Post by Sofa - SpudPost by Carl WaringPost by Sofa - SpudPost by Carl WaringOn Wed, 14 Apr 2010 00:05:45 +0200, Sofa - Spud
Post by Sofa - SpudPost by tnm-collectablesBBC have axed Survivors! - great! now we will never know what it was
all about! - hope they organise a one off to tie up the loose ends -
not surprising really as they dragged their feet in series 2 stories!
http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/cult/s54/survivors/news/a214070/bbc-axes-survivors-after-two-series.html
FFS!! I liked that - yes it was predictable, yes it was annoying but
we all liked it and enjoyed watching it.
So that's Paradox cancelled and now this - but they could manage
Ashes to Ashes!
Given the unique way the BBC is funded why should I bother watching
any of the BBC's stuff? If it's minority programming I could watch
and it gets pulled if it's mainstream and I watch it gets pulled. I
just don't get how they can justify it - either it's ratings or it
isn't.
Exactly! That's what pisses me off about the BBC. They try to justify the
licence fee the by saying that it allows them to make shows that are not
commercially viable and then they drop shows due to them not getting the
viewing figures. I wish they would make up their bloody minds as to what
kind of broadcaster they are!
It's not really the BBCs fault though.
If a programme they show is succesful (ie gets good ratings) there are
cries of "it's not supposed to be about ratings", etc. yet when they
show anything that *doesn't* get good ratings, the cry goes up "why are
we all forced [sic] to pay for stuff that no-one watches."
Well that doesn't make sense at all on any level even for a BBC
apologist as yourself. If the programme was a towering success then all
would be fine, they'd keep making it.
To cries of "it's not supposed to be all about ratings" from the usual
suspect. Not to mention the fact that there are some people who, if they
had their way, would take any popular BBC show and *GIVE* it to a
commercial channel 'because anything that popular shouldn't be on the
BBC'. I mean, please! You see the kind of mentality the BBC has to put up
with!!
I've never seen anyone say a programme should be *given* to a commercial
channel unless you've taken the comment out of context.
Nope. Has been mentioned on Digital Spy a few times. An idea from various
other, anti-BBC, sources.
Post by Sofa - SpudThe fact that the BBC has to *put up* with it is part and parcel of them
being paid for by a universal licence fee - you seem to think they should
have no criticism at all.
Valid criticism is fine. It's the pointless, contrary, mis-informed and
downright stupid criticisms that I don't agree with.
Post by Sofa - SpudPost by Carl WaringPost by Sofa - SpudIf it was a show on BBC3 with small ratings they'd keep on making it.
To cries of "why are we forced to fund programmes that no-one watches".
See, you just proved my point for me. Thanks.
I haven't made any point for you - if the show was on BBC3 it's 3 million
ratings would be OK but as it's BBC1 it gets binned , move it to BBC 3
then ! I watch a lot of stuff on BBC3 & 4 , no way does it get the same
figures as something prime time on BBC1 but it still gets made.
Pointless conjecture, unless you actually have examples.
Post by Sofa - SpudPost by Carl WaringPost by Sofa - SpudBut here we are with a show they hyoed and lots of people watched - look
on here for threads about Survivors and it's binned.
I'm sure they had their reasons.
Ever get even the slightest inkling they *might* be wrong? They want us to
watch the shows, like this and Paradox, build up the audience ( which
obviously is going to be less than the first episode - a hardcore base of
fans) then pull it? Why not move it to BBC2?
Where the ratings fall because - if you remember - we're all supposedly
idiots who can't change a channel, so then come the cryies of "why are we
forced [sic] to fund stuff that no-one's watching".
And don't tell me that *wouldn't* happen because it does, all the time.
(Though not necessarily through those exact circumstances).
Post by Sofa - SpudWhy should I give the BBC my time when their next new series starts if
they treat viewers like this?
Well don't then I'm happy not to cut off my nose to spite my face.
Post by Sofa - SpudPost by Carl WaringPost by Sofa - SpudWhat people *do* have a problem with is binning this for another
*Cooking on Ice with the stars* show.
Please cite a source for this statement of fact. ie that the cancelled
"Survivors" *will* be replaced by a "Cooking on Ice with the stars"-type
show.
*cite a source* ?? funny how you want sources for what others say yet the
comments you come out with seem little more than adoration worship of the
BBC.
BS. You stated that something would happen without qualifying it. Was it
fact or opinion?
If the latter, then that's fine. If the former, what's wrong with asking you
to cite a source as I have never ever heard that stated as fact.
Post by Sofa - SpudIt's clear looking at the schedules that the BBC has made more of the
cooking/lifestyle/ ballroom dancing on ice with stars shows in the last
few years - I actually watch TV and watch the schedules ( you've admitted
you don't actually watch that much) .
Yes, and? They're very popular and, to a certain degree, somewhat PSB also.
However, they are *not* being produced *instead of*, or to the detriment of,
anything else or any other type of programme. There are still plenty of good
dramas being made by and for the BBC.
Post by Sofa - SpudLooking at these schedules with a critical instead of a rose tinted eye
it's clear the output has gone the way of cheap to make recognised formula
TV - lifestyle/gameshow on ice stuff.
Really? What's all this then?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/drama/
http://www.bbc.co.uk/science/
http://www.bbc.co.uk/nature/
If you feel inclined, try this for a more rounded over-view of everything
the BBC does
http://www.bbc.co.uk/a-z/
Post by Sofa - SpudPost by Carl WaringOr, if that is, in fact as I suspect, merely your *opinion* (though
stated as fact) then I would think that they are more likely to replace
it with another drama.
You would *think*? what's that a statement of fact or an opinion?
The word "think" should have been a big clue.
Post by Sofa - SpudWhat evidence do you have that the budget for Survivors is to be used for
another drama?
Think about the history of what has usually been shown in the week-day 9pm
slot. Has it been drama or has it been "lifestyle/gameshow on ice stuff"
stuff?
Or, to put it another way. Name me one "lifestyle/gameshow on ice stuff"
show that has been regularly shown at 9pm on a week-day on BBC1.
Post by Sofa - SpudPost by Carl WaringPost by Sofa - SpudPost by Carl WaringSo, whatever they do, the BBC can't "win".
They don't even try
Indeed not; and why should they when they know that anything they do will
always be criticised by *someone* and not necessarily for a good reason.
What possible use would it be to be surrounded by adoring misty eyed fans
like you? I'm on record here for regularly praising the BBC's output -
look at my posting history on new threads concerning BBC programmes - if
they are good I'll say so if not then I'll criticise , after all I AM
paying for it!
And that's fair enough. I'm talking about them not being able to please all
the people all the time; despite people thinking that they should try and do
that. We're back to the fair/un-fair criticism thing again.
I *know* the BBC isn't perfect and I have never said it is.
Post by Sofa - SpudPost by Carl WaringI'd rather they just continued doing exactly what they're *supposed* to
be doing, which is producing as wide a selection of informative,
educational and entertaining programming.
What?? I can't believe you actually wrote that without an irony smiley -
they've binned several *entertaining* programmes which have been mentioned
here. "informative and educational" programmes have been roundly criticise
for being dumbed down - not all of them but many.
So thats 3 out of 3 fail then .
You are welcome to your *opinion*, but that doesn't make it a fact.
Post by Sofa - SpudIf the BBC make a great show you can be sure it'll be me here first in
line with the praise - Small World, Being human, Wonder of the solar
system,museum of life to name but a few.
Good to know you're getting some value out of your LF; as the majority of
people in the UK are.
Post by Sofa - SpudFunny how for someone *so* keen to justify the BBC's bizarre actions you
never actually appear to watch any of the shows or indeed comment on them.
I can only fairly comment on the shows I have seen and I don't watch
*that*much BBC overall.
However, that does not stop me from talking and the BBC in *general* terms,
as we have been doing here.
--
Carl Waring