When Do You Think It’s Okay To Spoil A TV Show? - Today's Debate

"Woah, spoilers!" "Spoiler alert!" "Gee, thanks for the spoiler!" 'SPOILERS!!!"

All stuff we've heard, probably something we've said. There's not much that annoys a fan more than the idea of having the thing they enjoy 'spoilt' for them. If there's a big twist, a shocking development, or huge moment, then ideally you want to see it play out without prior knowledge, allowing you to fully experience it the way the creators intended.

The idea of spoilers has seemingly always existed - just look at that image from The Simpsons above, which aired back in 1991 - but the whole spoiler culture/spoiler alert *thing* has really taken off in the last few years, thanks (and there isn't a way of saying this without sounding a confused and out-of-touch person) to the internet and social media. There are people who are outraged by spoilers, and people who seem to delight in the spoiling.

But how long do you wait before spoiling something?

It's something that I'm always aware of, given I write about TV shows and films and, quite often, am looking at things that people don't want spoilt. Mondays are the most obvious example of this: each one is an exercise in having to avoid social media, and carefully navigate the internet, to avoid Game of Thrones spoilers before having a chance to watch it. But then, that's the day after, and it's surely a reasonable expectation to be able to go a day without having a TV show spoilt. After that, it's then a case of trying not to spoil it for other people, both online and just talking in the office. I think it's fair game to expect spoilers once you've clicked into an article, but I'm generally careful to use non-spoilery images in the immediate aftermath, and am still wary of it over the next few days (it's now a weekly conversation about how big a Thrones spoiler a particular image is or isn't).

The reason for exploring it further in this article comes from a different one posted on the site yesterday, about a death in Arrow. I decided to put the character's name in the headline, because, well, it'd been TWO months since it happened, and close to a month since the show itself had went off the air. Of course, almost instantly, there were comments complaining about spoilers. It was to be expected, really, but is it a fair comment? Who is in the right? If you can't mention something because of those who haven't caught up, then where does it end?

If two months isn't long enough, then what is? Two years? Can we openly talk about the Red Wedding? Twenty years? Can we mention who shot J.R.? Or is everything that happened supposed to be locked away, talked about in secret and behind vague headlines, so as to not upset people who've been saying they'll catch-up on something for the past few years now?

Speaking of catch-up, you've then got the number of people using those services to watch shows, which extends the spoiler moratorium even longer. And that's before you factor in the fact that so many people prefer binge-watching these days, choosing not to watch something 'live' so they can have it all in one go - should they be considered with spoilers? That again feeds into a wider argument, because of streaming services like Netflix. When a show like Daredevil drops, you've got people who'll watch it in an entire day or weekend, some who'll span it out over a few nights, and others who'll watch it as a normal series over 13 weeks.

The debate gets even messier when you factor in something like the book/show divide for Game of Thrones (or The Walking Dead comics/show), where certain fans can talk about some things and others stick fingers in ears and yell loudly. Is it their fault for not reading the books? Or should the book stuff, which still very much feeds the show even as they move past them, be left separate, or at least clearly signposted? I tend to fall into the latter category for that, but it's sometimes a difficult line to walk, especially when there are important elements that might not ever make it into the show.

Films, again, is probably another debate altogether. There's an immediacy with TV, because it's a weekly event, that means the events of a particular episode are all thrashed out within a few days of it airing. With film, though, you've got a much longer period of it being fresh and in cinemas, so a longer gap before 'spoilers' can be revealed, but the crux of the argument is still the same: do you give it a week, a month, six months? Can we discuss, like Homer, the plot twist in The Empire Strikes Back? Mention what 'Rosebud' means in Citizen Kane? What about the works of Shakespeare, or Chaucer?

Someone, somewhere, will put out details of a show, film, whatever. And just as certain, someone will cry spoiler.

What do you think? How long should you wait before 'spoiling' a TV show? What about a film? Take to the comments to share your thoughts, and remember, no spoilers...