What got me about Children of Earth was that in killing Ianto and Steven and having Jack leave effectively killed the Torchwood we know and love. If it comes back, it won't be the same show. I honestly don't know how they can come back.

I was under the impression that after the combined Companions adventure on Dr. Who, that Mickey and Martha would be joining the team, so this gutting of the team was doubly shocking for me.

I said this earlier but I just can't get over the writing choices in CoE. Why kill Clem instead of him being the instrument of alien death? Similarly, why did they write Martha out like that (she's on her honeymoon let's not disturb her). If aliens seeking 10% of kids isn't a reason to cancel a honeymoon, I don't know what is.

why did they write Martha out like that

The actress wasn't available.

If aliens seeking 10% of kids isn't a reason to cancel a honeymoon, I don't know what is.

Law and Order: UK on ITV with Jamie Bamber, baby. Don't know what happened with the Micky idea, if they ever intended to follow that one up.

Dana pinged it for me and I haven't even read a quote from RTD about being grown up enough to handle drama.

But I did read a quote posted here (in Minearverse, I think) from Joss about how the great worshippers of Joss might want to look away (ostensibly from Dollhouse, I think) because they are about to get a snout full of something they won't like.

I don't need my artists to stay the same. As in my previous post, I can shuffle away of my own accord when they change direction but that doesn't mean I'll have a spring in my shuffle.

Media is built in the backs of people like me who enjoy something and want more off it. I'm okay when a 'provider' either stops enjoying what they are doing, or runs out of coherent ideas (Lost, I'm looking at you). But when it seems like a mean-spirited jab, just for the sake of seeing how the masses will writhe, it makes me sad.

If you want to do a different thing...kill off the old thing, or just make clear your intentions...and I'll be right behind you...or in the hall. But please, don't spit at me for liking your stuff.

I must really be in a mood. I can't actually tell how much of this is personal projection and how much really applies to Torchwood (and Robin Hood, etc.).

Why kill Clem instead of him being the instrument of alien death?

They had to show that the wavelength was powerful enough to kill, that it wasn't just in Clem's head.

Also, Jack's grandson could have lived, and the daughter still wouldn't forgive him because he risked his grandson not knowing if he would live, and he had to face the idea that he would trade someone he loved if necessary.

when it seems like a mean-spirited jab, just for the sake of seeing how the masses will writhe, it makes me sad

RTD definitely comes off as smug and superior during his interviews, but I haven't read anything that made it seem like he did this to be cruel to anyone but Jack and Ianto.

It seems the writers really did set up a situation where it was Jack's grandson or a millions of other kids. Get somebody down the road? No time. Even a few minutes delay could have let the junkies pick up their fix. Clever idea so it would not kill the kid to send the signal? Probably could have been done if they had the time. That review linked a while back was right. If the government had let in Torchwood from the beginning, and Torchwood and the specialist team had pooled their resources, there is a good chance this could have been solved without losing Ianto or the people in Thames house, or even one kid. But Torchwood was kept on the run, no time to plan, cut off from access to information. I will note by the way that in spite of my previous criticism, they seem to be a really functioning team now. Working together much better than in season one.

Yes, the writers did set up a no win. I understand why Martha had to be written out, and what the excuse was for Jack to kill his grandchild, Ianto to die all so Jack could split and be morose. Fine. But were these the only ways to make the larger points?

It's a lot of crazy plotting to put Jack through agony. As one viewer, I’m not sure all the coincidences and assumptions about politicians being lemmings were all worth it.

You likely could have achieved a good bit of what the writers were intending (personal sacrifice, not sacrificing others' children) by having Clem make this statement and then agree to be used as the vessel.

But this wouldn't have achieved the aim of having Jack seem like a complete bastard.

I don't know if it does make Jack seem like a complete bastard. That is why I emphasized that the writers set up a convincing no win scenario. Of course the science is probably inferior to Eureka's (and that is a tough standard to meet) but it is emotionally convincing which is what counts in this sort of writing. I 100% believed that Jack's choice was that stark: millions or his grandson. No third option. Now that does not make it right. But it does not make choosing the other way right either. He had no good choices, and it is not self-evident that this was not the lesser evil. It is hard to say that he was automatically a complete bastard. And maybe in a real world ethical situation, you could arguing that sacrificing an innocent is never the lesser evil. (See Le Guin's short story "Those who walk away from Omelas". ) But emotionally, within the context of the story I don't think we are supposed to see Jack as a complete bastard for doing this.