h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

Top Gear going is only a rumour for now. I really hope it isn't going - I was laughing my off at it tonight.

Did Jeremy Clarkson *really* have a w*nk whilst driving?

Sorry, can't stand Topgear. It used to be good but it's now just a load of middle class, public school boy rubbish with a little bit of car critque. Clarkson wouldn't need to relieve himself, his two little toadies probably do it for him.

The BBC's problems obviously stem from the explosion into all the additional channels and trying to keep up with CNN. There's only so much content to go around. Production hasn't increased along with distribution hence the only way is down, dumb down, more repeats, lower quality.

"...the explosion into all the additional channels and trying to keep up with CNN" and others.

That was one of the points of my original question - *should* Beeb be trying to keep up on the same terms?.

It seems to me that sound, reliable quality Does Not Need to slavishly copy others (most of whom are in a different market), it would get and keep substantial (and growing) numbers of viewers, albeit not exclusively. See post 1

If you're brought up on pap, real food becomes near indigestible.
(that doesn't apply to *all* the others, all the time, of course)

Certainly don't believe there are more repeats on BBC1 and 2 than there used to be. Complaining about the number of repeats on TV has been a national pastime for as long as I can remember (1970s).

Quality of programs made is a different issue. Serious drama particularly has suffered IMO. Play for Today and similar programs allowed people like Dennis Potter and Alan Bleasdale to get started.

But.... if there say is a sizeable minority who what they want to watch is reality TV, springer clones and generic "buddy" cop shows. Is it really right for the BBC not to make programming for them. I mean hey they have to pay the licence fee as well.

For my I really hate all that stuff. But the BBC does cater for me. I have BBC4, Radio 4, H2G2 and the BBC News site. I think I get a lot of content pitched at me.

Once again I will say it there is a nasty snobbish untertone on this iste that seems to feel that "plebs" shouldn't be catered for and that the BBC should be elitest and only make TV they like.

It stinks.

Oh dear. It was my question so I have to accept what you say, but I don't have a lot to be snobbish about.

I haven't asked for populist programs to be removed from *TV*, but for fewer of them on limited budget *BBC*.

My justification? See Dogster's post 6, the BBC's charter.

Match of the Day on BBC2. I rest my case, m'lord.

Certainly I think the BBC should be going for quality & a wide choice of viewing rather than chasing ratings. Even though there often isn't much on that I want to watch, I wouldn't like to say that they're not achieving this at the moment.

Maybe the balance isn't quite right. What I do notice is that some of the 'meaty' programmes have been telescoped to a superficial 30 min whereas some of the frothier stuff extends into a whole repetitious evening.

When I lived in Bristol 15 years ago there was always something of interest to be found on BBC TV. Any time of day ... either a film or a series (Inspector Morse, Prime Suspect) or an interesting documentary or interview chat thing.

Nog tells me the quality of the BBC has gone seriously downhill since then. That now it's all reality tv and loads of crap programming.

Sad.

I sure wouldn't want to be paying a license fee for that sort of shit.


az

Last I saw of Horizon, its gotten pretty rubbish.

Don't we always look back through rose tinted specs? I seem to recall some rubbish on then, even if not as much as now. Also, I think when there wasn't so much choice of TV (or other forms of entertainment) we made do with what was on, or maybe appreciated it more.

Can't programs be entertaining and educational at the same time?
Even Eastenders has managed to cover serious issues like HIV and domestic violence. The best of BBC like 'Life on Earth' has certainly managed to be both IMO.

This week's Economist is reporting that Mark Thompson is planning to axe the factual side of BBC i.e. Newsnight, Panorama and Today rather than get rid of some of the digital channels that nobody is watching. Also lots of people to be made redundant as he failed to negotiate enough funding from Government hence the need to save money.

One way to save money would be to have ONE evening news Bulletin, delivered by ONE reader, instead of the current male/female duets who read alternate passages from an autocue.

Why do we need two people to read the news? Why do we need so many 'on the spot' reporters , all with their piece to camera. Just send the film crew and bring back Moira Stewart to explain in dulcet tones what is going on.

The question of multiple channels which nobody watches is a sound one. It is a bit like going into Tesco for a packet of cereal. You are now faced with an isle , 3 shelves high . both sides of you, with myriads of packets of essentially the same ingredients coloured and dressed in different ways.

I thinks 6 different cererals + porridge oats is enough.

Too much choice or what?

Novo

Clearly no, as most of the plethora of digital channels are commercial. If no one watched them they would go bust simple as.

I think that BBC3 and BBC4 were both set up on the premise that they would get less viewing figures then terrestrial channels. But that they would serve a "nich" not currently served well by the BBC tv output. Whilst I am not so keen on BBC3 (I dont think it is really pitched at people like me, though there is the occasional cracker) BBC4 has really hit the spot for me and I wacth it a lot.

Good point about the news. There are far too many reporters doing not very much. I wish the BBC would make more use of their correspondents actually living around the world. It seems to me the main news programmes send their own reporters out their specifically to cover a newsworthy event, when there might already be a BBC journalist around. And one who has lived in that place for a while, allowing them to give better insight.

Hear, hear. From Our Own Correspondent, on Radio 4, must be the best foreign affairs programme.

Aside - I'm sure Morse was on ITV and sponsered by a beer company ?

I also watched the C4 documentry on Stolen Children in China, but to be fair I'm always happy to watch things that confirm my prejudices.

There is a lack of quality on the BBC today - even bought in quality, though for me Spooks is coming back and I'm into Heros.

Now, I know this link is quite silly, but it made me laugh anyway

http://members.lycos.co.uk/bbcpioneers/