Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
#1
This is not a Party political issue, but one about broadcasting standards, hence this section.
Did anyone else watch the election night coverage on the BBC?
I was switching between the 'Beeb' and Sky News during the Thursday night and was watching up to about 3am, then again on Friday evening for the Boris election, so I have a pretty good feel for how each were presenting.
Most of the time I tend to attend the count so it is unusual for me to be able to see so much coverage.
What struck me was how poor the BBC was. The Jeremy Vine cowboy bit was particularly pointless and cringemaking. Cannot the beeb get it into their heads that anyone watching at that time would have a real interest in politics and would not be impressed with such antics. Dont get me wrong, there is plenty of room for some fun with the presentations, but there is a fine line between fun and stupidity and frankly the Beeb totally lost it.
In addition they were well behind Sky with the results, by a significant margin. Their running totals were wrong, significantly understating Labour losses and Tory gains. Sky's running totals were spot on and tied up with the independent figures provided by the politicshome website. Interestingly most of the print media (including Tory papers) used the figures provided by the BBC, what (used to be) a trusted source.
It seems to me that the BBC has totally lost the plot, at least as far as their news and current affairs coverage. They have recently had to admit their pro-EU bias. Their overall political coverage has for a long time also had a left of centre (as opposed to Labour) bias.
Sky were far better in every way both nights. Sadly there seems to be a move from Sky to remove Sky News from Freeview onto a terrestial subscription package. I really hope Ofcom block that, I now would certainly miss their coverage.
If the BBC are to justify retaining their licence fee then they must start getting their act together. Right now they are not earning their priviledged position.
Guest 640- Registered: 21 Apr 2007
- Posts: 7,819
#2
I did see some of this coverage including Jeremy Vine doing a bizarre interpretation of Peter Snow, but unfortunately I bailed out early due to a slight case of being knackered, and a rather slow trickling in of the results, and with the prospect of the Boris result running later and later the land of Rip Van Winkle won through.
Re the BBC. WE are a nation of traditionalists, and no matter what multi channels cover a major event, whether it be Royal Weding or World Cup, the BBC always win out in the viewing figure chase. WE cant move off the channel for love nor money. Rightly or wrongly we are at home with the oul familiar faces like David Dimbleby, who fits us all like a comfortable sofa. Whether they are quite as sharp as SKY or quite as technologically advanced I dont know but somehow its where we feel most at home...and it has a hint of the leftie subversive about it! But just a hint.
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
#3
old auntie is the one for events.
you only have to look at the others to see.
formula 1 on ITV cuts off for adverts many times during the race.
do they think that the drivers stop for a cup of tea and a smoke, while this happens?
i always switch to them on election nights despite peter snow and his swingometer.
i can never understand why they try to appeal to the lowest common denominator.
they do not have to worry about ratings and advertising sales.
DT1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 15 Apr 2008
- Posts: 1,116
#4
I totally agree the BBC is really letting itself down in recent years. I totally agree with Barry in that that reporting takes a left of centre slant and this is really not what I want from the news. I would like to receive purely the facts and do the interpretation part myself! Unfortunately I feel that the BBC, and all the media to an extent, feel the need to provide an interpretation service, dumbing down so many important issues, confusing servicing the public with entertaining them.
It is also very clear that the media, especially the BBC is ridiculously constrained in delivering the full magnitude of any story in order to drip-feed the general public. Last year the blatant way in which they 'drip-fed' the general public with the notion that any kind of drinking whilst pregnant was unacceptable, a notion that at the time was not the same as department of health guidelines. I brought this very subject up with a good friend, working in the department and this seems to be the rather devious way in which the two organisations work to dupe the general public into believing that new ideas are actually old ones.
Which brings me onto the point that the BBC news has become a rather unashamed trailer show for other BBC broadcasts. If you believe that there are no adverts on BBC, think again! The amount of times that a news 'story' is finished with the line "and if you want to know more about...watch tonight's Panorama at 9pm"
I think the BBC has got a lot to do to substantiate the licensing fee. I was appalled last year to hear that the BBC was cutting funding to children's TV, something I feel it does to a world class standard. If I am going to pay a licence fee I expect a broad and quality service. Not an organisation that just ploughs more money into Eastenders (much as I like it) and period drama, just because of viewing figures and the fact that they can sell them on!