« Topics
12
noggin12,028 posts since 26 Jun 2001
Am I the only one who finds the ITV1 Jubilee programme complete with BBC Party at the Palace musical backing slightly comical?

ITN seem to be trying to stage a serious pre-amble to fireworks, discussing the monarchy's role etc., with a permanent rock backing?!
william643 posts since 7 Jun 2001
I was rather amused when John Suchet introduced his two royal biographer guests at the start..

More to the point.. who is seriously going to watch it?

I can't believe anyone who was interested in this event wouldn't either be already watching on BBC1 or would have switched over immediately at 10pm to watch the end.

Rather reminds me of the Newsnight/Berlin Wall clip..
JB371 posts since 4 Jan 2003
Quite funny that they had to sit around twiddling their thumbs while the BBC concert finished - and they when they did start taking their pictures Charles starts saying how great the BBC is.

And tommorow their coverage switches to ITV2 for a non-entity of a World Cup match - only the most dedicated ITV fans will switch over to ITV2 and not BBC1!
Square Eyes7,119 posts since 31 Mar 2001
They weren't sat around twiddling their thumbs, there was value in seeing what was going on outside the palace grounds. Sky News were also covering events outside. If ITV had done nothing, they'd have been condemned by the likes of you for not even turning up.

Actually the ITV1 pictures of outside the palace where much clearer than the BBC's.
Square Eyes7,119 posts since 31 Mar 2001
No, it wasn't dire. There was a pop concert put on by the BBC (who wanted to hijack the whole event as BBC Music Live). The BBC showed the pop concert. But there was a bigger event going on here, that of the Queens Jubilee.

Therefore it was very fitting that ITV should cover the celebrations and mood outside of the concert. I don't think for one minute the ITV coverage was dire, on the basis that they didn't have the rights to a pop concert. I got bored of the concert and wanted to see what was going on elsewhere, and ITV covered that.

Go and play with your insignificant website.
Whataday6,956 posts since 13 Sep 2001
It wasn't just a pop concert, as it had music of many genres. ITV was right to broadcast what it did, but it was very comical to see them filming the outside of the palace, when you could hear all the action happening on the BBC's coverage.

I don't have a particular bias to either ITV or the BBC. In some cases I think that ITV does well, and the BBC in others. I don't think it is possible for someone to believe that either is 100% good.

And as for the comments of 'my' website (which is not just my website, but run with 14 other people), it is hardly insignificant judging by the amount of visitors it has been getting. But i'll let your infantile comment pass, as I am not getting involved in an argument.
Square Eyes7,119 posts since 31 Mar 2001
Whataday posted:

And as for the comments of 'my' website (which is not just my website, but run with 14 other people), it is hardly insignificant judging by the amount of visitors it has been getting. But i'll let your infantile comment pass, as I am not getting involved in an argument.

Not infantile - statement of fact.
TheSaint0 post since 21 Feb 2017
I caught a bit of the fireworks last night and while the bbc had superior camera work and sound, the ITV cameras were far higher quality - the BBC's cameras didn't seem to have even been white balanced.

Having said that the sound on the BBC was superior, I did notice that, watchin on an analogue set, they only transmitted one audio channel rather than the sum.
JB371 posts since 4 Jan 2003
square eyes posted:
They weren't sat around twiddling their thumbs, there was value in seeing what was going on outside the palace grounds. Sky News were also covering events outside. If ITV had done nothing, they'd have been condemned by the likes of you for not even turning up.

Actually the ITV1 pictures of outside the palace where much clearer than the BBC's.


I accept they had to do something, which is entirely why they opted in just for the fireworks. However they did at one point seem to run out of things to do because of the concert overrunning...thank goodness they had adverts to fill some time with Laughing
chrisb0 post since 4 Jan 2002
I thought ITV did very well considering the circumstances and BBC tried to turn the whole thing into 'BBC's BIG PARTY STUFF THE QUEEN LEAVE HER TO ITV' sort of thing.

And that blue peter / cbbc concert was a right shambles. Not only was it presented by those pathetic little puppets from The Saturday Show, but the whole live thing went wrong and nobody was on time with 5 second gaps before the presenters responded. (for example the world famous... umm. whats her name... that one on "50/50" )

The poor excuse for presenters (the most patronising, childish, 'i try and be a child to make kids relate to me' presenters.) I am, quite frankly, sick of seeing presenters act like children to help us relate to them.

Anywho. There is only one good presenter on Blue Peter and that is Simon, mainly because he has the balance between being cool and child like, and being mature. Matt is far too mature and shouldn't be allowed near children, he should stay near his stamp collection. Liz is waaayyy too boring and tries to be like an eighties BP presenter with a miniskirt and her cheesy fake smile. Konnie just gets on my nerves, BP needs presenters that can speak properly (Think about it... Konnie F.. sorry Huq and her Drrrooooonnnnne, Katie Hilla nd her R / W's...). The CBBC bit was ever so slightly better but still the presenters (Barney + Jake, who are usually really good in the studio) were also treating the kids like babies.

To even it out though, cITV presenters can be just as bad and generally, whilst in the studio, CBBC presenters are much calmer cand better, because the cITV ones try and be too cool and keep saying 'WICKED' and 'SORTED' and I want to shout "SHUT UP YOU ARE ADULTS ACT BL**DY MATURE FOR ONCE."

Anyway thats my ranting done.
Smile