Donate to Remove ads

Got a credit card? use our Credit Card & Finance Calculators

Thanks to johnstevens77,Bhoddhisatva,scotia,Anonymous,Cornytiv34, for Donating to support the site

BBC Standards?

Grumpy Old Lemons Like You
XFool
The full Lemon
Posts: 12636
Joined: November 8th, 2016, 7:21 pm
Been thanked: 2608 times

BBC Standards?

#509553

Postby XFool » June 25th, 2022, 2:18 pm

It's Rant time again!

I just listened to the recording of Any Questions on BBC R4. I know, I know! I really should give it up (again).

Serious problem. With the sound feed from one person 'on'(?) the panel. Serious as in: "Can't hear her".
Various jiggling with sound levels by recording engineers meant one could hear her - sometimes.

OK. These things do happen, especially in the field. They always have, they always will. So, what is different now?

Remember - this is the BBC. There wasn't a single word about this after the programme, not a dickie bird.

Always, in the past, ANY problem however slight with sound quality would have been referred to and apologised for following the programme. It would not have made it possible to hear her retrospectively, but it just have acknowledged it. Somebody letting us know that they recognise that we - the listeners - actually exist. Not now.

When did this change? (I am mindful that I previously had a rant about this over the sound on a 1990s BBC TV programme, so it's not new)

Bminusrob
Lemon Slice
Posts: 386
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 6:45 pm
Has thanked: 77 times
Been thanked: 270 times

Re: BBC Standards?

#509581

Postby Bminusrob » June 25th, 2022, 5:46 pm

You need to keep up with the times. The words of the panellists are completely irrelevant. The reason for the program these days is so that the "chairman" can get in all their pre-conceived snipes and political agenda.

XFool
The full Lemon
Posts: 12636
Joined: November 8th, 2016, 7:21 pm
Been thanked: 2608 times

Re: BBC Standards?

#509586

Postby XFool » June 25th, 2022, 6:26 pm

Bminusrob wrote:You need to keep up with the times. The words of the panellists are completely irrelevant. The reason for the program these days is so that the "chairman" can get in all their pre-conceived snipes and political agenda.

Ah well!

That's an entirely separate (in programme) matter. I do have my own take on that (reflected in my "I know! I know!" comment) which is likely, by the sound of things, not going to be exactly the same as yours. ;)

Actually, in this respect the 'rot' set in decades ago (1987) - when Jonathan Dimbleby took over as err... "presenter" (so, not chairman?) of AQ. I still have a vague recollection from the time, of his agent giving a talk about the change - things were going to be "different" from now on. More exciting, apparently.

Really? Well, as a very long term listener, I wondered if he had listened to many past unexciting episodes. I remember, I remember... Poor old David Jacobs having to cope with invasions of activists in the 1970s and the live programme being taken off air. That very animated discussion in 1956 - the Team vs Freddy Grisewood - at the time of Suez. The 1960s? Who can ever forget (cough!) and his spontaneously rhetorical: "How would you feel if a big buck xxxxxx turned up on your doorstep asking to marry your daughter? ". That was "exciting". :shock:

I stopped listening to AQ - or 'The Jonathan Dimbleby Show' - for quite some years. I started listening again towards the end of his reign, when he was at his worst, AFIAC. When the new presenter Chris Mason came along I lived in hope, it could go either way.

Unfortunately it seems to have (inevitably?) started well on the road to 'The Chris Mason Show'. Then there are his really annoying vocal mannerisms: "Yeah, yeah, yep..."


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerald_Nabarro

MrFoolish
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 2284
Joined: March 22nd, 2020, 7:27 pm
Has thanked: 553 times
Been thanked: 1115 times

Re: BBC Standards?

#509676

Postby MrFoolish » June 26th, 2022, 8:19 am

Ah, the "things were better in the past" brigade. I thought rants were better pre 1986.

XFool
The full Lemon
Posts: 12636
Joined: November 8th, 2016, 7:21 pm
Been thanked: 2608 times

Re: BBC Standards?

#509700

Postby XFool » June 26th, 2022, 10:18 am

MrFoolish wrote:Ah, the "things were better in the past" brigade. I thought rants were better pre 1986.

Of course. Weren't they always?

Seriously though, my follow on was less about how things were always "better in the past" - I can't imagine bringing back some of the 1960s AQ programmes now, as I showed - and in truth, I seem to remember AQ had got into a bit of a tedious rut by the mid 1980s, rather more about the irritations of the programme under the rule of Dimbleby and now Mason.

Both Dimbleby and Mason are professional (political?) journalists. To my mind this has become something of an issue with the BBC. In my case, unlike many others, NOT due to concerns over political "bias" but simply due to the political journalist style being the default, the norm, the universal. Apart from the obvious (e.g. drama) there seem to be no voices on the BBC nowadays apart from journalists. And before you say "Yes there are!", well "Yes there are", but only being interviewed by or mediated by a journalist.

Originally AQ (derived from a US radio programme in the 1940s) was simply ordinary members of the public having their questions answered by a panel of politicians and public worthies, with a BBC staffer acting as a chairman (not "presenter"). The chairman helped realise the programme: the questioners, the questions, the panel, the audience both at home and present. But they didn't 'join in', it wasn't about them. Once you get professional journalist acting as "presenters", they start to behave like... professional journalists.

I found Dimbleby became insufferable. As I said, AQ to my mind became 'The Jonathan Dimbleby Show'. Chris Mason seems inclined to go much the same way, not to mention that: "Yep, yeah, yep, yep, yep..."

IMO, the last thing we need today is yet another platform for professional journalists - there aren't enough already? The original AQ concept sounds to me like something we could do with more of today. So that's my view. Possibly it could be summed up as: "Things were better in the past"? :)

Rhyd6
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 1262
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 10:01 pm
Has thanked: 3475 times
Been thanked: 1103 times

Re: BBC Standards?

#509724

Postby Rhyd6 » June 26th, 2022, 11:51 am

I too gave up in the Dimbleby era. Personally I think that they should do away with boring presenters, the guests are bad enough, how about Ricky Gervaise or any other comedian of your choice.

R6

UncleEbenezer
The full Lemon
Posts: 10690
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 8:17 pm
Has thanked: 1459 times
Been thanked: 2965 times

Re: BBC Standards?

#509737

Postby UncleEbenezer » June 26th, 2022, 12:35 pm

Rhyd6 wrote:I too gave up in the Dimbleby era. Personally I think that they should do away with boring presenters, the guests are bad enough, how about Ricky Gervaise or any other comedian of your choice.

R6

Dimbleby was dire, and drove me away. It became more-or-less his personal soapbox, and a dreary, frustrating listen even when I agreed with him on a subject.

As for a comedian ... the News Quiz used to be real news in comic guise; now it's just comedians, and no longer more than very marginally entertaining. Alan Coren never chaired it, but was the outstanding panelist, and I would date its decline to his departure. Though having said that, it's no longer quite so soporific as in the Toksvig era.
Last edited by UncleEbenezer on June 26th, 2022, 12:39 pm, edited 1 time in total.

pje16
Lemon Half
Posts: 6050
Joined: May 30th, 2021, 6:01 pm
Has thanked: 1843 times
Been thanked: 2066 times

Re: BBC Standards?

#509738

Postby pje16 » June 26th, 2022, 12:37 pm

Rhyd6 wrote:I too gave up in the Dimbleby era. Personally I think that they should do away with boring presenters, the guests are bad enough, how about Ricky Gervaise or any other comedian of your choice.

R6

Ricky Gervais - about the worst comic ever
He had to fill in once for about 20 mins when there was a problem with a show opening
Could he think on his feet, not in the slighest, spent a lot of the time doing that stoopid David Brent "dance"
But for some reason he is one of those BBC favourites - must have a good agent :lol:

MrFoolish
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 2284
Joined: March 22nd, 2020, 7:27 pm
Has thanked: 553 times
Been thanked: 1115 times

Re: BBC Standards?

#509811

Postby MrFoolish » June 26th, 2022, 7:05 pm

pje16 wrote:Ricky Gervais - about the worst comic ever


I'm not familiar with his stand-up routines but I thought The Office was great and highly original.

pje16
Lemon Half
Posts: 6050
Joined: May 30th, 2021, 6:01 pm
Has thanked: 1843 times
Been thanked: 2066 times

Re: BBC Standards?

#509813

Postby pje16 » June 26th, 2022, 7:07 pm

MrFoolish wrote:
pje16 wrote:Ricky Gervais - about the worst comic ever


I'm not familiar with his stand-up routines but I thought The Office was great and highly original.

The office wasn't to my taste
each to their own I guess, as I know a lot did like it

stewamax
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 2417
Joined: November 7th, 2016, 2:40 pm
Has thanked: 83 times
Been thanked: 782 times

Re: BBC Standards?

#510053

Postby stewamax » June 27th, 2022, 5:13 pm

One challenge for both Dimblebys is that they cannot live up to the sheer competence of their father.
He tends to be remembered as anchor for state events (although anchor is an inappropriate word as he was almost sole commentator for an event), but he was fundamentally a journalist who was big enough to stand up to the BBC*.
Unlike his sons, he didn’t push his own opinions but was a past master at drawing out others'.

* at the age of 31 he reported the liberation of Belsen, and when the Beeb refused to run his account as too upsetting, he tendered his resignation. The Beeb backed down.

terminal7
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 1917
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 6:26 pm
Has thanked: 225 times
Been thanked: 686 times

Re: BBC Standards?

#510075

Postby terminal7 » June 27th, 2022, 7:10 pm

pje16 wrote:
Rhyd6 wrote:I too gave up in the Dimbleby era. Personally I think that they should do away with boring presenters, the guests are bad enough, how about Ricky Gervaise or any other comedian of your choice.

R6

Ricky Gervais - about the worst comic ever
He had to fill in once for about 20 mins when there was a problem with a show opening
Could he think on his feet, not in the slighest, spent a lot of the time doing that stoopid David Brent "dance"
But for some reason he is one of those BBC favourites - must have a good agent :lol:


Too much BBC obsession m'lud - that was then - now he sups at the Netflix trough.

T7

XFool
The full Lemon
Posts: 12636
Joined: November 8th, 2016, 7:21 pm
Been thanked: 2608 times

Re: BBC Standards?

#511242

Postby XFool » July 1st, 2022, 10:02 pm

XFool wrote:It's Rant time again!

I just listened to the recording of Any Questions on BBC R4. I know, I know! I really should give it up (again).

Serious problem. With the sound feed from one person 'on'(?) the panel. Serious as in: "Can't hear her".
Various jiggling with sound levels by recording engineers meant one could hear her - sometimes.

OK. These things do happen, especially in the field. They always have, they always will. So, what is different now?

Remember - this is the BBC. There wasn't a single word about this after the programme, not a dickie bird.

Always, in the past, ANY problem however slight with sound quality would have been referred to and apologised for following the programme. It would not have made it possible to hear her retrospectively, but it just have acknowledged it. Somebody letting us know that they recognise that we - the listeners - actually exist. Not now.

When did this change? (I am mindful that I previously had a rant about this over the sound on a 1990s BBC TV programme, so it's not new)

Better late than never. Ed Stourton, presenter of this week's Any Questions, apologised in programme for the problem with sound on last week's AQ.

MrFoolish
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 2284
Joined: March 22nd, 2020, 7:27 pm
Has thanked: 553 times
Been thanked: 1115 times

Re: BBC Standards?

#511439

Postby MrFoolish » July 3rd, 2022, 6:52 am

On the subject of sound, I wish the BBC wouldn't do video calls to the homes of social commentators who have bad internet connections. It's a waste of everyone's time. They return to these favourite usual suspects a couple of weeks later and surprise surprise we get the same technical issues.

And the newsreader will say "Oh sorry about that, we'll try to improve the line". Which is complete nonsense, because they have no control whatsoever over someone else's internet link. So they return to these people and the link breaks up again.

On a separate note, they've now dropped the HD channel of BBC News from Freeview. But the kids' channels remain in HD. So the channel for adults with serious content is degraded but the kids still get to watch cartoons in HD! Who makes these decisions?

Bminusrob
Lemon Slice
Posts: 386
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 6:45 pm
Has thanked: 77 times
Been thanked: 270 times

Re: BBC Standards?

#511564

Postby Bminusrob » July 3rd, 2022, 6:49 pm

MrFoolish wrote:On the subject of sound, I wish the BBC wouldn't do video calls to the homes of social commentators who have bad internet connections. It's a waste of everyone's time. They return to these favourite usual suspects a couple of weeks later and surprise surprise we get the same technical issues.

And the newsreader will say "Oh sorry about that, we'll try to improve the line". Which is complete nonsense, because they have no control whatsoever over someone else's internet link. So they return to these people and the link breaks up again.

On a separate note, they've now dropped the HD channel of BBC News from Freeview. But the kids' channels remain in HD. So the channel for adults with serious content is degraded but the kids still get to watch cartoons in HD! Who makes these decisions?

I am frequently amazed how often this happens, or they have a VOIP call with someone and the line drops out. My home internet, out in the sticks is never that bad, and I sometimes wonder if there is a bit of influence from Big Brother having an effect.

didds
Lemon Half
Posts: 5244
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 12:04 pm
Has thanked: 3244 times
Been thanked: 1018 times

Re: BBC Standards?

#511632

Postby didds » July 4th, 2022, 12:27 pm

MrFoolish wrote:
On a separate note, they've now dropped the HD channel of BBC News from Freeview. But the kids' channels remain in HD. So the channel for adults with serious content is degraded but the kids still get to watch cartoons in HD! Who makes these decisions?



so the kids don't count?

stewamax
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 2417
Joined: November 7th, 2016, 2:40 pm
Has thanked: 83 times
Been thanked: 782 times

Re: BBC Standards?

#511657

Postby stewamax » July 4th, 2022, 3:25 pm

MrFoolish wrote:On a separate note, they've now dropped the HD channel of BBC News from Freeview. But the kids' channels remain in HD. So the channel for adults with serious content is degraded but the kids still get to watch cartoons in HD!

Of course: kids' eyesight is more acute than ours. We could watch the news in 405 lines B&W analogue and not notice much difference...

MrFoolish
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 2284
Joined: March 22nd, 2020, 7:27 pm
Has thanked: 553 times
Been thanked: 1115 times

Re: BBC Standards?

#511676

Postby MrFoolish » July 4th, 2022, 4:19 pm

didds wrote:
MrFoolish wrote:
On a separate note, they've now dropped the HD channel of BBC News from Freeview. But the kids' channels remain in HD. So the channel for adults with serious content is degraded but the kids still get to watch cartoons in HD! Who makes these decisions?


so the kids don't count?


Not until they start forking out for the licence fee, no.

pje16
Lemon Half
Posts: 6050
Joined: May 30th, 2021, 6:01 pm
Has thanked: 1843 times
Been thanked: 2066 times

Re: BBC Standards?

#511677

Postby pje16 » July 4th, 2022, 4:22 pm

stewamax wrote:Of course: kids' eyesight is more acute than ours.

Not always, I couldn't see the puppets strings on Thunderbirds when I was a kid :lol:

didds
Lemon Half
Posts: 5244
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 12:04 pm
Has thanked: 3244 times
Been thanked: 1018 times

Re: BBC Standards?

#511731

Postby didds » July 5th, 2022, 12:15 am

MrFoolish wrote:
Not until they start forking out for the licence fee, no.


Well on that basis there should have been very limited stuff for people over the age of 75 for some years presumably?


Return to “Bitter Lemons”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests