‘Contributing factor’ must be outlawed

Press, Volume CXVI, Issue 34106, 19 March 1976, Page 4

‘Contributing factor’ must be outlawed

(By

A. K. GRANT)

It falls to my unhappy lot to rubbish a programme about thoroughly worthwhile people performing a most useful service. I refer to the programme “Missing,” screened on Wednesday night and apparently in serious contention for a Feltex award. Its subject was the Salvation Army missing persons bureau.

i The programme certainly 'conveyed the sincerity, decency and industry of the members of the bureau, and gav.: some indication of the (scope and difficulties of their work. But I found it embarrassing to watch because however good the members of the bureau are at finding (missing persons, they are no 'good at playing themselves (doing so. The result was a series, of stilted and artificial (conversations, having no ring of authenticity whatsoever. I don't know how one would go about making a television documentary on this subject. I am sure, however, that the method chosen was not the right one. One of the persons missing suffered from “athritis.”! I hope I never get it. It! sounds much worse thah arthritis. One of the participants in: the programme was guilty! of using the phrase "contrib-; tiling factor.” 1 have! besought learned men for|

yiyears to explain to me how -something which is a factor e in a situation can be anyd(thing other than a contribe luting factor. If a factor does f not contribute to a situation, then surely it is not a factor - in that situation. Can we - look to the new Governf nient, with its huge mandate g (I am told the mandate is so > large they have to keep it in > a disused hangar at Parat paraumu), can we look to I them to outlaw "contrib- > luting factor"? Probably not, - at this point in time. ❖ ❖ ?| “The Carol Burnett Show” i was memorable for a deI: lightful sketch involving a ■jjilted advertising man and i his faithless customer. Having racked my brains I can-! (not think of anything else to i 'lsay about the Carol Burnett I : Show, so must dose now. ;I « i i Wednesday was St Pat-1 pick's Day, a fact which did j (not escape the alert Max: (Cryer, who gave us a special; i(St Patrick’s Day programme. ! j What St Patrick would

v make of the present state of r Ireland is anybody's guess, - and what he would have >- made of Max’s tribute to s him is even more problei, matical. r 1 have noticed a dise tressing tendency on the - part of other contributors to e this column to try and be o fair to Max Cryer, some a (even leaning over backwards -jso fur as to assert that it is /possible to enjoy his pro- . gramme, or at any rate that , it ought to be possible, or that they know someone who once had a friend who ” was the sort of person who - might possibly have enjoyed i (Max’s programme under ceri tain unspecified circum- . stances. -I 1 say to the dogs with 11 such effete bourgeois t; decadent rubbish. Great civilisations have fallen because (they tolerated enter- . Itainments like “Town I [Cryer.” If we are ever taken : over by the Red Chinese or (the Viet Cong, then I, for (one, will know who to (blame. I On Wednesday night Max gave us a famous rose grower, who was mildly interesting, an Irish monologuist of surpassing indifference, a roguish Irish (and a pair of Irish wolfhounds who were most attractive but appeared to be highly embarrassed by the company in which they I : found themselves. We were also treated to a' husband and wife duo whose! demonic energy failed to compensate for the banality of their song, entitled "Viva , Espana.” a ditty which must I have hastened the demise of. General Franco if he was! unfortunate enough to have heard it.

Max did however, throw us one small but extremely welcome bonus, namely the positively last appearance on New Zealand television of I Angela Ayers. Angie baby is off to Sydney, where she has six months of confirmed bookings. Best of luck Angela, and mav the six months turn into 60 years.