User:SOTO/Forum Archive/Inclusion debates/@comment-1432718-20170915033630/@comment-4028641-20171128224126

User:SOTO/Forum Archive/Inclusion debates/@comment-1432718-20170915033630/@comment-4028641-20171128224126 That's a very tricky subject that you've suggested we dive into.

In my eyes, the rule of "trailers are not stories" was implemented mainly due to the many that showed clips from upcoming stories. So, for instance, a next-time trailer is not an episode. Soon, this was extended to appeal to many other things, such as the BBC ident narratives or trailers that use original scenes. This was simply because few of these told a story at all.

The first big time that a narrative-driven "trailer" was disputed in a discussion of validity was with the case of TV: Sprout Boy meets a Galaxy of Stars, where it was said that the story didn't count simply because it was an advertisement. Advertisements, it was reasoned, can never be narratives. The logic here is that the intent of the story to sell something else made it invalid.

The same debate also had the comic Dr Who and the Turgids invalidated. That is a case where the strip had a full narrative but its intent to serve as an ad for a toy made it invalid.

These are simply examples of precedent that I am laying out as an example.

In my eyes, this "story" (because it is a story, there is no debate) was indeed created to cause the listener to want to purchase something else. But I'm not sure that this alone makes it a "trailer" and thus not a narrative. Most prequels and preludes are used with the intention of selling what comes next. Are the Tardisodes trailers? What about the Series 6 Prequels? If they are and this isn't, what's the difference?

I've talked about this before when debating the validity of Doctor, Doctor, Doctor. (Don't let the tag at the top of the page fool you -- this story was never declared invalid by any authority. Two debates have been had about LEGO stories, and this passes the rules set up by both of those.) I stand by my belief that a webcast telling an original story, even if meant to elicit the purchase of something else, is no trailer.

I at the same time have a hard time seeing how to discuss what could possibly make this story valid without stepping on the toes of previous discussions. How can this Big Finish trailer be valid when Sprout and Turgids isn't? I'm afraid that I don't have an answer to that.