« Topics
1234
Moz5,552 posts since 4 Jan 2003
Very bad news. I like the show a lot and think that Paddy and Claudia are great.

On the other hand, it depends on what replaces it, and what they do with the talents that are P & C. If they do something good, then I applaud their risk taking.

The controller is right that the channel should become too cosy with shows going on forever. There should be no flagship show on a channel which essentially should be for experimental, daring, groundbreaking shows.

Thing is, they need more experimental, daring, groundbreaking shows!
Gavin Scott8,286 posts since 23 Mar 2001
As someone who has watched since Zero30, including the awkward transition period following Christopher Price's untimely death, I felt the show was finally coming back to its peak. The presenting team was just right (including correspondents).

For Stuary Murphy to have decided that *now* is the right time to axe the show, one can only surmise that he doesnt bother watching it.
ohwhatanight3,055 posts since 2 Jul 2001
intheknow posted:
ohwhatanight posted:
Good riddance to a waste of BBC license fee payers' money!

Liquid News was bareable when Christopher Price presented but it was HIS programme and should have finished when he left.

I think a liquid news type programme should be intergrated within the BBC Three Seven O Clock news and make it more of a fun news half hour!

BBC Three ? Who watches that?


...and in the 'Burn It' thread...

ohwhatanight posted:
Yes I TOTALLY agree- the BBC Three scheduling has been great and has given the public many chances of catching the series. This is similar scheduling to which Whatday posted negatively about ITV2 in another thread. From my point of view that is the whole point of these 'extra' channels - to give the viewers extra chances of watching/catching up with episodes that they may have missed elsewhere. I dont think they expect you to religiously watch these channels for excessive periods but to watch them for the odd hour here and there. Just think if you do that with a whole group of channels you can still effectively keep a viewer within 'your' brand of channels.

Ie 19:00 7 oclock news BBC Three
19:30 Eastenders BBC One
20:00 University Challenge BBC Two
20:30 Some crap welsh type programme on 2W
21:00 Comedy programme on BBC Two

etc etc

So these other channels do play a very important part and dont expect people to watch them continuously and just offer an alternative oppourtunity to watch programmes people may have missed.


What a hypocrite.


Point taken!

BUT

I am trying to reinforce the fact that the BBC only has enough programmes to fill BBC One and BBC Two. Im sure the BBC could have found a spot to show Burn It on one of their 'premium' channels rather than hiding it on BBC Three.

What I was commending in the other thread was that something worthy of being broadcast on a 'proper' BBC channel was being shown on BBC Three and the viewer was given many chances of watching it because it was repeated many times throughout the week.(which is commendable)

So there are always two sides to every story and so WELL DONE to BBC Three for showing Burn It - but surely (the other side of the argument) Burn It (along with all new dramas) should be shown on a proper BBC Channel and given the exposure it deserves rather than be hidden on a minor channel?

A lot of effort and money is put into drama and I dont think the BBC should use it as a tool to force viewers into watching a digital channel or making them buy into a digital service to recieve a channel to watch a programme which they have already paid for via the tv license!
A former member
Moz posted:
Very bad news. I like the show a lot and think that Paddy and Claudia are great.

On the other hand, it depends on what replaces it, and what they do with the talents that are P & C. If they do something good, then I applaud their risk taking.

The controller is right that the channel should become too cosy with shows going on forever. There should be no flagship show on a channel which essentially should be for experimental, daring, groundbreaking shows.!


Which is a fair point. Except it will become harder to for people to innovate and be creative if they are worried all the time that their jobs will be axed with little or no warning.

Either Stuart Murphy has some amazing plan for a relaunch of the channel... or its a last gasp move of the deck chairs before he's axed himself.

Following his "triumph" at UK Play. His "15 minute programmes" for BBC Choice... his launch night for BBC Three... his failure recognise the two hits his channel has commissioned (3 Non Blondes... Monkey Dust) which were buried after 11 o clock when they first ran while *shudder* Dom Joly squatted in Prime Time... and now this.

I'm sorry. The man's an idiot.
DJGM2,713 posts since 4 Jan 2003
lovelight posted:

I'm sorry . . .


No need to apologise!

lovelight posted:

. . . The man's an idiot.


That is an understatement. A more appropriate description would not get past the TVF swearword filter!
rts2,748 posts since 14 Oct 2001
Blimey. Just realised that the comment I posted on BBC News Online has actually been put online. Visit here, press ctrl + f and then search for Rowan. And yes, I missed out the word 'before' in the first sentence. Ahem...

Does anyone know if they post all comments received or is there a selection process?