True but from the pilots I have been watching the carpet can cause problems because they do move the cameras a lot. Also personally I think it just looks mucky with Carpet and tape plus carpet is harder to clean and accessing underfloor services a pain!
As for improving the acoustics there is an obsession with so much glass in these new studios that acoustically they are shocking anyway!
I don't see the Iranians rushing to provide a TV channel for us, maybe because they don't see the requirement.
Perhaps if we didn't go around needlessly irritating foreign governments in this way then their more extremist citizens wouldn't be quite so tempted to visit here to practice their knowledge of explosives.
.
Sorry can't agree with your point there. Iran already has a TV channel aimed squarely at the English speaking world - www.presstv.ir
SP
Sput
adamcobb55 posted:
Stuart posted:
Hymagumba posted:
blah blah blah
A well constructed point, Hyma.
I don't see the Iranians rushing to provide a TV channel for us, maybe because they don't see the requirement.
Perhaps if we didn't go around needlessly irritating foreign governments in this way then their more extremist citizens wouldn't be quite so tempted to visit here to practice their knowledge of explosives.
.
Sorry can't agree with your point there. Iran already has a TV channel aimed squarely at the English speaking world - www.presstv.ir
So that's point 2 blown out of the water. Now for point 1: your claim that Iranians practice terrorism over here. Citation needed that isn't the daily mail.
Sorry can't agree with your point there. Iran already has a TV channel aimed squarely at the English speaking world - www.presstv.ir
So that's point 2 blown out of the water.
The important difference is that Press TV is aimed at the ‘english speaking world’ not at any country in particular. Many governments wish to put across their point of view, one of the easiest ways is to use a language understood by almost a third of the world’s population.
Furthermore, I’m not aware of the UK government expressing any objection to Press TV being broadcast here or of us having any sort of censored government-owned news channels.
That is quite different to creating a channel speaking a relatively minor language based almost exclusively within an area of the world with which we have little or no natural affinity. The Iranian government has viewed this move as suspicious and will no doubt seek to capitalise on it as unwelcome interference.
Sput posted:
Stuart posted:
Perhaps if we didn't go around needlessly irritating foreign governments in this way then their more extremist citizens wouldn't be quite so tempted to visit here to practice their knowledge of explosives.
Now for point 1: your claim that Iranians practice terrorism over here. Citation needed that isn't the daily mail.
Sput, if you actually read what I said, instead what you want argue about, then you would realise I didn’t mention the specific nationality of any terrorists. Are you trying to deny that the UK has become a target for terrorists or that those who come to the UK with terrorism in mind do so because they think we’re a ‘nice bunch of people’ who generally just 'mind our own business'?
Anti-western propaganda is fuelled by countries such as the UK thinking that they have the right to try to influence events in areas of the world which don’t concern us. Providing a news service in the native language of a country which has quite strict media controls can hardly be described as 'minding your own business'.
Sorry can't agree with your point there. Iran already has a TV channel aimed squarely at the English speaking world - www.presstv.ir
So that's point 2 blown out of the water.
The important difference is that Press TV is aimed at the ‘english speaking world’ not at any country in particular. Many governments wish to put across their point of view, one of the easiest ways is to use a language understood by almost a third of the world’s population.
Furthermore, I’m not aware of the UK government expressing any objection to Press TV being broadcast here or of us having any sort of censored government-owned news channels.
That is quite different to creating a channel speaking a relatively minor language based almost exclusively within an area of the world with which we have little or no natural affinity. The Iranian government has viewed this move as suspicious and will no doubt seek to capitalise on it as unwelcome interference.
So just because a totalitarian government doesn't want its people to have access to free, unfilteded news and information the BBC/Government should roll over and say - "ok then we'll abandon the plan". Despite the apparent ban on satellite tv 40% of Iranians have access to it so the audience is obviously there so I really don';t see your reasoning. What the world service has done very effectively for all these years is provide free, unbiased news to those without access to it.
And I think you'll find the language is hardly "minor". The last estimate I think (but not completely sure) was as many people use the Persian language as French or Italian. Are we suggesting that these are now minor languages and that the World Service shouldn't broadcast in the obviously defunct methods of communication.
Perhaps though, you might like to continue the ins and outs of how the government is spending public money over at Metropol.
If I recall correctly the BBC has closed down several of its radio stations (like the Bulgarian service, the Polish service and others) in order to save money to launch the Arabic and Persian TV channels, so it's not really £15 milion coming from nowhere.
Plus, £15 milion is probably just a fraction of what the UK government has spent in Iraq but while every pound spent on the Persian TV service will probably make many Iranians feel more positve about the UK every pound spent in Iraq has had quite the opposite result on the Iraqi people and the whole world.
And I think you'll find the language is hardly "minor". The last estimate I think (but not completely sure) was as many people use the Persian language as French or Italian. Are we suggesting that these are now minor languages and that the World Service shouldn't broadcast in the obviously defunct methods of communication.
Less than 1% of the world's population speak Farsi, so you could hardly call it a major international language. Incidentally, about 3 times more people speak French, but I haven't noticed the FCO launching a french language TV news channel.
Isonstine posted:
Perhaps though, you might like to continue the ins and outs of how the government is spending public money over at Metropol.
I have no issue with the cost of BBC Persia, which is paltry in the grand scheme of government waste. My objection is in the fact that the UK government feels the need to do it in the first place.
adamcobb55 posted:
So just because a totalitarian government doesn't want its people to have access to free, unfilteded news and information the BBC/Government should roll over and say - "ok then we'll abandon the plan".
No, I'd say it's got 'diddly squat' to do with the UK government what Iran decides to broadcast to it's own people! It's not our role and I'm not sure why such an arrogant attitude to 'inform the oppressed of the world' is still maintained by the FCO long after our influence in the world disappeared. It's the sort of behaviour which irritates foreign governments, and then we wonder why they don't like us!