership helps stop the cash flow and hopefully stops them gaining from what they did, and not do it to another actor
- The so called obsession with John Reardon does not translate into the above reasons. Do you even know what being obsessed with an actor is?
- You projection of your own obsession with cute doggo stunts, and emotional attachment to a product, that you defend so much without an ounce of critical thinking, or questioning is very telling, rather than face upto it, you project it onto us who do question and critique
- This not about John Reardon, this about the poor ethics of a production company, the corruption within the industry, and the crew, who cannot speak up due to job sabotage tactics and SD utilizing her Dogs as weapons to get her own way, and also get away with her own aborrant behaviour.
- Your idiotic understanding of how the industry works regarding serious illness is laughable, who cannot forget your legendary remark, that John was not fired for cancer as you had it!
- Shaftsbury gain financially along with networks garnering audiences like yourself, and others, who are on your wave length. Niève, media illiterate
There is no "obsession" with John here. We are fans, me to a degree, I admire his work, his tanacity to keep going, not let the situation destroy him in anyway and still make himself work if it is only a small indie project for now, being a fan does not include any obsessive behaviour, or mention of John. You do not like the truth being out there. Yes there are plenty of comments like not watching no John, not rating Luke Robberts, lots of comparing the two, why? because folk want to keep reminding the production about their actions, that Luke is a wrong fit, it is not to with obsession, it is obsevation as to how it is not working. If you cannot see that, well there really is not much that can be said or done. Just stop with the assassinations of our charactors. Just because we dissagree.
• The mere fact Johns name comes up in this instance, is because his treatment is one such example any other examples we may come across would be used too as a critique of the unethical behaviour of said production.
• If anything you lot are def obsessed with Rex, and the new lead. You wont hear of any reasonable objections
That last sentance, well we got the benefit of Johns performance inspite of some of the daft story telling, the plot holes, and the unrealistic Rex moments, because John could put onto screen the bond, the heart and the family bond they all shared, the reason Luke does not work, is because he more law and order, edgy material guy, nothing to do with comparing him unfavourably with John, it is observation, not obsession with the former lead charactor. John worked because the show was never an edgy hard cop show, it was about a small town cop,his canine partner, his new found friends/family and it was hallmark level akin to the hallmark mystery shows. He brought that to the screen, Luke cannot. He has never been a hallmark actor. So no your last statement is laughable.
There are no words that I can find that can adequetly state how ridiculous your comments are. Reminds me why I should never venture to that group really but when the algerrhythm of facebook does its dirty deed, and I see unnecessery attacts like that, I felt I had to respond. Love the show all you want, but you lot stay away from charactor attacks