Talk:Jason Donovan

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article must adhere to the policy on biographies of living persons. Controversial material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted or if there are other concerns relative to this policy, report it on the living persons biographies noticeboard.

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.	Biography Portal
Start	This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ]
	This article is supported by WikiProject Musicians, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed biographical guide to musicians and musical groups on Wikipedia.

An appropriate infobox may need to be added to this article, or the current infobox may need to be updated. Please refer to the list of biography infoboxes for further information.

Portal	Jason Donovan is within the scope of WikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Australia and Australia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on the quality scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Australian television.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Australian music. See also P:AUSMUSIC.
Assessment comments This article has been rated for quality and/or importance but has no comments yet. If appropriate, please review the article and then leave comments here to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article and what work it will need.

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Jason Donovan article.
Please sign and date your posts by typing four tildes (~~~~). Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Ask questions, get answers. This is not a forum for general discussion about the article's subject.	Be polite Assume good faith No personal attacks Be welcoming	Article policies No original research Neutral point of view Verifiability

Uncompleted discography!

[edit] Gay libel trial

How exactly did Donovan "lose credibility"? The article does not explain. Dev920 17:33, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

This has now been addressed in the article. After Donovan successfully sued The Face magazine for alleging he was gay, it alienated a large portion of his fan base (Donovan had a significant gay fan base in his heydey, as did Kylie who still does to this day). The act of taking action for libel made it appear that he felt being gay was shameful in some way (regardless of whether he was or not) and his gay fans left him in droves, utterly shattering his career. Basically he should have kept his mouth shut and played along with the ambiguity that had allowed him to appeal to a wider market outside of prepubescent girls. The same thing has happened to Robbie Williams in 2006 following his "gay libel" suit, and his record sales have declined significantly (though not as drastically as Donovan's did in the 90's).

Ridiculous. Are there any proof to all this? Cause I can not find it in the article. A lot of stars from those days are without a fan base today, this is a common thing, not unusual, not because of anything else than time passing. And, by the way, what's wrong with gay people? I don't care if people think I'm gay or not, but I wouldn't have anthing but respect for someone who would want the truth. So, according to this article, gay people have more respect for a magazine's right to lie than for a lone person's right to get the truth. I'm removing the part I am referring to.

What exactly is so ridiculous here? Unless it had been altered by the time you read it, you have clearly misinterpreted the article as the facts speak for themselves. Like Kylie, Donovan held a certain popularity with gay audiences in the late 80's/early 90's (most PWL/SAW stars did as their danceable pop music was widely played in gay clubs). At the time, the press liked to rib him about it and even went as far as to imply he was gay himself. The press were probably baiting him, but Donovan took umbridge to the suggestion that he might be gay and sued The Face magazine. He won the case, but the fact that he sued in the first place made it seem as if he felt being gay was something to be ashamed of - regardless of whether he was or not. Right up to the year before the lawsuit, he was still having no.1 hits and starring in a successful run of Joseph. Directly after the lawsuit, he couldnt sell a record to save his life. It had nothing to do with shelf life, as Kylie has always managed to maintain her popularity. I agree that The Face had no right to publish such allegations about him without substantial proof, but Donovan went to such extreme lengths to distance himself from the "gay" label, when really he should have just laughed it off and carried on letting his records sell. It made him look somewhat homophobic, and it was this action that pissed off his fans and that's what ended his career.

The article was not implying that there is anything wrong with gay people, in fact it was quite the opposite. It was merely stating that Jason Donovan clearly had a problem with the press suggesting he was gay - regardless of whether he is or not.

You're right. I feel "the lady doth protest too much" —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.45.59.71 (talk) 04:48, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

Of course he was right to sue them. It wasn't true - end of story. If they claimed he ate burgers for breakfast, and it wasn't true, it would be the same situation. I don't actually recall him volunteering for the position of gay icon, or defender of queers, so he can really say whatever he wants.Sennen goroshi 06:24, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

The whole point of "libel" is that a statement has to be negative/damaging, not simply untrue. Simply stating something that is untrue is not libel under the law. E.g. saying someone had a burger for breakfast would not be libel unless that person was famously a vegetarian/animal rights activist or similar, and that claim could actually damage their career or reputation. So saying being considered gay is libel is understandably perceived as homophobic. It definitely implies there is something bad about being gay. In fact some courts have ruled that you cannot sue someone for libel for saying you are gay, because being gay is not a negative thing.

There was definitely a backlash against him for being perceived as homophobic. I don't know anything about his fanbase or what effect the case had on his fans specifically. But just look at the news reports or photos from that time -- there were lots of pro-gay protesters outside the courthouse with big signs saying things like "Jason=homophobe" and "It's okay to be gay." He addressed this in "Marie Claire" magazine this month. He says he is "not proud" of suing and admits it was a very bad idea that he regrets, and says the motivation to sue came about because he was in the middle of trying to change his image from being a teenybopper to being a "cool" musician ("I was trying to go from being a Smash Hits person to a Face one") and he was upset that a "cool" magazine he aspired to being in was mocking him.

Unless proof can be provided that his fanbase specifically suffered due to this case, it should not be in the article, but the fact that he was perceived (rightly or wrongly -- and I believe wrongly) as homophobic by some people and that he suffered a backlash because of this is verifiable fact. Just look at the protest photos. 81.1.81.88 17:11, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

Yes, there is no doubt whatsoever that the case made him appear homophobic in the eyes of the public and the fact that he was having big hits up until the case and flops right after it do more than merely suggest that his fanbase had diminished because of it. There is at least a correlation between the two things, if not precise proof. As for whether he genuinely was homophobic, I think he must have been to some extent because there had been rumours about his sexuality since the late 80s but this did not impact on his career at all which implies that it was the actual suggestion of being gay that he had a problem with. He was part of a well-oiled hit machine along with Kylie, Bananarama, Big Fun, and Sonia - all of whom had something of a gay following because their music was cheesy dance-pop and often played in gay clubs at the time. I never actually thought Jason Donovan was gay, but he did have something of a gay following because he was this expertly styled pretty boy with fashion sense and wholesome good looks who made S.A.W. records. He played the part well which is probably why he achieved success but also probably why the press started suggesting things about his sexuality. I do think he sued because he felt being gay was something to be ashamed of and he felt the need to prove something. In all fairness, he was quite young and naive at the time when it all happened which might also account for his actions, but not only did he offend the gay crowd, he also made himself look like a childish, insecure brat who was sulking because people were calling him names. So much for trying to lose the prepubescent audience. Nobody likes a cry-baby. 79.69.2.88 13:06, 5 November 2007 (UTC)