I'm not having a go at anyone (well, other than people who claim to know technical details about equipment they've never seen, never mind operated)
So if anyone from outside your line of work has a theory, however wide of the mark, they get shouted down?
It's not that I think he's commenting on. I've had it happen to me. Working in broadcasting, you get to know the equipment, operational and general concept of things and how they work, and when someone on here tries to talk down like they know what's best and what to do, that's when it gets annoying and at times insulting whilst being a bit funny.
It's like someone telling you about Grange Hill and how badly it's put together, then you jump straight to it's defence
Quote:
Insiders such as yourself are a valued part of TV Forum, you know first hand how things are done, we do not, I accept that. But is there any reason for such hostility to individuals' suggestions?
It is when the suggestions aren't really possible.
So if anyone from outside your line of work has a theory, however wide of the mark, they get shouted down?
Insiders such as yourself are a valued part of TV Forum, you know first hand how things are done, we do not, I accept that. But is there any reason for such hostility to individuals' suggestions?
Simon, you got the type of reply you deserved.
You simply assumed that because playout is now in the hands of an outsourced company and is largely computer-driven, they would be unable to stop transmission of a live programme.
You got your facts wrong, and you didn't even have the courtesy to *ask* one of the "informed insiders" if the system could do that most basic of manual functions.
But don't let lack of facts stop you. Your "suggestions" are often quite amusing.
Apologies if this has been mentioned before but in my own experience going to a show at TVC back in 1996, I remember at the entrance of TVC going into a little portakabin and security asking everybody to empty any coats/bags etc to minimise any risk so how they got flares (alledged at the time by Eamonn) is anyone's guess.
Apologies if this has been mentioned before but in my own experience going to a show at TVC back in 1996, I remember at the entrance of TVC going into a little portakabin and security asking everybody to empty any coats/bags etc to minimise any risk so how they got flares (alledged at the time by Eamonn) is anyone's guess.
The same kind of arrangements are still in place - it's been a while since I've been to a show, so can't remember if they pat everyone down, or just people who've set off the alarm through the screen. Perhaps a flare doesn't have anything metallic in it to set it off?
Again, I'm sure the BBC will be having some strong words with LandSecurities Trillium to make sure they tighten up their procedures (before they get replaced in a month or so)
[You simply assumed that because playout is now in the hands of an outsourced company and is largely computer-driven, they would be unable to stop transmission of a live programme.
Whether the playout is in the hands of an outsourced company or not is irrelevant. It was the system I was questioning, and you and I both know that if the BBC was still playing out, it would be using similar equipment.
peterrocket posted:
It's like someone telling you about Grange Hill and how badly it's put together, then you jump straight to it's defence
Only if I feel it deserves it. I'm not so conceited as to believe everything about the show pre-2003 was perfect;
it was not;
and that everything thereafter was crud. But since you have made up your minds...
[You simply assumed that because playout is now in the hands of an outsourced company and is largely computer-driven, they would be unable to stop transmission of a live programme.
Whether the playout is in the hands of an outsourced company or not is irrelevant. It was the system I was questioning, and you and I both know that if the BBC was still playing out, it would be using similar equipment.
The BBC
is
still playing out and is using identical equipment.
The bold and confident statements you have made here and on MHP Chat (and who knows where else) are not based on anything other than your own unfounded assumptions, and as you have never operated or developed television transmission equipment I suggest you think before you submit posts like that in future.
I'm not going to go into technical detail - a public forum is not the place to do such a thing - but suffice to say the facilities for taking manual control of a channel have not changed significantly in the move to the current transmission automation systems.
I was away this weekend (without a television!) and missed the event but all I can do is echo earlier points made - how can this be allowed to happen? Security definitely needs improving and I suppose we are lucky that more damage wasn't caused.
I expected better from Eamonn but am thoroughly pleased with Alan Dedicoat's ad-libbing. He did a brilliant job.
I think what would be interesting would be to see the cameras from the studio after the Jet Set slide came on, though I doubt anyone has them.
what was he expected to do, beat the living #### out of them, he's the presenter, not security, he got out of the way and let security get on with it, in my mind that was a professional thing to do,
in my line of work, teaching, if there is an emergency i get the kids and myself out of harms way and let the professionals get on with it. be it security or emergrency services.
