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

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/tv_and_radio/2625699.stm

What do you think? The BBC's flagship science programme. The place where h2g2 was officially launched.

Has it run out of steam after 38 years or should the BBC be persuaded to keep it?

i don't know how well 'Tomorrows World' has aged,
but 38 years ago it was an inspiration to many like me.

Why axe it??

alec.

Perhaps you shouldn't worry too much, any of you Tomorrow's World fans out there.

Look what happened to Top Gear. They axed that, realised what a mistake it was (and that fans were watching the copycat Fifth Gear) and brought it back.

"BBC officials have decided not to produce another series following a long-term decline in ratings from 10 to three million per show."

I wrote a brief account of the h2g2 launch in my Post report about the Tomorrow's World Live event. A587892

My God. The BBC are so thick, it is unbelievable...they don't NEED to worry about ratings, because they don't have to reply on advertising.

Not that I particularly care about Tomorrow's World - as far as I can see, the only technological advances will be in the field of weaponry right now (). But 3 million viewers is hardly a small enough figure to merit axing the damn thing. Couldn't they just move it to BBC2?

I'd think they would have to worry about ratings. Don't they exist for the benefit of the people? (I'm somewhat guessing here, I'm not British) I assume they have to achieve some minimum number of viewers benefitting of the show.
On the rest of the discussion: I've never even seen Tomorrow's World, so no comment

No they don't!! Ratings are only important when you are relying on advertising as an income. The BBC already have a huge influx of money from television liscences (still can't spell that word) and so should only be worrying about producing good quality programming that any number of people want to see...not ratings. Leave that to the other channels!

3 million viewers is hardly a small number anyway!! They should just move the timeslot to later on at night.

Although I don't watch it either. Not to hot with science...

I believe the phrase they use is: "due to the unique way the BBC is funded..."

AH! That would be it!

The reason the ratings dropped is because the show had become really dreadful!

It was INCREDIBLY dumbed down, aimed WELL below the lowest common denominator, and had the most annoying presenters imaginable. Both Peter snow, and Adam-heart-whatever his name-was, behaved as if they were presenting a toddlers tv programm(n-o n-e-e-d- t-o t-a-l-k- r-e-a-l-l-y s-l-o-w-e-l-y and wave you hands around like drowning morons), not a science show.

Jesus, if they had credited their viewers with an IQ that reached into double figures, folk may have continued to watch- me i gave up a couple of series ago..

Good riddance T.W.- i'l get my science from 'new scientist' and the like.

The good thing about TW is that it was accessible to everyone, not just those with a science background and a subscription to new scientist (ie me). I remember watching as a 6 yr old and understanding what they where explaining about genetics and the human immune system and all sorts of complex things. It was also fun to see which new gadgets/inventions where being featured.

I have to be honest I haven't watched it in years, partly because I'm usually still at work or have just got back and am desperately trying to cook/eat some food before collapsing into bed and partly because I subscribed to new scientist which contained the same info and more in a format I could read during my lunch hour.

I would hope that they weren't t-a-l-k-i-n-g r-e-a-l-l-y s-l-o-w-l-y but where explaining the scientific principles involved in language and logic that even a child could understand...I'm sure the programs demographic includes a lot of families and children and teenagers rather than the bulk of the scientific community...which is exactly how it should be.

It never was about being the cleverest and using the most technical terms it was always about bringing science to people who *dont* subscribe to NS...and a good thing too.

PQ (wondering when the last episode is and about campaigning to get the viewing figures through the roof to see them out with a bang)

I take your point about accessibility, but there is a fine line between accessability and making something so 'accessible' that it panders only to the youngest, and/or thickest members of society.

I used to watch and enjoy the series, but for the last few years it just felt like i was being talked down to and patronised.

It just didn't know who it was aimed at recently. It would have been right at home in 'CBBC' or some other children's slot. But even for adults with no understanding of science, it had just, in my opinion, wavered too far into dumb, tabloid T.V terratory- flashy O.T.T graphics, and stupid presenting tecniques.

About the only fun to be had, of late, was watching the, almost inevitible live experiment failures. Poor Phillipa Forrester seemed prone to more than her fair share of failed experiments..

In fact, i think most of the explanations of scientific processes, or of how a new technology worked were *so* over-simplified recently that i usually still didn't understand the 'explanations' at the end of it all.

I was often left scratching my head, because so much detail was left out in a vane effort not to bore anyone, that their explanations simply made no sense! So if a 'new scientist' reader didn't understand half of what the presenters were blathering on about, heaven help a science novice.

And heaven help any poor guest scientist. he/she would be interupted and cut off so much, that again, the viewer was left none the wiser.

One of the things I know I've chatted to people about before, is which presenters you remember. I grew up watching James Burke and Raymond Baxter. This was in the days of the first moon landings when this kind of science was new to everyone. Families watched Tommorows's World together and marvelled at things like cashpoint machines.

I do agree that something has gone wrong with the formula. I don't remember as a child feeling that I was watching a kids programme at all. It has more of a feel of Blue Peter about it now.
<-- As old as the answer and child of the 60's.

I agree a later time slot and a move to BBC2 would be a good idea. I gave up watching it as I gained a social life - even before I worked in London 7pm was too early to settle down in front of the TV. I appear to have been one of those 10 million viewers who watched Judith and Howard. And bloody great they were too. Especially Judith.

No! No!!! No!!!! Me and FC were both hoping that this show would be around to inspire our future kids as we oursleves were inspired.

Having just watched that other long lived scientific BBC programme The Sky at Night last night this is sadddening news indeed.

Happy New Year BBC One what on earth are you doing to us. Are you changing the remit of providing good factual television of all sorts of which you excel or is the greatset inventors meant to take ove and become a competition format to givew you ratings.

Just out of curiosity, does Britian have a show called "Secret, Strange, and True"?

I liked TW - even/especially when the experiments went wrong! The BBC were wrong to "dum down" the programme's format/presenters and they are even more wrong to axe it completely.

Starting h2g2 may be one of the few good decisions the BBC has made lately. I also watch Sky at Night. If the BBC have any plans to axe that too, there would have to be some sort of scheme to save Patrick Moore from enforced retirement. It is one of the top killers in western society.

Even Sky at night isn't immune from 'progress'. Did anyone notice on the last episode, the arival of that sickening 'yoof tv' style of camera work?

I couldn't believe my eyes... a handheld camera was swooping around P.moore and his guest, with occasional shots in -oh so arty- monochrome.. or as used to be called- black and white.

Ye gods- ive seen it all now.

I'm still in love with James Burke after all this time. And Raymond Baxter and what's-her-name with the lovely fingernails, were brilliant at explaining without talking down to their audience.

I love seeing things around that we first saw featured on TW and now they're reality, especially if it's something (and now, of course, nothing springs to mind) that I thought - at the time - was very far fetched.

And the young inventors were great, even if some of them were insufferably big-headed.



Still, I haven't seen it for ages, too busy watching Discovery Kids with the gruesome twosome. (Brain Bounce anyone? or The Big Bang? Or Popular Mechanics for Kids?)