Talk:The Trap (British TV series)

message: Ok I've added a section on the third epsiode. I may have made a few typos and it would be good to add some links, but I think its important to leave most of it as it is. It is perfectly acceptable to say "Curtis argued that ..." include a contentious statement, and stay with Wikipedia NPOV. 
-confusedmiked
I added numerous pieces throughout the section on the 3rd episode earlier today, particularly about positive vs negative liberty, Iraq, and a stronger conclusion. They have since been edited and further clarified and expounded by others, which I appreciate, as they're excellent additions and correct some omissions I made. firstfox 21:34, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  I'm changing the end of the ep 3 summary. Doesn't reflect the programme properly at all. Garrick92 12:16, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  just realised that the above comment looks a bit snotty. Wasn't meant to, apols if I was overblunt. Garrick92 09:55, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Third episode 

message: I do think Curtis' film misrepresents Richard Dawkins' views on genes and how this relates to society. Dawkins has always been very careful and clear to distringuish between darwinism as a description of how animals evolve and darwinism as a way of running society. Curtis did not seem to me to make clear this distinction in the second episode.
-confusedmiked
I agree - the Dawkins clips didn't really relate to the narrative, and you sense they were put there to make the straw man of Chagnon's arguments a bit stronger. I doubt Dawkins would agree with Chagnon's conclusions at all. EJBH (talk) 03:13, 21 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dawkins 

message: It's clearly incorrect to call it "The Trap (film)" for a number of reasons. Really it should be either "The Trap (documentary)" or "The Trap (TV series)" or "The Trap (TV documentary series)" since it is a three-part TV documentary series. At the very least, like most BBC series, it's a video production, not film. On top of that, it's actually being trailed by the BBC as The Trap - What Happened to Our Dream of Freedeom. Nick Cooper 13:24, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Page name 

message: Please note that Nash did not in anyway recant his Game Theory in the programme.  What he did do was to say that one of the underlaying assumptions of Game Theory was incorrect, namely that people are entirely selfish in all their interactions.
Assuming that people ARE entirely selfish in their interactions, Game Theory describes very well the kinds of outcomes one would expect in various interactions between entirely selfish individuals.
The closing statement about psychopaths acting as predicted by the theories is interesting.  The personality trait of Psychoticism is a measure of selfishness in a simplistic sense.  It differs from individual and is higher in prison populations and extreme right wing politicians (think Hitler).  It is also slightly higher than normal in 'normal' right wing politics, think republicans and conservatives.  I'll find a correct reference and update the psychoticism article later. Tom Michael - Mostly Zen  (talk) 00:15, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Re Nash. Haven't we had this already? The article says film of an older and wiser Nash recanting his earlier ideas about people is also shown. Perhaps the article needs to be clearer on this distinction? I am going to make an edit, near the top of the article, to clear this up, maybe other people can gauge whether it helps. Garrick92 11:19, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I've re-ordered the principle bits about Nash, effectively putting them in the order they appear in the programme, i.e. "revealing" his condition after explaining what his theories were. Also tried to clear up exactly what he said in the more recent footage. Nick Cooper 11:52, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Luvverly. Much better. Garrick92 14:13, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Game Theory

message: Have re-edited the intro because there is no evidence for the claim that Cold Cold Heart was ever cancelled. Claims come from non-official websites. If it was cancelled, Mr Curtis did a miraculous job in getting an entirely new doc to transmission in under six months! Moreover the BBC's 2006 synopsis of CCH read as follows:
:: "Cold Cold Heart Adam Curtis, producer of the award-winning Power Of Nightmares, returns with a series of three one-hour films about the death of altruism and the collapse of trust – trust in politicians, trust in institutions and trust in ourselves, both in our minds and our bodies." .
- Which is precisely the summary, word for word, given to The Trap.
The Trap is in fact a re-edit of CCH. I defy anyone to argue otherwise. 
For my money: the delay has been forced by problems with getting copyright release on the song Cold Cold Heart and the subsequent re-edit this problem has caused, but I have no direct evidence for this supposition, only logical inference. Take a look at the lyrics:
::: "I tried so hard my dear to show that you're my every dream. Yet youre afraid each thing I do is just some evil scheme. A memory from your lonesome past keeps us so far apart. Why cant I free your doubtful mind and melt your cold cold heart."
Garrick92 12:17, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Intro

message: Whilst I agree with the statement about Thatcher dismantling as much of the welfare state as possible, I think some sort of citation is required for a statement such as this. Maybe something from here? --Tomhannen 10:07, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Errr ... I dunno abt that. The article is a summary of Curtis's claims. He said that was the case, the article describes his claim. I don't think we need to go double-sourcing everything and re-researching his narration -- that way lies wikimadness. If there are criticisms to be levelled at his research, or quibbles raised, then they surely need to go in a "criticism" section at the end (when they, inevitably, appear). What do others think? Garrick92 11:10, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Absolutely. It's a summary of what Curtis says in the programme, and so we no more need to reference it further than we would have to double-reference any counter-criticism (e.g. not only referencing an article that claims Thatcher didn't do that, but referencing the source of that claim, as well). Nick Cooper 11:32, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

text: Yes, you're right - sorry!  --Tomhannen 14:40, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: But i would love to see a citation for the "psychopaths behave exactly as predicted"-claim at the end of part 2. Anyone ? Might it be in the work of Daniel Kahneman or his co-laureate Vernon L. Smith ? I'm searching...-- ExpImptalkcon 04:29, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  I don't want to turn this into a message board, but the google term you're scrabbling for is neuroeconomics. The following link might provide a few pointers (PDF) [ http://www.econ.nyu.edu/user/bisina/camerer_loewenstein_prelec.pdf]. Garrick92 15:19, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  i think he wasn't scrabbling for that term. i believe testing of economic behaviour on psychopaths is more behavioral- or experimental-economics than neuroeconomics (buzzword-alarm!) but i may be in error.--217.230.12.207 01:45, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  A google for <neuroeconomics, psychopaths> produced this  and  this  as lead items... Garrick92 14:33, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Citation needed for Thatcher statement

message: A previous user has added some URLs to watch the episodes online, which messed up the formatting of some of the section titles. I have corrected this, and placed the URLs in the External Links section. Since Adam Curtis regularly distributes his work online for download, I suspect it would be okay to keep these on this page, but others may have other (more expert) views on this. firstfox 14:17, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not sure of the validity of that. The programmes are BBC copyright, so unless the downloads are from their site, they should be a no-no. Nick Cooper 14:23, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  There are several brief excerpts from each of the two eps aired to date, on the BBC site, you could legitimately link to those if you want. Garrick92 15:21, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  URLs for each episode 

message: So they have all aired in the UK, when will they be available for purchase on amazon? I am in Australia and want this pronto. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.165.55.234 (talk • contribs) 18:55, 26 March 2007 
:Much of Curtis' work is pretty heavy on the use of archive footage, and he usually can only get clearance for inclusion and broadcast, not resale (eg, via DVD). Very often he puts his work up for download, and I am aware that the first two episodes are already available via indybay.com (or .org?). The URLs are on a previous edit of the page, but due to copyright reasons, it was agreed to remove them from the main page. Either hunt around the edits, or do a search on Indybay... firstfox 21:37, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I would think any sort of official release is very unlikely. Even the abridged version of The Power of Nightmares didn't get one, although the full series did get screened by SBS in Australia, so it's very probable that The Trap will be as well. Nick Cooper 22:40, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi Nick, think we've encountered before… hope everything bodes well… as for the Trap, if nowhere else, one can explore it at youtube, and bbc, of course... Lovelight 23:28, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: DVD Release

message: I've resited this section and put the figures into the actual context of when the series was shown. "Commercial success" isn't a valid description for a channel that is not funded by advertising, and overall - with the exception of Top Gear - BBC2 programmes rarely exceed 4 million viewers. In fact, a 6% audience shared for a documentary on BBC2 in that timeslot is actually pretty damn good! Nick Cooper 23:15, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Ratings

message: Changed Police in North of England to Lothian and Borders Police. (Lothian and Borders is part of Scotland) http://thescotsman.scotsman.com/index.cfm?id=675182002 62.25.109.195 12:05, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: minor change - just providing citation

message: Someone has tagged The Trap as part of this project, which it clearly can't be, as it's a television series (i.e. not just a single programme), not a film. Clearly this should be removed and replaced with WikiProject Television, but I'm not up on the protocol of doing that, so can someone who does do so? Nick Cooper 13:19, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Done Jonpatterns (talk) 17:24, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: WikiProject Films?

message: Would the article benefit from a section on the style of the film(s)? It's one of the most striking things about it, as with Curtis's previous work. At the moment, the article just reproduces the polemical content. Curtis is at least partly a humourous documentary maker, and someone who enjoys putting together a film that works aesthetically, using fast cutting, between footage and concepts. See the interview snippets in this article: http://www.guardian.co.uk/saturday/story/0,,2025578,00.html - it's as if he has primarily set himself an artistic challenge: how many strands of thought can he weave together and still give an impression of a coherent argument? It's the impression that matters, rather than actual intellectual consistency. He is not necessarily telling us what he believes: "I love the BBC," Curtis says. "It's so complex that no-one can control it. My job is to swim in the chaos and use it to my advantage." That is, he is a cynical self-interested individual taking advantage of an overgrown bureaucracy! Also he talks about how he is "affectionately spoofing" the conspiracy theorists - there's certainly a flavour of Oliver Stone's JFK in this series. Personally I found the multi-stranded argument very weak for most of the film, and yet still admired the filmmaking style. It's the one thing he gets right, so I think it deserves some coverage. earwicker 22:55, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think earwicker makes a good point. Many have critiqued Curtis's arguments as historically unsound or philosophically misleading. Yet his films have always made a big impact because his editing style juggles ideas & images in a way that is always watchable, often humorous. In particular, his use of "stock footage" (eg U.S. suburbia in the 1950s, Arabian genies appearing out of bottles) vividly conveys a subjective dimension to history: our awareness of the issues of economic freedom and jihadist terrorism is bound up with imagery from popular culture and there is an 'unconscious' dimension to many of these arguments. Mick gold 09:12, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Totally disagree, FWIW. If there are points to be made about Curtis's montage style, they don't belong in this article but in the Adam Curtis entry itself. I also think a lot of the criticisms of Curtis raised above are meretricious. There are certainly criticisms to be made of some of Curtis's logic (for example, did people refuse to support the Iraq invasion because distrust of politicians had gone mainstream, as Curtis suggested? Or was it simply because the public is not quite as gullible as Blair liked to think?). Dragging Oliver Stone into it and attempting to tar Curtis with the "conspiracy theory" brush is just irrelevant and irrational. Garrick92 09:25, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  I agree, all of Curtis's work is stylistically similar, at least as far back as Pandora's Box. It would be silly to go into too much detail on that style here - and on all the other individual series/programme pages - rather than keep it to Adam Curtis. Nick Cooper 09:33, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Discussion of Style?

message: In episode 1, the graphic for Antony Jay (creator of Yes Minister) spells his name "Anthony".   The wikipedia entry uses Antony so I have gone with that.  I'll post a query on the relevant talk page.  --Tomhannen 10:53, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Spelling of Antony Jay

message: music listed is wrong, The Thing is not featured at all (morricone), 2 tracks created by John Carpenter are included however. Overture from Tannhauser isnt included either. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 82.29.230.23 (talk) 21:16, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: The music

message: :Image:The trap episode1 nash.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is  other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot (talk) 05:23, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:The trap episode1 nash.jpg

message: :Image:The trap episode2 chagnon.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is  other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot (talk) 05:23, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:The trap episode2 chagnon.jpg

message: :Image:The trap screenshot.PNG is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is  other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot (talk) 05:24, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:The trap screenshot.PNG

message: :Image:Thetrap episode1 laing.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is  other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot (talk) 02:33, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Thetrap episode1 laing.jpg

message: :Image:Thetrap episode3 isaiah berlin.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is  other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot (talk) 02:34, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Thetrap episode3 isaiah berlin.jpg

message: Understandable confusion has arisen: the Nash game is known as So Long Sucker or Fuck Your Buddy, but for whatever reason the BBC chose Fuck You Buddy as the title of the episode. There have been repeated attempts to harmonise these on Wikipedia, either by changing the name of the game or, more recently, by changing the name of the episode. It might seem more elegant to make such changes, but the historical reality shows this small, but I feel significant, difference. Testbed (talk) 16:39, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Name of first episode - clarification 

message: I'm taking out the 'so called', because its the tantamount to saying - the so called second world war, or the so called Glorious Revolution. It might be best to keep this unbiased.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jackdelyelis (talk • contribs) 20:23, 23 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: You seem to be implying that the term "so called" has purely negative connotations, which it does not automatically. It depends on the context. One could say, "This was the work of Theodore Kaczynski, the so called 'Unabomber'..." as a synonym of "(also) known as..." Nick Cooper (talk) 07:25, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  The 'so called reign of terror'

message: Marc Summers was shown (along with his name) in a video used in episode two. Should he be among those credited? Orville Eastland (talk) 03:15, 22 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Marc Summers credit? 

message: A couple of weeks ago User:Larklight edited some of the episode summaries citing NPOV issues, but to me it seems that the POV is an accurate reflection of the POV in the documentary itself, ie, the summaries were a neutral description of the contents of the documentary, and any POV should be in the article for the summaries to be correct. As such I reinstated the summaries as they were previously. In the interest of making the article less POV'ed it would be good to add more on the reception of the documentary (as touched upon above, as the article is rather heavy on the summary of the contents itself right now. Siawase (talk) 11:22, 1 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  "POV" in the episode summaries 

message: This section seems to be a case of WP:INDISCRIMINATE - it lists music that, while in the programme, is not the focus of it.Autarch (talk) 17:47, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Possible issue with Featured Music 

message: Curtis often greatly misunderstands the ideas he claims to explore.  I hate reading the summaries because many sentences merely restate Curtis' claims.  I understand it would be awkward to reword it so that every sentence is as skeptical as I'd like it to be.  As an alternative, I believe we need section headings which remind the reader that this section is not neutral or fact-checked like other parts of wikipedia.  What have other articles summarizing questionable sources done? --RedHouse18 23:03, 1 November 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I think you're wrong. The purpose of the summaries is to describe what the episodes say, not to confirm or refute them. To do so would clearly be original research. Nick Cooper (talk) 01:05, 2 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Warning Labels for Episode Summaries 

message: As I first posted here in 2008, understandable confusion has arisen: the Nash game is known as So Long Sucker or Fuck Your Buddy, but for whatever reason the BBC chose Fuck You Buddy as the title of the episode. There have been repeated attempts to harmonise these on Wikipedia, either by changing the name of the game or, more recently, by changing the name of the episode. It might seem more elegant to make such changes, but the historical reality shows this small, but I feel significant, difference.
The title of the episode is (correctly) F*** You Buddy but when describing the game itself, the correct name is (see So Long Sucker for the reference) F*** Your Buddy. I have therefore changed this back in the body of the article. Testbed (talk) 05:54, 25 May 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  First Episode title: F*** You Buddy vs F*** Your Buddy 

message: The sections labelled 'contributors' are mis-titled in my opinion.  For example, using a clip of Richard Dawkins in 1987 does not mean Dawkins has contributed in an active way.  I proposed that the sections be retitled 'Featured', as this does not imply active participation. Jonpatterns (talk) 17:24, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Contributor/ Featured

message: An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect :The Trap (television documentary series and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 October 27#The Trap (television documentary series until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion.  Steel1943 (talk) 19:09, 27 October 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  "The Trap (television documentary series" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]]