NE
Don't worry, my hands would be shaking too if I lived in a part of the world with that many police sirens.
HAHA! it's called Shoreditch, London, Eastenders often refer to it..
Here you go:
Don't worry, my hands would be shaking too if I lived in a part of the world with that many police sirens.
HAHA! it's called Shoreditch, London, Eastenders often refer to it..
NE
and I appreciate that... Couldn't find a decent version either...
It's not my video, it's Newsroom's, I just uploaded it to YouTube so people could watch it without having to download it.
and I appreciate that... Couldn't find a decent version either...
MO
I'm sorry, but I have to agree with BBC WORLD. I think that Jon & Emily are fantastic, and having a bit of banter and even laughing is great - but in its place . If they'd just cracked up before the weather then that would have been good, shown their human side, but they should have regained their composure before the headlines.
I didn't think it was appropriate.
Yes, I do agree that they're a great pairing. However, and unfortunately, giggling through the headlines about the death of the dictator of a nuclear nation is not particularly professional.
Global viewers who don't know the Maitlis Sopel history will just assume it's a case of the BBC being disrespectful.
You and I know they're laughing about chocolate and that these two also lark about, but I really do suppose they were "sent to the naughty step" for this.
Can you imagine two of CNNs or Skys anchors laughing like this?
No.
Global viewers who don't know the Maitlis Sopel history will just assume it's a case of the BBC being disrespectful.
You and I know they're laughing about chocolate and that these two also lark about, but I really do suppose they were "sent to the naughty step" for this.
Can you imagine two of CNNs or Skys anchors laughing like this?
No.
I'm sorry, but I have to agree with BBC WORLD. I think that Jon & Emily are fantastic, and having a bit of banter and even laughing is great - but in its place . If they'd just cracked up before the weather then that would have been good, shown their human side, but they should have regained their composure before the headlines.
I didn't think it was appropriate.
IT
I'm sorry, but I have to agree with BBC WORLD. I think that Jon & Emily are fantastic, and having a bit of banter and even laughing is great - but in its place . If they'd just cracked up before the weather then that would have been good, shown their human side, but they should have regained their composure before the headlines.
I didn't think it was appropriate.
I agree with BBC WORLD and Moz. It was totally inappropriate. Like Moz says, if it had happened solely before the weather, fair enough. But to carry it on during the headlines was very unprofessional. Strangely, some members here make out as though BBC News is their afternoon entertainment with a cuppa and some biscuits and expect the presenters to be cracking jokes every five minutes. I really don't mind a little banter in the appropriate places but that example was letting it get out of hand. Why is the news being stale and boring perceived as such a bad thing these days? Nobody seemed to mind in the 80s and 90s. You watch the news to find out the day's events, most of which are going to be serious. Watching the news isn't meant to be comedy.
itsrobert
Founding member
Yes, I do agree that they're a great pairing. However, and unfortunately, giggling through the headlines about the death of the dictator of a nuclear nation is not particularly professional.
Global viewers who don't know the Maitlis Sopel history will just assume it's a case of the BBC being disrespectful.
You and I know they're laughing about chocolate and that these two also lark about, but I really do suppose they were "sent to the naughty step" for this.
Can you imagine two of CNNs or Skys anchors laughing like this?
No.
Global viewers who don't know the Maitlis Sopel history will just assume it's a case of the BBC being disrespectful.
You and I know they're laughing about chocolate and that these two also lark about, but I really do suppose they were "sent to the naughty step" for this.
Can you imagine two of CNNs or Skys anchors laughing like this?
No.
I'm sorry, but I have to agree with BBC WORLD. I think that Jon & Emily are fantastic, and having a bit of banter and even laughing is great - but in its place . If they'd just cracked up before the weather then that would have been good, shown their human side, but they should have regained their composure before the headlines.
I didn't think it was appropriate.
I agree with BBC WORLD and Moz. It was totally inappropriate. Like Moz says, if it had happened solely before the weather, fair enough. But to carry it on during the headlines was very unprofessional. Strangely, some members here make out as though BBC News is their afternoon entertainment with a cuppa and some biscuits and expect the presenters to be cracking jokes every five minutes. I really don't mind a little banter in the appropriate places but that example was letting it get out of hand. Why is the news being stale and boring perceived as such a bad thing these days? Nobody seemed to mind in the 80s and 90s. You watch the news to find out the day's events, most of which are going to be serious. Watching the news isn't meant to be comedy.
PE
I've no idea how to upload videos sorry people - here's a link to download it if someone would care to assist.
http://wtrns.fr/alEFp5tyixNZ3s
[try metropol's upload service]
Pete
Founding member
Please tell me someone had the last 4 minutes captured? It all just fell apart with Jon and Emily.
I've no idea how to upload videos sorry people - here's a link to download it if someone would care to assist.
http://wtrns.fr/alEFp5tyixNZ3s
[try metropol's upload service]
GS
As it was me who brought it up, and given that I'm one of the few who said I enjoyed watching it, I'll take it as read that you're referring to me.
Well I have to tell you now, you're absolutely wrong in your assumption.
I watch/listen to the news for the content. I'm under no illusions about what its supposed to be, and I haven't got it confused with GOLD or another channel.
For a combined total of about 2 minutes in a several hour block there was some moments of laughter, banter and confusion about what item was coming next.
Had anyone here with the pursed-lips and po-faces actually seen the afternoon of television, you would have seen that the context was - specifically - that they were awaiting someone to stand up and ask a question in the commons, and had three items to juggle - weather, the top of the half hour, and Hilary Clinton doing a press conference.
None of the items were moving as anticipated, and rather than shuffle papers they chatted on air.
But you didn't see it. You saw the clip where they laughed, and not the generally stellar block of programming.
And FYI, there was no cuppa or biscuit involved, I'll have you know - just me doing plenty of work with the news on in the background. Perhaps I give the air of someone who swans around in a silk robe cramming my mouth with baked goods all day, but the reality is quite different. Sorry to disappoint.
Anyway - I'm all done discussing this now. It was momentarily, fleetingly amusing, and now I'm surrounded by Margo Leadbetters telling me to buck my ideas up, and I wish I hadn't mentioned it.
So, with yuletide felicitations in mind, you can cram it with festive walnuts.
Gavin Scott
Founding member
Strangely, some members here make out as though BBC News is their afternoon entertainment with a cuppa and some biscuits and expect the presenters to be cracking jokes every five minutes. I really don't mind a little banter in the appropriate places but that example was letting it get out of hand.
As it was me who brought it up, and given that I'm one of the few who said I enjoyed watching it, I'll take it as read that you're referring to me.
Well I have to tell you now, you're absolutely wrong in your assumption.
I watch/listen to the news for the content. I'm under no illusions about what its supposed to be, and I haven't got it confused with GOLD or another channel.
For a combined total of about 2 minutes in a several hour block there was some moments of laughter, banter and confusion about what item was coming next.
Had anyone here with the pursed-lips and po-faces actually seen the afternoon of television, you would have seen that the context was - specifically - that they were awaiting someone to stand up and ask a question in the commons, and had three items to juggle - weather, the top of the half hour, and Hilary Clinton doing a press conference.
None of the items were moving as anticipated, and rather than shuffle papers they chatted on air.
But you didn't see it. You saw the clip where they laughed, and not the generally stellar block of programming.
And FYI, there was no cuppa or biscuit involved, I'll have you know - just me doing plenty of work with the news on in the background. Perhaps I give the air of someone who swans around in a silk robe cramming my mouth with baked goods all day, but the reality is quite different. Sorry to disappoint.
Anyway - I'm all done discussing this now. It was momentarily, fleetingly amusing, and now I'm surrounded by Margo Leadbetters telling me to buck my ideas up, and I wish I hadn't mentioned it.
So, with yuletide felicitations in mind, you can cram it with festive walnuts.
VM
I've no idea how to upload videos sorry people - here's a link to download it if someone would care to assist.
http://wtrns.fr/alEFp5tyixNZ3s
[try metropol's upload service]
The file is over 30mb so did not work.
Please tell me someone had the last 4 minutes captured? It all just fell apart with Jon and Emily.
I've no idea how to upload videos sorry people - here's a link to download it if someone would care to assist.
http://wtrns.fr/alEFp5tyixNZ3s
[try metropol's upload service]
The file is over 30mb so did not work.
IT
itsrobert
Founding member
Actually, Gavin, you weren't in my mind at all when I wrote my comment earlier. It's just a general impression I get from several members that they watch BBC News as a form of entertainment and revel in all the banter and jokes, so your assumption was totally wrong. Despite your remarks, I do think there is a place for banter on the BBC News Channel. For instance, this morning Simon McCoy, Rachel Schofield and Nick Miller had a laugh at a popular YouTube video about a talking dog. That was right before the weather and was completely appropriate.
Where the Sopel and Maitliss case differs is that it continued into more serious news and came across as rather unprofessional. I don't think it's too unreasonable to expect BBC newsreaders to be able to control themselves when the time calls for it. I don't think I'm alone in this expectation either, as Sopel himself admitted they'd been told off, so obviously their behaviour wasn't acceptable. I'm not some stuffy prude but I just find moments like that really cringeworthy and a big turn-off.
And, as for not seeing the whole episode live, does that really invalidate my opinion? Does one have to read a whole book from cover to cover in order to get the gist? I can only base my judgement upon that clip, but that does not mean my opinion is wrong. From what I've seen, it looks unprofessional and I stand by that claim.
Where the Sopel and Maitliss case differs is that it continued into more serious news and came across as rather unprofessional. I don't think it's too unreasonable to expect BBC newsreaders to be able to control themselves when the time calls for it. I don't think I'm alone in this expectation either, as Sopel himself admitted they'd been told off, so obviously their behaviour wasn't acceptable. I'm not some stuffy prude but I just find moments like that really cringeworthy and a big turn-off.
And, as for not seeing the whole episode live, does that really invalidate my opinion? Does one have to read a whole book from cover to cover in order to get the gist? I can only base my judgement upon that clip, but that does not mean my opinion is wrong. From what I've seen, it looks unprofessional and I stand by that claim.
GS
Oh.
OH!
Gavin Scott
Founding member
Actually, Gavin, you weren't in my mind at all when I wrote my comment earlier.
Oh.
OH!