MW
Would you say it's better or worse than Dimbletat?
Yes this is important.
It's probably worse than Dimbletat - At least Dimbletat has a major event behind it! Who can forget the nail-biting moments of Election '79!
My BBC mug arrived this morning - Seeing it I think I'm the mug for paying that much for it but never mind!
Would you say it's better or worse than Dimbletat?
Yes this is important.
It's probably worse than Dimbletat - At least Dimbletat has a major event behind it! Who can forget the nail-biting moments of Election '79!
PE
Would you say it's better or worse than Dimbletat?
Yes this is important.
It's probably worse than Dimbletat - At least Dimbletat has a major event behind it! Who can forget the nail-biting moments of Election '79!
Perhaps the better question would be is it bigger or smaller than Dimbletat?
Pete
Founding member
My BBC mug arrived this morning - Seeing it I think I'm the mug for paying that much for it but never mind!
Would you say it's better or worse than Dimbletat?
Yes this is important.
It's probably worse than Dimbletat - At least Dimbletat has a major event behind it! Who can forget the nail-biting moments of Election '79!
Perhaps the better question would be is it bigger or smaller than Dimbletat?
MW
Would you say it's better or worse than Dimbletat?
Yes this is important.
It's probably worse than Dimbletat - At least Dimbletat has a major event behind it! Who can forget the nail-biting moments of Election '79!
Perhaps the better question would be is it bigger or smaller than Dimbletat?
It's smaller!
On the K-Scale it's 4 Kays out of 5, Dimbletat is 6 Kays out of 5.
My BBC mug arrived this morning - Seeing it I think I'm the mug for paying that much for it but never mind!
Would you say it's better or worse than Dimbletat?
Yes this is important.
It's probably worse than Dimbletat - At least Dimbletat has a major event behind it! Who can forget the nail-biting moments of Election '79!
Perhaps the better question would be is it bigger or smaller than Dimbletat?
It's smaller!
On the K-Scale it's 4 Kays out of 5, Dimbletat is 6 Kays out of 5.
SR
Would you say it's better or worse than Dimbletat?
Yes this is important.
It's probably worse than Dimbletat - At least Dimbletat has a major event behind it! Who can forget the nail-biting moments of Election '79!
Perhaps the better question would be is it bigger or smaller than Dimbletat?
It's smaller!
On the K-Scale it's 4 Kays out of 5, Dimbletat is 6 Kays out of 5.
Right, someone has definitely spiked my drink.
My BBC mug arrived this morning - Seeing it I think I'm the mug for paying that much for it but never mind!
Would you say it's better or worse than Dimbletat?
Yes this is important.
It's probably worse than Dimbletat - At least Dimbletat has a major event behind it! Who can forget the nail-biting moments of Election '79!
Perhaps the better question would be is it bigger or smaller than Dimbletat?
It's smaller!
On the K-Scale it's 4 Kays out of 5, Dimbletat is 6 Kays out of 5.
Right, someone has definitely spiked my drink.
SG
BBC boss Mark Thompson has defended the corporation's Olympics coverage after reports he ordered staff to stop "focusing" so much on Team GB's success.
full story link:
http://news.uk.msn.com/uk/articles.aspx?cp-documentid=250874990
full story link:
http://news.uk.msn.com/uk/articles.aspx?cp-documentid=250874990
SC
scottishtv
Founding member
There is a fine line there, and I think Mark Thompson is probably right.
I'm not actively following the equestrian events, but did see highlights of the Individual Showjumping earlier in the week. The whole report focused on GB's Nick Skelton coming in fourth place, then highlights of an interview with him on how heartbreaking and awful it was for him.
True that, but he knocked over a bar on one of the fences. The Swiss guy (who won the Gold) put in a perfect performance, but the reporter didn't even acknowledge that performance and the images from it were fleeting compared to the GB coverage. They didn't show the medals being awarded and it was left to viewers to look at the table at the end of the report to work out who got the Gold, Silver, Bronze positions whilst the audio was still talking about the agony for the Team GB guy.
It's natural people will be wanting to know about the home country on the home broadcaster at a home Olympics, but for anyone actually trying to watch/follow the sport, a bit less of the human interest would have been preferable. I don't know if this was a one off or not.
I'm not actively following the equestrian events, but did see highlights of the Individual Showjumping earlier in the week. The whole report focused on GB's Nick Skelton coming in fourth place, then highlights of an interview with him on how heartbreaking and awful it was for him.
True that, but he knocked over a bar on one of the fences. The Swiss guy (who won the Gold) put in a perfect performance, but the reporter didn't even acknowledge that performance and the images from it were fleeting compared to the GB coverage. They didn't show the medals being awarded and it was left to viewers to look at the table at the end of the report to work out who got the Gold, Silver, Bronze positions whilst the audio was still talking about the agony for the Team GB guy.
It's natural people will be wanting to know about the home country on the home broadcaster at a home Olympics, but for anyone actually trying to watch/follow the sport, a bit less of the human interest would have been preferable. I don't know if this was a one off or not.
JA
Maybe they've done it this way because all of the full events are available to watch in their entirety online or on the 24+ BBC channels, so any true followers of whatever sport it is can actually see the whole thing from start to finish should they wish to. Most 'casual' viewers of the Olympics will only be concerned with what the Team GB athlete's are doing, so maybe the BBC is justified with the main BBC One/Two/Three coverage being a little biased towards Team GB. Whether that's the right or wrong approach, I'm not too sure!
jay
Founding member
There is a fine line there, and I think Mark Thompson is probably right.
I'm not actively following the equestrian events, but did see highlights of the Individual Showjumping earlier in the week. The whole report focused on GB's Nick Skelton coming in fourth place, then highlights of an interview with him on how heartbreaking and awful it was for him.
True that, but he knocked over a bar on one of the fences. The Swiss guy (who won the Gold) put in a perfect performance, but the reporter didn't even acknowledge that performance and the images from it were fleeting compared to the GB coverage. They didn't show the medals being awarded and it was left to viewers to look at the table at the end of the report to work out who got the Gold, Silver, Bronze positions whilst the audio was still talking about the agony for the Team GB guy.
It's natural people will be wanting to know about the home country on the home broadcaster at a home Olympics, but for anyone actually trying to watch/follow the sport, a bit less of the human interest would have been preferable. I don't know if this was a one off or not.
I'm not actively following the equestrian events, but did see highlights of the Individual Showjumping earlier in the week. The whole report focused on GB's Nick Skelton coming in fourth place, then highlights of an interview with him on how heartbreaking and awful it was for him.
True that, but he knocked over a bar on one of the fences. The Swiss guy (who won the Gold) put in a perfect performance, but the reporter didn't even acknowledge that performance and the images from it were fleeting compared to the GB coverage. They didn't show the medals being awarded and it was left to viewers to look at the table at the end of the report to work out who got the Gold, Silver, Bronze positions whilst the audio was still talking about the agony for the Team GB guy.
It's natural people will be wanting to know about the home country on the home broadcaster at a home Olympics, but for anyone actually trying to watch/follow the sport, a bit less of the human interest would have been preferable. I don't know if this was a one off or not.
Maybe they've done it this way because all of the full events are available to watch in their entirety online or on the 24+ BBC channels, so any true followers of whatever sport it is can actually see the whole thing from start to finish should they wish to. Most 'casual' viewers of the Olympics will only be concerned with what the Team GB athlete's are doing, so maybe the BBC is justified with the main BBC One/Two/Three coverage being a little biased towards Team GB. Whether that's the right or wrong approach, I'm not too sure!
NG
noggin
Founding member
Isn't the Mark Thompson criticism to do with the News coverage, not the Sport coverage? It was allegedly mentioned in an e-mail from Helen Boaden (Head of News) to BBC News staff - which suggests that the issue is related to News-coverage (otherwise Roger Mosey, Head of 2012 or Barbara Slater, Head of Sport, would have been sending the e-mail to their staff, not Helen Boaden to her's?).
I don't think the criticism is aimed at BBC Sport output - more the way Team GB has been covered in News bulletins.
I don't think the criticism is aimed at BBC Sport output - more the way Team GB has been covered in News bulletins.
Last edited by noggin on 10 August 2012 5:01pm
:-(
A former member
The BBC Olympics channels are now unsurprisingly shutting quite quickly - BBCO 13 to 24 have already concluded according to the EPG.
WE
Wouldve been nice if theyd hung onto 2 or 3 channels, for let's say a month, to allow people to rewatch the best bits?
Or is the bandwidth required that quickly?
The BBC Olympics channels are now unsurprisingly shutting quite quickly - BBCO 13 to 24 have already concluded according to the EPG.
Wouldve been nice if theyd hung onto 2 or 3 channels, for let's say a month, to allow people to rewatch the best bits?
Or is the bandwidth required that quickly?