Leter I wrote to the Beeb

Congratulations BBC on yet another breathtaking natural history programme. The Blue Planet was filled with amazing facts and camera shots. However, the 'making waves' programme on the end of The Blue Planet kinda spoilt it.

I'd like to take this opportunity to express how angry I'm getting with your continuity announcers and the fact they can't help but talk over the credits of every programme. It TOTALLY ruins programmes and amazes me at the total lack of respect to these programme makers. The Blue Planet has taken 5 years to make yet the viewers attention is distracted from viewing the credits because they're being told information that could easily be announced at the end of the programme. It's the same story for films shown on BBC channels. There's always someone telling us what's on next and it TOTALLY ruins the enjoyment of the film. We don't want to know what's on next. You advertise Radio Times yet you tell us what's on next anyway. It doesn't make sense!
This I believe is part of a change to the BBC. I've seen the BBC take on more of a commercial attitude to its broadcasts. The BBC needs to be reminded that it is providing a public service and does not need to fight against other channels in order to get viewers. It is the law to pay our license fee. It's your job to provide us with entertainment, that's all. It's not expected of you to show visible signs of a decline in quality just to increase your viewers.

Apologies for the jumbled nature of this email. It is early.

Matthew Morelli

Firstly announcers speak over the credits of films especially on the BBC because it would be easy to record a film on your VCR, DVD etc and make illegal copies and sell them. An announcer speaks over the credits to stop this (although different music could be dubbed on top of the announcer), secondly tv channels are always pushed for time, and having a static screen with an announcer talking would look a bit naff, so talking over the credits is usually standard practice these days.

Although that is a 'plus' for the broadcasters, I doubt it's their main concern. When credits appear, your average Joe Public starts channel hopping very quickly and so the announcer needs to be there to tell people what's coming up, other programmes they may be interested in etc.. It's all ratings. Hence this new breed of ECP (End Credit Promos) where we see horribly small - on ITV1 anyway - credits with a promo at the side. It's all about keeping as many viewers as possible.

Static slides are still used by all terrestrial broadcasters but it's the fact of whether any viewers will have stayed until the end of the credits to find out that is the question.

Cheers, Asa

Channel 4's old 'Right to Reply' programme featured this quite some time back - didn't get anywhere with it because it's still going on.

Here's a nice example to back up the idea that nobody stays around until after the credits.

Parent A is a religious viewer of The Royale Family. It was only in the most recent series that he realised it was made by Granada. This is simply because the Granada logo appears at the very end of the credits and by this time Parent A had usually turned off.

I was annoyed about ITV deciding to stick a 'Coming Up...' slide on the end of the last This Morning with R&J.
BTW, when is their new Channel 4 show starting?

If people object to ****** ********** on video copies then they should also object to ****** them on TV broadcasts. I certainly do.



This post has been edited for a family audience.


(Edited by Jenny at 11:10 pm on Oct. 6, 2001)

The BBC also fast-forward the credits on some films. i was having an argument with someone about whick actor was int he film,a dn the credits went sof ast we couldnt read them.

It has been proven that back anno's can deliver fairly large amount of viewers to the next programme.  Viewers do tend to channel hop during junctions, so any device to get a message across is important.

The BBC was the last terrestrial UK broadcaster to introduce promo's during end credits, and only did so because the competition were using this method of promotion.

AFAIK ruining then end of the programme for subsequent commercial reasons has never been an issue.

I'm not sure what happens with film credits now, but from what I remember they stopped speeding up end credits in the mid/late 90s because it looked silly (though films purchased before this date will still be in the library with sped up credits). But the problem is that end sequences on feature films are so long and viewers turn off in their droves - most people don't watch them in the cinema's. The showing of credits is normally contractual so it's not a case of not showing them, but sometimes coming to a deal with the distributor and only showing the cast and main production team is reached.


(Edited by andyrew at 4:01 pm on Sep. 13, 2001)

I'm totally in agreement. VO announcements over the end credits of a programme are totally disrespectful to the crew who put stacks of man-hours/years into putting this spectacular show on. We all know what's coming up next if we read the Radio Times/Tv Times/other listing, Ceefax page 606 and Teletext page 120! I'm beginning to think that some announcers just like the sound of their own voices!

In addition, when I see a split-screen with the credits in one half of the screen and the other half populated by a 'coming up next' message, that's even worse. The worst offenders are those divot presenters of Children's television, who obstruct the credits of children's shows by shovelling them off to a screen behind them on set, and then sit in front of these screens almost eclipsing the credits from view altogether! It is discrediting the word credit in all ways possible.

Might I suggest that between programmes, we are shown a still graphic of the rest of the night's schedule with a voice over providing description for the visually impaired and restore some respect?

Sorry to take issue with you here folks, but viewers don't always remember what's on and when. A programme maybe heavily trailed and billed, and as a viewers you decide you would like to watch it. However, during EastEnders you may well have completly forgotten it was on next and turned over during the end credits.

Producers understand that programmes have voice over end credits, and realise that the programme before gave it's end credits to promote their programme and probably increased it's audience by a substantial amount, and that their end credits will deliver viewers to the next programme. That's the way it is.

Hi Folks

{RANT NO. 1}

I've long ago developed a reflex reaction to press the Mute button as soon as the end credits of any programme begin to avoid the atmosphere from being shattered by some companded motor-mouth coming on.

The same during commercial breaks, because (especially when listening via stereo turned up high) the traumatic aural onslaught of the ads makes you jump.

{RANT NO. 2}

It's completely exasperating that the BBC feels the need to put anything between programmes - advertisements for the Radio Times, stuff about what's coming later, whatever it might be - just trying to keep hold of the goldfish-sized attention span of their imaginary viewer, i suppose.

{RANT NO. 3}

Don't you just hate it when the schedule is running late and you're sitting expectantly waiting for your upcoming prog. and - unbelievable - they roll all the 'what's on later' stuff anyway?

{/RANTS' END}

The film Im talking about here was a christmas 2000 premier- after the 1990s had finished.

Is [/RANTS' END] a new type of HTML code!! :