MA
I didn't know he was still working. Is it true that he once did a pilot for fantasy football league? I wonder what that was like.
Soapbox moment ;
Midlands Today, 6:30 each evening with Nick Owen and Suzanne Virde...
Not heard of the fantasy football league... What is it? Oh and John Simpson, BBC World Affairs Editor is also very interesting and welcoming in the great unwashed.
dodrade posted:
Matrix posted:
Nick Owen...
He is both a brilliant broadcaster and a very nice man to boot, plus he's a Shropshire Lad, and rather a local celebrity
He is both a brilliant broadcaster and a very nice man to boot, plus he's a Shropshire Lad, and rather a local celebrity
I didn't know he was still working. Is it true that he once did a pilot for fantasy football league? I wonder what that was like.
Soapbox moment ;
Midlands Today, 6:30 each evening with Nick Owen and Suzanne Virde...
Not heard of the fantasy football league... What is it? Oh and John Simpson, BBC World Affairs Editor is also very interesting and welcoming in the great unwashed.
DO
Fantasy Football league, the david Baddiel and Frank skinner show on BBC 2 in the early to mid 1990's. I read once when they decided to quit the BBC made a version of the show with nick owen presenting but was never broadcast. Baddiel and Skinner then revived the show on ITV during the 1998 world cup.
I suppose we've got very off topic now.
I suppose we've got very off topic now.
DO
Is there anyone who is actually nicer off camera than on?
Most people are nice off camera. Some are very very nice, almost to the point of overnice. Some are good laugh. Generally everyone is polite.
On radio, i can't think of any news presenters who aren't nice people away from the microphone. Dotun Adebayo is probably the nicest guy you've ever meet. Even John Humpreys is a nice guy, tho he has a number of foybols you need to work around..
However, some people are just downright strange...
dodrade posted:
Matrix posted:
When people are on camera, they are a lot different to when they are their normal selves. Don't be fooled! There only seems to be a handful that are genuine both on and off camera.
Is there anyone who is actually nicer off camera than on?
Most people are nice off camera. Some are very very nice, almost to the point of overnice. Some are good laugh. Generally everyone is polite.
On radio, i can't think of any news presenters who aren't nice people away from the microphone. Dotun Adebayo is probably the nicest guy you've ever meet. Even John Humpreys is a nice guy, tho he has a number of foybols you need to work around..
However, some people are just downright strange...
DO
Are you saying Prince Charles was spot on about him?
Dog posted:
There are only a few total w&nkers, but there are lots of correspondents who like to think above their station. Our carrot topped friend who was at the royal event yesterday and then filed the voice track for his package from home is one who can be a handful.
Are you saying Prince Charles was spot on about him?
DU
For all your talk (Marcus and Dog) about the "scabs" who worked yesterday, I don't think you do yourself any favours by slagging people off personally on a public forum.
In fact if your colleagues knew you came on a website and bitched about them behind a vague cloak of anonymity, I'm sure you would be far from flavour of the month.
All sounds a bit hypocritical to me.
Basics facts remain the same- despite an apparent "BBC wide" strike, the strikers were in the vast, vast MINORITY.
"Striking in Sympathy" is a particularly poor tactic and likely to lose supporters with time without pay (should the strikes continue). 13000 went on strike about 4000 job losses- it figures that most of those people striking are going to keep their jobs.
Union leaders get power-trips off strikes- they'll take the BBC staff with them, but they won't be losing their £80k/year salary. Oh no, they're the proper champagne socialists.
In fact if your colleagues knew you came on a website and bitched about them behind a vague cloak of anonymity, I'm sure you would be far from flavour of the month.
All sounds a bit hypocritical to me.
Basics facts remain the same- despite an apparent "BBC wide" strike, the strikers were in the vast, vast MINORITY.
"Striking in Sympathy" is a particularly poor tactic and likely to lose supporters with time without pay (should the strikes continue). 13000 went on strike about 4000 job losses- it figures that most of those people striking are going to keep their jobs.
Union leaders get power-trips off strikes- they'll take the BBC staff with them, but they won't be losing their £80k/year salary. Oh no, they're the proper champagne socialists.
TV
you seem unable to grasp the point that it is not just about the job cuts, it is about the future independence and existence of the bbc.
tvmercia
Founding member
Dunedin posted:
For all your talk (Marcus and Dog) about the "scabs" who worked yesterday, I don't think you do yourself any favours by slagging people off personally on a public forum.
In fact if your colleagues knew you came on a website and bitched about them behind a vague cloak of anonymity, I'm sure you would be far from flavour of the month.
All sounds a bit hypocritical to me.
Basics facts remain the same- despite an apparent "BBC wide" strike, the strikers were in the vast, vast MINORITY.
"Striking in Sympathy" is a particularly poor tactic and likely to lose supporters with time without pay (should the strikes continue). 13000 went on strike about 4000 job losses- it figures that most of those people striking are going to keep their jobs.
Union leaders get power-trips off strikes- they'll take the BBC staff with them, but they won't be losing their £80k/year salary. Oh no, they're the proper champagne socialists.
In fact if your colleagues knew you came on a website and bitched about them behind a vague cloak of anonymity, I'm sure you would be far from flavour of the month.
All sounds a bit hypocritical to me.
Basics facts remain the same- despite an apparent "BBC wide" strike, the strikers were in the vast, vast MINORITY.
"Striking in Sympathy" is a particularly poor tactic and likely to lose supporters with time without pay (should the strikes continue). 13000 went on strike about 4000 job losses- it figures that most of those people striking are going to keep their jobs.
Union leaders get power-trips off strikes- they'll take the BBC staff with them, but they won't be losing their £80k/year salary. Oh no, they're the proper champagne socialists.
MA
Anyone who is interested can see the spinning globe and then 58 second countdown into 7pm yesterday at the following link (from about 27:20)
rtsp://stream2.blinkx.com/BBCNews24/20050523/20050523_BBCNews24_News_1830.rm
EDIT: just seen that someone has posted the exact same link in the requests section
rtsp://stream2.blinkx.com/BBCNews24/20050523/20050523_BBCNews24_News_1830.rm
EDIT: just seen that someone has posted the exact same link in the requests section
BB
Theres also a 30 second globe with the headline bed plus various other material over on the TV Room
AN
Anybody know the viewing figures for yesterday's "Breakfast" compared with the usual Breakfast?
Lot's of people are saying it was better than the usual Kaplinsky rubbish
Andrew
Founding member
Breakfast News posted:
Media Guardian says that the Ten had 200k more viewers than normal.
Plus apparently Stephen Cole fancied himself as a movie star
Plus apparently Stephen Cole fancied himself as a movie star
Anybody know the viewing figures for yesterday's "Breakfast" compared with the usual Breakfast?
Lot's of people are saying it was better than the usual Kaplinsky rubbish
RU
you seem unable to grasp the point that it is not just about the job cuts, it is about the future independence and existence of the bbc.
That's not the reason given to me! Job cuts was the only thing mentioned and still is.
tvmercia posted:
Dunedin posted:
For all your talk (Marcus and Dog) about the "scabs" who worked yesterday, I don't think you do yourself any favours by slagging people off personally on a public forum.
In fact if your colleagues knew you came on a website and bitched about them behind a vague cloak of anonymity, I'm sure you would be far from flavour of the month.
All sounds a bit hypocritical to me.
Basics facts remain the same- despite an apparent "BBC wide" strike, the strikers were in the vast, vast MINORITY.
"Striking in Sympathy" is a particularly poor tactic and likely to lose supporters with time without pay (should the strikes continue). 13000 went on strike about 4000 job losses- it figures that most of those people striking are going to keep their jobs.
Union leaders get power-trips off strikes- they'll take the BBC staff with them, but they won't be losing their £80k/year salary. Oh no, they're the proper champagne socialists.
In fact if your colleagues knew you came on a website and bitched about them behind a vague cloak of anonymity, I'm sure you would be far from flavour of the month.
All sounds a bit hypocritical to me.
Basics facts remain the same- despite an apparent "BBC wide" strike, the strikers were in the vast, vast MINORITY.
"Striking in Sympathy" is a particularly poor tactic and likely to lose supporters with time without pay (should the strikes continue). 13000 went on strike about 4000 job losses- it figures that most of those people striking are going to keep their jobs.
Union leaders get power-trips off strikes- they'll take the BBC staff with them, but they won't be losing their £80k/year salary. Oh no, they're the proper champagne socialists.
That's not the reason given to me! Job cuts was the only thing mentioned and still is.