|
Free Harold Shipman from death's cold embrace. Last night's University Challenge featured a question round dedicated to one corner of the Manchester Art Gallery. It was weird.
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2014 00:01
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 06:15 |
|
|
Squalitude posted:What IS there to like about the BBC these days? Their sport coverage is top notch, you might say how hard is that to gently caress up? you just point some cameras at it and film it?. Thank god itv don't have rights to show domestic football highlights anymore, good lord.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2014 00:13
|
|
|
^^^ I'm a goon, I don't care for sports.Bogmonster posted:Just my cocking luck to make a nice twee post about a gentle but quietly good and well written programme just before the guy with the angry opinion shows up. Shhh, it's okay, the thread was languishing far down page 2 when I posted, and we're all big and ugly enough to discuss more than one thing at once. The BBC doc is on youtube (hopefully I have successfully de-embedded all the intrusive links): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RS9PtoLiM4M (I say BBC doc, it was actually produced by NBC America. An American documentary being sensationalist? Cor!) This is a pretty good video that simply and straightforwardly disassembles many of the things in the BBC doc that are outright wrong. Although it has its own biases, one thing to note is that much of the damning evidence presented in the BBC doc is refuted by the same court that they say they are following- not the annulled innocent verdict: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KVBRHbOBXDw And because I feel like it's not fair if I let the pro-Knox people have the last word, here's a trailer that says it's going to show us how much of a big fat liar Knox is based on her facial expressions. Comments are golden, as ever, for youtube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RToxD_spv08 My part in the derail is over for now, I won't reply again unless anyone really wants me to, apologies to anyone wanting more light-hearted discussion here, but hey at least we were discussing BBC TV so it's not too off-topic! Marmaduke! fucked around with this message at 00:54 on Mar 26, 2014 |
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2014 00:20
|
|
|
The licence fee would be worth it even if all we got was the BBC natural history unit and the rest was spent on prostitutes and coke.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2014 00:41
|
|
|
Blue Screen Error posted:The licence fee would be worth it even if all we got was the BBC natural history unit and the rest was spent on prostitutes and coke. For.. us? 
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2014 00:43
|
|
|
Ponce de Le0n posted:Their sport coverage is top notch, you might say how hard is that to gently caress up? you just point some cameras at it and film it?. Thank god itv don't have rights to show domestic football highlights anymore, good lord. Yeah, the BBC's snooker coverage is the best sports coverage in the UK, for my money. The only thing that I would say is better of sports I watch is probably the NFL.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2014 00:54
|
|
|
Mickolution posted:Yeah, the BBC's snooker coverage is the best sports coverage in the UK, for my money. The only thing that I would say is better of sports I watch is probably the NFL. Wimbledon is always really well done as well
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2014 02:04
|
|
|
Squalitude posted:^^^ I'm a goon, I don't care for sports. yeah I'd already started watching it I just wasn't sure if it counted as  . I don't really see an issue with the film myself, but whatever.If you want a more balanced documentary about justice watch Life and Death Row on iplayer, which is, as far as I can tell, the best factual thing BBC3 have shown. I'm a sucker for real life crime things recently so maybe it's not for everyone, but I've really enjoyed both episodes.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2014 02:11
|
|
|
Mr. Squishy posted:Last night's University Challenge featured a question round dedicated to one corner of the Manchester Art Gallery. It was weird. On one hand I'll be sad to see them lose the freedom to make whatever programming they want, and some of the fantastic science / nature shows it's enabled. On the other hand, accountability to advertisers and viewing figures might mean an end to unforgiveable filler poo poo like the 7pm vortex of beige that is the one show.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2014 09:12
|
|
|
Squalitude posted:Stuff like this makes me hope the license fee will be abolished soon. Stewart Lee just called to say he'd like to buy this quote for the cover of his next DVD.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2014 10:46
|
|
|
Bobby Deluxe posted:I like to imagine most of the weirder decisions the BBC makes are the results of senior management's days consisting of "gently caress it, we're losing the fee anyway, let's get drunk." no, the one show is exactly the kind of thing that advertisers love
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2014 11:20
|
|
|
Don't believe this has been brought up, but Richard Herring has an internet sort-of-tv-show-thing going on, which I only found out about when I saw him the other night. http://vimeo.com/channels/rhmol Similar to his touring shows with the odd animated sketch thrown in. You can pay a bit to subscribe via Go Faster Stripe for extended versions and extra interviews and what have you.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2014 13:25
|
|
|
Just got a message on 4OD about ad blocking software:
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2014 16:29
|
|
|
Attempting to "block" ad-blocking software is a cat and mouse game and the winner will be whoever has the most resources to throw at it: 4od or the entire ad blocking community. Good luck chaps.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2014 16:57
|
|
|
All this and they don't even offer any kind of paid ad-removal alternative. Also I'm a big Richard Herring fan generally, but that first free episode of RHMOL seemed kinda lovely to me.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2014 18:10
|
|
|
Would C4 even be allowed to offer a subscription service?
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2014 18:19
|
|
|
I don't see why not, but I doubt very much they'd do that and have no ads. When I watch catch up on Sky Go they have a couple of adverts before every show (which none of my Adblockers remove) and I pay 60 quid a month for sky. I don't mind the odd one on 4oD but they'll have to improve the service for me ever to use it with ads.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2014 19:10
|
|
|
Captain Mediocre posted:Also I'm a big Richard Herring fan generally, but that first free episode of RHMOL seemed kinda lovely to me. Yeah, bits of it were OK. Pretty standard modern-day Herring without the polish of one of his tours or the anarchy of AIOTM.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2014 19:38
|
|
|
Easy watching wednesdays are back. Cheeky bit of Alan Titchmarch on farmlands during the day, then some lambing live and then masterchef. Top stuff.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2014 22:07
|
|
|
Bobby Deluxe posted:On the other hand, accountability to advertisers and viewing figures might mean an end to unforgiveable filler poo poo like the 7pm vortex of beige that is the one show. No.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2014 22:44
|
|
|
Cerv posted:Would C4 even be allowed to offer a subscription service? I thought FilmFour was originally subscription?
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2014 23:21
|
|
|
People asking for the abolition of the license fee, look at your allies: reactionary Tory MPs, Daily Express readers, libertarians. Scum, basically. The BBC already has to make arbitrary sacrifices for these cunts. Think about whose side you're on.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2014 23:32
|
|
|
Al2001 posted:People asking for the abolition of the license fee, look at your allies: reactionary Tory MPs, Daily Express readers, libertarians. Scum, basically. The BBC already has to make arbitrary sacrifices for these cunts. Think about whose side you're on. You know who else didn't like the BBC? Hitler. 
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2014 00:14
|
|
|
It looks like they have quite a few programmes on iplayer available for up to a year and others having at least ten episodes available to watch. Just finished watching a good documentary from 69 about city planning and architecture. http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/p00rzvqv/i-love-this-dirty-town And another from 75 about the Indian rail network. http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/p0120460/the-world-about-us-the-romance-of-indian-railways
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2014 01:34
|
|
|
Al2001 posted:People asking for the abolition of the license fee, look at your allies: reactionary Tory MPs, Daily Express readers, libertarians. Scum, basically. The BBC already has to make arbitrary sacrifices for these cunts. Think about whose side you're on. The reason so many of those mentioned dislike the BBC is down to raw stupidity. They are so stupid, in fact, that they do not realise that the BBC is pandering to them. The BBC is not making "arbitrary sacrifices" (as if they're occasionally allowing a conservative voice a few seconds among hours of liberal programming) they have pretty much become a right-wing mouthpiece. If the government says something, BBC News will report it without question. Numerous programs have been commissioned telling us that people on benefits are all terrible skivers. If someone theorises that the NHS is sinking in a pit of fraud, then Panorama will report this as fact, as happened on Monday. I'm sure they would claim they are being Fair And Balanced here, too. Of course, we're all still told there is incredible left-wing bias on the BBC - when Newsnight invited on two black women scientists to discuss science recently, there was uproar from the Daily Mail- clear evidence of the BBC's bias! Women, doing science? Must be quotas! How dare they! So, the question is... in the face of all this, does the fact that they have moved away from quality programming towards being a bunch of right-wing shitlords (impartiality!) and sucking up to those groups you mention- does this mean they are more deserving of our license fee money? If they become even more right wing and less quality overall, is the solution going to be to increase the license fee? I mean, I understand this rationale when applied to a school or a hospital- if they're doing poorly then cutting funding isn't going to help. But when it's an institution meant to be providing us with news and entertainment, I don't think they deserve an easy time. I'm not saying the license fee ought to be abolished, but they deserve a kick up the bum. Marmaduke! fucked around with this message at 11:19 on Mar 27, 2014 |
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2014 11:16
|
|
|
PriorMarcus posted:Your taking this awfully seriously for someone who doesn't find her sexy. What a lovely comment. Alright 'trial of the century' cases are all basically soap operas cf Michael Jackson's doctor or the South African runner, but its perfectly possible to believe that the whole Knox case is a travesty without saying it's because she's good looking- and simultaneously admitting that having a good looking white female is vital to getting the media's attention at all.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2014 11:22
|
|
|
Squalitude posted:The reason so many of those mentioned dislike the BBC is down to raw stupidity. They are so stupid, in fact, that they do not realise that the BBC is pandering to them. The BBC is not making "arbitrary sacrifices" (as if they're occasionally allowing a conservative voice a few seconds among hours of liberal programming) they have pretty much become a right-wing mouthpiece. If the government says something, BBC News will report it without question. Numerous programs have been commissioned telling us that people on benefits are all terrible skivers. If someone theorises that the NHS is sinking in a pit of fraud, then Panorama will report this as fact, as happened on Monday. I'm sure they would claim they are being Fair And Balanced here, too. Of course, we're all still told there is incredible left-wing bias on the BBC - when Newsnight invited on two black women scientists to discuss science recently, there was uproar from the Daily Mail- clear evidence of the BBC's bias! Women, doing science? Must be quotas! How dare they! How do you think the BBC should be funded? Adverts? Direct funding from the government? I agree that the BBC's news and political coverage has been steadily getting shittier since Hutton, and that's a major problem. But slashing their budget will just make things worse. More stories that are just regurgitated press releases. More stories that are just based on something someone said on twitter. Less stories outside the London bubble. Less investigative reporting.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2014 21:31
|
|
|
Squalitude posted:"arbitrary sacrifices" I was referring to the (proposed) axing of the bits that Tory middle-Englanders don't like/use (ie BBC Three, 6music, Asian Network) in order to save a tiny amount of licence fee and get the pricks off their backs for 2 seconds. BBC has always been pro-establishment but it's a really difficult balancing act, and the Tories are going to have a crack whatever they do just because they're ideologically opposed to anything that's not unfettered free-market capitalism. But also, yes, Hutton does seem to have scared BBC journalists and it's a pity.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2014 23:15
|
|
|
"Programme quality is sure to improve if the BBC operates on the same model as ITV and Channel 5" is an idea that never made much sense to me.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2014 00:49
|
|
|
Yeah it's clearly unworkable. I know other countries without our model have good state broadcasters with good niche programming but afaik it's not completely ad-free and there's nowhere near the scope (4 TV channels, loads of radio, internet etc.) as we have. Don't get me wrong, I get annoyed at the beeb all the time, often in this thread, but let's not throw the baby out with the proverbial.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2014 01:04
|
|
|
Speaking of channel 5, Desmond's selling it after doing his best to inflate its value by aiming all of his newspaper and magazine's considerable puff at the last series of Celeb Big Brother. I can't imagine that any buyer could improve it though.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2014 01:21
|
|
|
Captain Mediocre posted:"Programme quality is sure to improve if the BBC operates on the same model as ITV and Channel 5" is an idea that never made much sense to me. What about channel 4's model?
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2014 01:31
|
|
|
Squalitude posted:What about channel 4's model? They are also licence-fee funded. e: wait, might have got my wires crossed a bit there. Apparently that never went through? I don't know anymore. Captain Mediocre fucked around with this message at 13:03 on Mar 29, 2014 |
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2014 13:00
|
|
|
You must be joking, but I can't see the humour? Edit: Ah, okay. I thought I would have known if it were true!
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2014 13:03
|
|
|
Might be S4C you were thinking of? Going to be cancelling the TV license this year because we genuinely don't watch broadcast TV in this house (the TiVo box has been unplugged for months). Can't wait to be treated like a criminal because of this.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2014 13:27
|
|
|
EL BROMANCE posted:Might be S4C you were thinking of? Also I should explain that I support the license fee and ive got one now for that rare occasion but was on the dole at the time and only watched dvd's on it and computer for everything else, didnt seem to be any point at the time.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2014 14:53
|
|
|
Mr. Squishy posted:Speaking of channel 5, Desmond's selling it after doing his best to inflate its value by aiming all of his newspaper and magazine's considerable puff at the last series of Celeb Big Brother. I can't imagine that any buyer could improve it though. Time for Noel Edmonds to swoop in and fulfill his dreams?
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2014 16:06
|
|
|
EL BROMANCE posted:Can't wait to be treated like a criminal because of this. you'll get a letter in the post! the horror! and if you don't bother to respond they'll send you another! people so precious they actually get indignant about TV licensing are the worst.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2014 16:42
|
|
|
And things get any bigger, you can just eat the telly.
|
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2014 16:47
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 06:15 |
|
|
Cerv posted:you'll get a letter in the post! the horror! and if you don't bother to respond they'll send you another! Indeed, a year ago I would get a letter every couple of weeks and was always too lazy to do anything other than throw them away. Eventually decided to go to their website and opt out and haven't had anything since.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2014 17:32
|
|
