Unaired footage and the Trump Tapes

Having just caught up on the last few pages can I ask everyone to keep discussion to tv/presentation related matters. The actual politics are best discussed elsewhere (eg. Metropol).

Back on topic...

Something fairly interesting that passed me by last week - it seems the real winner of the second TV debate, for a while anyway, was a chap called Ken Bone

I seem to remember that there have been audience members at our prime ministerial debates that have stood out and featured afterwards. However normally because they've asked a particularly tricky question not because of their personality or jumper choice. It's odd how some people just get latched onto like that, though I suppose for the internet and the media he's a bit of light relief from the current constant horrors of the campaign

It couldn't last for long however

Who was the last guy, the plumber in the last election, or 2008, wow that went quick.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_the_Plumber

I keep seeing grainy footage of Obama in 2008 on TV, yet I know at the time in 2008, the picture was in HD. I wonder do news channels do this on purpose.

Rasmussen Polls are about as reliable as guesswork.

I'd put very little faith in a Rasmussen poll.

Ironically, they were one of the original backers of ESPN, before pulling out just before it became a top name in US sports coverage.

The same could be said for all polls.

FiveThirtyEight has proven to be reliable in the past several elections: http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/?ex_cid=rrpromo




To be honest I don't get it. A few blogs wrote it was because of his "tough" question and sadly his appearance. It seemed like those entertainment / infotainment shows we have Access Hollywood (and their LIve edition), Inside Edition and Entertainment Tonight along with E! News seemed to report it the next day. I think by Tuesday it was popular enough that the morning shows did less than a minute on it and the cable networks put it in one of their quick segments before commercials.



Here in the US in 2008 despite there being HD newscasts on the broadcast and cable networks not many live shots were HD. Only since the past few years stations archival footage of broadcasts were in SD.

The Obama victory speech was in HD, I remember that. Yet it appears grainy and VHS like when they show it again over here.

I think all the polls are wrong. I think there are vast numbers of voters who are off the grid of polls.

There is no way this was HD on broadcast:



Note the poor recreation of the then current News Channel ticker, with letters appearing one by one on the right side.

That pretty bad!

But it exists in HD. I watched it somewhere in HD at the time. It was not on BBC or Sky.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CnvUUauFJ98

On second thoughts, I can't have watched it in HD, I can't think what channel in the UK would have shown it in HD? Maybe it was the BBC.

The reason I am so sure, is that at the time I had a Human Freesat box. It was new, and I recorded the speech to a USB stick. Unless I'm going mad.

But my point is that, why don't channels like BBC and Sky use the HD copy?

Because they have the copy from the night itself, which was in the quality shown in the video I posted.

If that is the case, they really should update their back catalogues.

What they are showing now, is worse quality. It looks like its many generations from the original.