RN
They've missed a trick in not showing some classic editions of HardTalk from yesteryear during the lockdown.
Indeed-they could loads of Hardtalk already in the can from pre-lockdown.
They've missed a trick in not showing some classic editions of HardTalk from yesteryear during the lockdown.
CR
Was it not filmed before Coronavirus ?
The way they've dressed the set certainly makes it look like it was filmed after B was mothballed - very minimal lighting (not especially out of place) but the set was also completely unlit and all the screens were off, with some pull up banners with HARDtalk branding on them almost hiding the fact it was in Studio B. They had a small monitor to show the guest on, but it was quite small and not one I've seen them use in Studio B before.
With the exception of one or two studio lights it felt like the way things were set up they were in Studio B simply as it was an empty, quiet space to film. The monitor could easily have been plugged into a laptop running Skype to get the guest on screen, and the links/presenter shots filmed on a normal camera (rather than a studio camera) and then edited together afterwards rather than through Studio B's gallery?
All of the above is pure speculation but even Newsnight in the Evan Davis era made use of more lighting in Studio B than HARDtalk did in the most recent edition!
HARDtalk being filmed in Studio B, by the way.
Was it not filmed before Coronavirus ?
The way they've dressed the set certainly makes it look like it was filmed after B was mothballed - very minimal lighting (not especially out of place) but the set was also completely unlit and all the screens were off, with some pull up banners with HARDtalk branding on them almost hiding the fact it was in Studio B. They had a small monitor to show the guest on, but it was quite small and not one I've seen them use in Studio B before.
With the exception of one or two studio lights it felt like the way things were set up they were in Studio B simply as it was an empty, quiet space to film. The monitor could easily have been plugged into a laptop running Skype to get the guest on screen, and the links/presenter shots filmed on a normal camera (rather than a studio camera) and then edited together afterwards rather than through Studio B's gallery?
All of the above is pure speculation but even Newsnight in the Evan Davis era made use of more lighting in Studio B than HARDtalk did in the most recent edition!
Last edited by Critique on 2 September 2020 10:15pm
VA
Staff-wise, it’s easier to get a runner to put up some banners than get engineers and studio camera crew (rather than PSC) in to fire up a studio, etc.
Which asks the question why go through all the effort of installing the large signage when it would take a few seconds to light it up with the screens. The cameras are manual roaming but I think they have Shotoku heads?
Staff-wise, it’s easier to get a runner to put up some banners than get engineers and studio camera crew (rather than PSC) in to fire up a studio, etc.
DE
HARDtalk has been produced with a minimal crew and the banners/screen/laptop/Skype setup throughout the reduced staffing period. They’ve been using several locations around BH and recording on location. I didn’t see the one using Studio B’s floor, but they wouldn’t have been able to light the set and use the screens without extra members of crew.
BA
And HARDtalk is the ideal programme to do in that way, considering the variety of different studios and settings it's used over the years - very little would look out of place.
JF
Sportoday that when Williams family leave F1 it's not even mentioned. This is a huge story and needed coverage 43 years and look at the coverage given to Alex Furgssen, Frank needed coverage and its biased.
AN
And in English?
Sportoday that when Williams family leave F1 it's not even mentioned. This is a huge story and needed coverage 43 years and look at the coverage given to Alex Furgssen, Frank needed coverage and its biased.
And in English?
AS
AlexS
Sportoday that when Williams family leave F1 it's not even mentioned. This is a huge story and needed coverage 43 years and look at the coverage given to Alex Furgssen, Frank needed coverage and its biased.
And in English?
Seems to be some sort of moan that a certain formula one story isn't being covered by BBC News, and claiming that it shows bias (which is clearly nonsense).
JF
And in English?
Seems to be some sort of moan that a certain formula one story isn't being covered by BBC News, and claiming that it shows bias (which is clearly nonsense).
What I mean if it were a football team and look at the TV coverage given when Alex Furgussen stepped down after 25 years, no mention of the last family-owned and run team being sold to private hands. Sir Frank stands down after 43 years not even a mention, Williams family leaving the sport after half a century of involvement
Sportoday that when Williams family leave F1 it's not even mentioned. This is a huge story and needed coverage 43 years and look at the coverage given to Alex Furgssen, Frank needed coverage and its biased.
And in English?
Seems to be some sort of moan that a certain formula one story isn't being covered by BBC News, and claiming that it shows bias (which is clearly nonsense).
What I mean if it were a football team and look at the TV coverage given when Alex Furgussen stepped down after 25 years, no mention of the last family-owned and run team being sold to private hands. Sir Frank stands down after 43 years not even a mention, Williams family leaving the sport after half a century of involvement
AS
AlexS
And in English?
Seems to be some sort of moan that a certain formula one story isn't being covered by BBC News, and claiming that it shows bias (which is clearly nonsense).
What I mean if it were a football team and look at the TV coverage given when Alex Furgussen stepped down after 25 years, no mention of the last family-owned and run team being sold to private hands. Sir Frank stands down after 43 years not even a mention, Williams family leaving the sport after half a century of involvement
It's not bias to cover sports with different levels of interest to a different extent, and even within football relatively uncontroversial changes in ownership of average teams rarely get more than a passing mention. As much as I would like to see much greater coverage of my own preferred sport on the news channel I accept it is largely a lack of interest that causes it to get little coverage (although realistically the governing body would probably fall apart if it faced proper scrutiny).