Watch out, Richard Armitage fans. We’re a market segment again!

What frustration, having seen notice of this post in my email about a topic I initiated and want to discuss, and then having my internet go out from night until a few minutes ago, before I got to read the content. Anyway, this post raises some additional issues and thoughts of what we’ve been discussing here, including, and this is key to me, the possible misrepresentation of Armitage’s character and the nature of the film. I would also say here, that it is only because I don’t have the one hard fact I need, to publish the name of the fan I think is running the account. I have copies of tweets from the fan begging Anna Friel and Candida Brady to use her services free since she has a PR and alleged digital media background, as well as tweets offering concrete “advice,” and a host of other clues and circumstantial evidence. But until someone in the know confirms the fact, or until I get utterly fed up, I’m going to refrain from mentioning the name or the FB page, which I think, most of us already know.

Me + Richard Armitage

Pursuant to this. I have a lot of the same reactions. And, as history repeats itself, a lot more weariness about it all. And two additional points to make.

Twitter #richardarmitage tag before August 2014 — how I miss thee. Full of funny exchanges, sexy remarks, links to great fan art, and some real discussions. What do we have now? A non-stop stream of smarm and fundraising and polls about James Bond with Armitage’s occasional self-promotion put in there and some pretty pictures. No discussions that involve anything like differing viewpoints; everyone always already agrees with everyone else. I haven’t been there much lately because I remember when it was fun and joky and it was okay to make some racy comments about Armitage’s body and I don’t want to lose the memory. The current state of affairs is what we get, though, when the occasional swear word provokes…

View original post 1,699 more words

7 thoughts on “Watch out, Richard Armitage fans. We’re a market segment again!

  1. Re; ”I have copies of tweets from the fan begging Anna Friel and Candida Brady to use her services free since she has a PR and alleged digital media background, as well as tweets offering concrete “advice,” and a host of other clues and circumstantial evidence. ”

    Before CB asked for twitter help she tweeted saying she needed help with her filing (maybe just in an exasperated way!) but said person replied, offering, as you’ve said, to sort out digital files from her location in the US. I’ve since had a look at the old tweets but can’t find these particular ones, though as Perry has said, CB did then ask for twitter advice in a tweet and got replies from various people.

    CB comes across as very nice and is a committed environmentalist – she’s presumably just gone with said person’s offer of help. As said person also tweeted CB a few times with environmental comments, CB may have thought she was a good choice. It’s an Indie film, looking for a distributor and so presumably will have very little budget of its own to play with.

    And CB may not have realised about the massed ranks of RA fans and ‘experts’!


  2. It’s not important to me to know the identity of said person.
    I feel the key issue here is to get the right people on board to assist the film in achieving its deserved exposure. I hope it gets this exposure in spite of my personal doubts concerning the *twittering*.
    I hope all goes well at and after Leeds.


  3. When you read the UATSC story synopses, you can tell right there that this is a gritty story of kids living on the edge–a cautionary tale with some hopeful messages attached to it. It is no “Pollyanna” story by any stretch of the imagination.

    The snippets of trailers that we have seen so far swing from a mashup between “About a Boy” to “The Wild Bunch”–or “The Wild ONes”, something with “wild” in the title. UATSC is a very complicated story–as most real life situations are. That the film in its interpretation of Bernard Hare’s book/memoir might bend toward the more positive side in the hope of gaining support for children’s social services is a plus to me.

    Children are among our most vulnerable citizens–especially since it takes 18 years before they are allowed to vote and have a say in what affects them, but the government and communities make policy impacting them. Such social programs as WIC (Women Infant Child) programs for children in underprivileged situations is vital to those children’s survival. With it, their parents can gain food vouchers for better nutrition for their child, medical insurance to make sure that they receive preventive and needed medical care such as vaccinations, etc. I know of mothers utilizing WIC and I am glad that they have that safety net for their children–however slim that might be.

    If I got to choose, all of my tax dollars would go to benefit children.


    • WIC and other services are all well and good unless the mothers are crack addicts and/or disinterested in their kids and take no advantage of what is offered.One of the issues in Urban is that the kids, or some of them, were in group foster care. They were removed from the home on account of parental neglect, and then ditching their care homes. That’s part of the reason why, in Urban, the system is painted as the enemy in enemy in many way.They were not going to school, and no one noticed or cared. This was one of the positive changes Chop did make, if I recall correctly. I just don’t know how relevant a 44 year old story is today, though it seems like some things have not changed. Children may need help and dollars to help them, but if we don’t start with the parents, then there isn’t much hope for these kids.

      Liked by 1 person

      • You are correct that all is not rosy. Parents, teachers, social workers, etc. all need to be involved and addressed.

        Let me share my experiences as another example of children at risk–but with a hopeful ending. For a year, I served as what is called an “Educational Surrogate Parent” for a child in one of our local special needs residential grade schools. These were little kids in dire situations–communication deficits, harming themselves, being bullied by other bigger kids because they could not defend themselves, etc.

        Learning was the least of their worries. But it was through the children participating in a structured classroom setting–guiding them to develop skills that we all take for granted, such as listening, taking notes, writing their name–and a structured and caring residential facility, that they thrived and developed.

        As an ESP, I was no surrogate, nor a parent. But my charge was to attend class monthly to observe the child and its interactions in class. Then quarterly, I sat in on the IEP (Individualized Educational Plan) meetings of the teachers, social workers, school district rep, etc.My role was to ask questions on behalf of the child as an advocate–such as if one teaching method worked for the child and others did not, how can the teachers build on that? Or, if the goal is to mainstream the child and return the child to their parents next year, what services will be provided to the child and to the parents, and to the new school that the child will go to. Has the child progressed enough to succeed when they are taken out of the protective cocoon of the residential school facility?

        Since I was not supposed to develop a relationship with the child, so as not to confuse the child as to whom its care givers were–and because as the child’s ESP, was supposed to be the unbiased observer–I was required to remain detached. I respected that mission. But I will say that in my year long observations of the classroom setting, I saw a child who didn’t communicate and scratched and hurt themselves, change/transform into a child who spoke up and participated in class, could use a computer, did not hurt themself anymore, and who was actually learning content materials. It really was a miracle, and I give many kudos to the teachers and caregivers in that residential facility for the transformative effect that they had and have upon children in their care. I wish I knew how that child is doing today ten years later, but privacy rules prevent the school from giving out that information. But I hope and pray that that child is well and happy and continued to develop and receive special assistance as needed.


  4. Pingback: @Urban Fangirl Marketer: Leveling a Charge or Back-pedaling? | Armitage Agonistes

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s