Beyer Browned-off by Channel 4 show

Surprise! The Sage of Ashford, John Beyer, doesn’t like the idea of mentalist Derren Brown‘s new Channel 4 show, The Heist.

The show involves Derren “persuading” a bunch of businessmen to hold up a security van during a management training seminar. Beyer is raging:

It is not something that Channel Four should be commissioning. If Derren Brown wants to make programmes involving magic, then he should stick to that – not silly stunts glamourising crime,

he drivelled witlessly to the Daily Record.

The thought-provoking show will also feature a recreation of the infamous “Obedience experiment” by Stanley Milgram in which subjects were persuaded to deliver apparently lethal electric shocks to another human being simply because they were told to by a man in a white coat.


7 Responses to “Beyer Browned-off by Channel 4 show”

  1. Dan Factor says:

    Like Derren Brown’s russian roulette stunt this looks faked and staged. Dont stop Beyer jumping in with an outraged quote though!

  2. Andy L says:

    Derren’s Russian Roulette stunt used blanks, but even if you use blanks at that range it will probably kill you. It wasn’t faked otherwise.

    Ngh. Dumb even by Beyers standards. Derren’s shows have never just been about magic, and how this is supposed to “glamourise” crime is completely beyond me.

  3. Irene Alder says:

    I maintained my composure reviewing Mr Beyer’s article by recalling that 89% of journalism must be appreciated for its comedy value, and Mr Beyer’s bitter (and evidently marginally senile) ranting certainly paid in this respect.

    As with most people intimidated by the prospect of thinking outside the box, he’s missed the point of the show entirely. I’m sure that Mr Brown’s intention was to reveal how easily we can be influenced without being consciously aware of it; a practise that is employed daily, world over. Politics, marketing, consumption/consumerism… The list of fields that are churning out subtle control methods, employed in every media, is endless. Personally I must admit I’m terribly grateful for being de-blinkered in this way and will endeavor to ensure that my opinions are objective, and not born from a sophisticated anchoring device!

    The dreadful irony is that there are individuals who will read Mr Beyer’s hopelessly misdirected article and form a negative opinion of Mr Brown’s craft, before witnessing it for themselves and drawing an objective conclusion. However, in this completing this act they will simply confirm Mr Brown’s point regarding human fallibility and predictability, so I am satisfied that his smug overtones will be perfectly justified!

  4. Andrew Nixon says:

    I’m sure that Mr Brown’s intention was to reveal how easily we can be influenced without being consciously aware of it; a practise that is employed daily, world over. Politics, marketing, consumption/consumerism… The list of fields that are churning out subtle control methods, employed in every media, is endless.

    You could probably add religion to that list too. Can anybody dig out what Beyer has had to say about Brown’s previous programs, especially “Messiah”.

  5. Stuart says:

    I’ve been fascinated by the Milgram experiment ever since learning about it on a psychology course years ago, and tried to stay on my guard against the things you can be persuaded to do by quasi-mystical ‘experts’ in professional costume (e.g. Gulf Wars…..)

    Wonder if Derren Brown wants to do something on the bollocks otherwise intelligent folk can be talked into by religious leaders – but then nobody would end up wrecking someone else’s life just because some wierd crossdressing bloke said his invisible friend had demanded it, would they?

  6. Mike Reddy says:

    Just watched the Heist programme. Like Space Cadets before it, there was a mention of independent psych experts. I’m really not sure that this is enough, especially when these people are presumably on the payroll. Was any form of ethical approval obtained? If so, from whom.

    I thought it was a great experiment. I guess it was good TV. Let me give you a thought experiment. Imagine that your partner/daughter/father was the ‘subject’ who, confronted by cameral crew and staff at the end, while running away with money and a fake gun, then realise how stupid they have been; the impending disgrace, the thrown away life, the shame they would anticipate, having been caught. would you want that to happen to someone who wasn’t an anonymous person on the telly?

    Be honest. You wouldn’t. However, watching voyeristically as we do, we are all victims of a wider Milgram Experiment: we condone the harsh and brutal treatment of these people, because it is TV. It’s not us that have been publically humiliated. The “oh what a positive experience” stuff at the end is just the remnants of brain washing.

    I just think that showing them “do it!”, then showing how would be more responsible. YOu can see why four British Muslims might have been persuaded to carry bombs onto London Transport though.

  7. Andrew Nixon says:

    The GMB, the trade union that represents security workers, has complained about the show: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/4586704.stm