NerdBoy's posts, page 6

The Sport Thread

Random question:

Why are companies allowed graphic logos for providing timings or data (IBM at wimbledon) on the BBC? Similarly the small Barclays prem. logo on subs. Surely these shouldn't be allowed -- regardless of the current rules -- as it's clearly advertising. If anything, a simple text description would be sufficient.

I thought coca-cola were prevented (or almost) from showing a graphic logo at the end of top of the pops once?

US Shootings - Coverage

Nice lecture by Matt Frei on why the media were right (not just the BBC) to show the 'multimedia manifesto' (?) and the continuing coverage. Hardly a neutral tone and stance taken, almost had a go at the students that didn't want it shown!

ITV Regional Idents

looks good

Moira Stuart - Dropped?

Is that a conflict of interest? Just curious

BBC News 24

err no, fortunately. I wouldn't want to find out by radio/television though, that would be ghastly. I see little more reporting to be done with this story. No one is on the loose, political ramifications are slight if any and I assume it is clear who is injured or dead. Fine, give brief details of the news, but it needn't go past that. The rest is morbid titillation for the vast majority.

Examples:
-Was subsequent 11/09/2001 reporting helped by the broadcast of last minute phone calls to loved ones? Get a real sense of what was happening, right?
-The Morecambe bay cocklers phoning the coastguard -- added an emotional edge to the story, yes?

Or both simply a fascination with what people do when they're going to die that they couldn't resist putting out. Same with this, grizzly detail here, speculative guess work there and shaky generated user content as well. Even get Matt Frei dishing out the fact one of the dead was a holocaust survivor as if it were a pub quiz question. If they want to have the world's wildest gun rampages, label it as such, not news.

Alan Johnston, missing journalist RELEASED

Sorry, it's just the term irks me when obviously it would be 'murder'. Gives an unintended air of justification.

Abolish the TV license

I used to be for, now against. No problem with the cost if there was more than a handful of programmes I'd watch or listen to. Since it's not the case it's far cheaper to buy DVDs of everything I watch. My main concern is the threatening and presumed tone of the letters sent out by the licensing authority.

BBC News 24

Fair enough, but I'd argue my last post is valid. Do we really need them to speculate on the killer for us? I find asking for submitted pictures abhorrent along with the special coverage of different victims purely where they came from (no doubt to the joy of that particular news desk). BBC News 24 is as guilty of this as any channel or website.

BBC World and Prime

I would agree to a certain extent, but I feel the quality isn't great enough to argue in favour of it giving prestige. We would have to do it properly, something I don't think we would.

The Sport Thread

Hawk-eye? I'm not sure how that's going to be used. Shots missed or possible safeties?

The Sport Thread

Hawk-eye? I'm not sure how that's going to be used. Shots missed or possible safeties?

Sky News

Ok bad phrasing. I meant that the same amount of time allotted for this single incident is afforded to every bomb with similar casualties -- which it clearly isn't. There's no blanket coverage, multiple eye-witness reports continuously. In any case Britain obviously has interests in that area so it will be featured to some extent. Dafur is probably a better example, only picked up on when news orgs. want to. I get the impression it's all a bit Littlejohn when deciding what to run, i.e:

"Does anyone really give a monkey's about what happens in Rwanda? If the Mbongo tribe wants to wipe out the Mbingo tribe then as far as I am concerned that is entirely a matter for them"