Challenge have currently got the text "WIN OR LOSE?" below their dog. What is this for? Challenge+1 do not have the extra text. I don't know if it has been like this all day or just for the current programme, Classic Who Wants to be a Millionaire?
I think the last series of 3-2-1 looked dated simply because they used the newest technology available to them. The 3D graphics of the opening titles look very 80s because 3D graphics have moved on so much. The animated titles of earlier series don't really look that dated simply because 2D animation wouldn't look that different if it was done today. 2D animation was already a mature art form in the late 70s. The video effects used in 1987 were very much of their time too and were really over used. I guess someone in the gallery had a new toy and they were going to use it for everything.
I think every programme made by Yorkshire Television suffered this look during late 1980's (except The New Statesman and Emmerdale Farm) from Calendar to Countdown and all they all had glossy computer generated shiny metal 3D looks to them, even promos didn't escape, there's plenty of proof on TV Ark and YouTube.
I blame Channel 4.
It wasn't just limited to Yorkshire Television either - if you look at old clips of ITN all the bulletins were made over during 1987 and 1988 and each one had a brand new, shiny metal 3D logo! Not that I'm complaining... I think they look great!
In my personal opinion I think Sky handled that well. There isn't much more they could have done but pull the offending sponsorship and they did A.S.A.P.
Interesting. I didn't realise that Ofcom sent a personalised letter to everyone who writes to them. Do they spend the same amount of time writing to the nutjobs too? Also, why did they ask Sky to send them a tape of the broadcast? Sky weren't disputing the fact that the sponsorship credit had been broadcast.
Anyway, presumably you got what you wanted. Challenge have stopped broadcasting the Sky Bingo sponsorship credits around Fun House, so everyone is happy, right?
Yeah I just don't understand how Fun House can be acknowledged as "programming that does not have appeal to children or has been made for children", yet also be "mindful neither that Challenge TV (or this programme) has a particular appeal to children".
I'm satisfied with the outcome, just feel that is slightly contradictory.
Yeah I just don't understand how Fun House can be acknowledged as "programming that does not have appeal to children or has been made for children", yet also be "mindful neither that Challenge TV (or this programme) has a particular appeal to children".
I'm satisfied with the outcome, just feel that is slightly contradictory.
I'm guessing, when they say "[Sky] is ensuring the Sky Bingo sponsor credits are only shown around programming that does not have appeal to children
or
has been made for children.", in this case they are talking about a programme that was made for children and then later say "being mindful neither that Challenge TV (or this programme) has a particular appeal to children" they confirm that the programme doesn't appeal to children. I wonder if this is their opinion or if they have data to back that up.
So, Ofcom are saying that Fun House is a programme made for Children but it doesn't appeal to children. Which seems fair enough. You could say the same about Watch with Mother. A programme made for children but if shown today would have very few viewers under 50.
Interesting. I didn't realise that Ofcom sent a personalised letter to everyone who writes to them. Do they spend the same amount of time writing to the nutjobs too? Also, why did they ask Sky to send them a tape of the broadcast? Sky weren't disputing the fact that the sponsorship credit had been broadcast.
Anyway, presumably you got what you wanted. Challenge have stopped broadcasting the Sky Bingo sponsorship credits around Fun House, so everyone is happy, right?
You get a reply if they have warranted an investigation. I have a letter about a complaint I made about something on BRMB last year. It was word-for-word what was published in the Broadcast Bulletin.
They always ask for a tape before they ask the broadcaster for a response, as not keeping tapes is a breach of licence in itself.
Interesting. I didn't realise that Ofcom sent a personalised letter to everyone who writes to them. Do they spend the same amount of time writing to the nutjobs too? Also, why did they ask Sky to send them a tape of the broadcast? Sky weren't disputing the fact that the sponsorship credit had been broadcast.
Anyway, presumably you got what you wanted. Challenge have stopped broadcasting the Sky Bingo sponsorship credits around Fun House, so everyone is happy, right?
You get a reply if they have warranted an investigation. I have a letter about a complaint I made about something on BRMB last year. It was word-for-word what was published in the Broadcast Bulletin.
They always ask for a tape before they ask the broadcaster for a response, as not keeping tapes is a breach of licence in itself.
Given Challenge's love of editing programmes, I'm surprised that they haven't butchered the Dave Spikey Bullseye programmes to remove references to their defunct challenge.co.uk/bullseye url shown on screen and mentions of the online game.
In fact I'm surprised a version without these elements wasn't produced at the time it was made. Then again it's being shown in 14:9 so it's not exactly being treated properly.
