It would be nice if the BBC at least were offering an uninterrupted live stream with no commentary on Freeview - 301 seems to just be showing a holding caption this afternoon.
Perhaps it's to allow the statmuxer to give a few more bits to the other channels, like what they're doing with BBC HD?
It would be nice if the BBC at least were offering an uninterrupted live stream with no commentary on Freeview - 301 seems to just be showing a holding caption this afternoon.
There is such a service on the red button on satellite. I notice that BBC HD isn't showing anything until 4.00 either, presumably this is to do with statmuxing and these services have been sacrificed to provide more bandwidth for BBC1 and BBC1 HD
:-(
A former member
Annoying audio glitch on ITV1HD every time the flags straps appear.
I'm with Pete on this one. Why deny international viewers the chance of seeing the Jubilee celebrations in order to show graphic images on a loop with little or no information just repeated ad nauseum? As horrific as the plane crash is, I bet there were far more people around the globe who'd rather watch the Jubilee, especially in Commonwealth countries.
But is the Jubilee really major world news or is it mostly pretty "eye candy"? Perhaps wall-to-wall coverage of such pageantry should best be left to the entertainment channels. Here in Slovenia, the Jubilee was covered by the media, but not at the expense of more consequential world news. People around the world are just not as obsessed with this "story" as some of the international news channels seems to think they are. There are many who don't care at all.
It would be nice if the BBC at least were offering an uninterrupted live stream with no commentary on Freeview - 301 seems to just be showing a holding caption this afternoon.
Perhaps it's to allow the statmuxer to give a few more bits to the other channels, like what they're doing with BBC HD?
I presume all the Freeview HD channels are stat-muxed together - not just the BBC channels?
I'm with Pete on this one. Why deny international viewers the chance of seeing the Jubilee celebrations in order to show graphic images on a loop with little or no information just repeated ad nauseum? As horrific as the plane crash is, I bet there were far more people around the globe who'd rather watch the Jubilee, especially in Commonwealth countries.
But is the Jubilee really major world news or is it mostly pretty "eye candy"? Perhaps wall-to-wall coverage of such pageantry should best be left to the entertainment channels. Here in Slovenia, the Jubilee was covered by the media, but not at the expense of more consequential world news. People around the world are just not as obsessed with this "story" as some of the international news channels seems to think they are. There are many who don't care at all.
Of course it's news - 1.5m people on the streets of London, the second longest serving monarch in British history, scenes showing Britain at it's best.
News is surely bringing history as it happens to the living rooms of the world - and this is a truly notable moment in British and Commonwealth history - and is respected as such by the rest of the world.
I'm with Pete on this one. Why deny international viewers the chance of seeing the Jubilee celebrations in order to show graphic images on a loop with little or no information just repeated ad nauseum? As horrific as the plane crash is, I bet there were far more people around the globe who'd rather watch the Jubilee, especially in Commonwealth countries.
But is the Jubilee really major world news or is it mostly pretty "eye candy"? Perhaps wall-to-wall coverage of such pageantry should best be left to the entertainment channels. Here in Slovenia, the Jubilee was covered by the media, but not at the expense of more consequential world news. People around the world are just not as obsessed with this "story" as some of the international news channels seems to think they are. There are many who don't care at all.
Of course it's news - 1.5m people on the streets of London, the second longest serving monarch in British history, scenes showing Britain at it's best.
News is surely bringing history as it happens to the living rooms of the world - and this is a truly notable moment in British and Commonwealth history - and is respected as such by the rest of the world.
Absolutely agree, Brekkie. WW Update, I think you're way off the mark on this one. This is a momentous occasion that has only happened once before (I think) in the history of the British monarchy. And it's not just Britain - although you say many people around the world don't care, just as many do, especially in countries and territories where the Queen is head of state. Why should they not be able to see it live? You get non-royal news all year long - and you begrudge just a few days of attention focused on Britain? If this means nothing to most people around the world, then why do we get full live coverage of the inauguration of American presidents? That means nothing to us either.
Perhaps I'm being unduly cynical, but I have a feeling that a crash that killed "all 153 people aboard the plane and an undetermined number of people on the ground" (AP) would have received a lot more coverage if it happened in, say, France. Would the Jubilee still have been the lead story on CNNI? I wonder.
At 11pm, at least, the plane crash was the lead story on CNNI Sunday. I'm not sure about earlier, but once the seriousness was understood, CNNI did lead on it. And CNN/US aired regular reports as well
To be fair they didn't say CNN never mentioned the crash. Jon Stewart -
"This is probably where CNN cuts away and we get pieces of taped flotilla re-caps as CNN goes wall-to-wall on that terrible tragedy."
Fair enough. But the Gawker link to The Daily Show piece was wrong. And The Daily Show could have acknowledged CNN did cut away for an update. And how CNN were far from the only news channel not going wall to wall. Indeed other than AJE who did?
That whole Daily Show piece strikes me as a cheap shot at CNN. There is a lot of criticism that could be aimed at CNN far more justifiably
AP
aprilj
The only part of the BBC coverage I would change is Jake Humphrey and Fearne Cotton. They added nothing to the programme and made it look quite fluffy.
I was pleasantly surprised by Sonali Shah (formally of Newsround), she seemed to fit in very well. I would quite like to see her present a shift on the News Channel. The closest she's come to is Business News which she did very well and BBC World News.
Chris Hollins was as annoying as ever, maybe replacing him with someone like Philippa Thomas who was out there for the NC would have sufficed.
Other than that, we had three of the most senior news presenters - Huw, Sophie and Fiona.