It was pulled because they played out the wrong version which had no narration.
The correct version is already on All4.
No legal threats or conspiracies, just a genuine error.
I thought it was a pretty dull programme TBH - maybe due to the lack of narration?. Just people sliding pictures of faces next to each other saying they were similar in dimensions shape etc (so what?) I couldn't understand the point of it.
With the exception of Channel TV who had special IBA dispensation (on financial grounds) no mainstream UK TV broadcaster has ever broadcast programmes from U Matic tape, they were only permitted for news acquisition, and play-out of news reports, (and ONLY news)
Dual running Quad Tape Cart Machines were used by the larger ITV companies for commercials playout, and I'm sure key programmes had alternative copies ready to go
on standby VTRs.
Was this because U Matic was cheaper and/or lower quality?
I thought it was a pretty dull programme TBH - maybe due to the lack of narration?. Just people sliding pictures of faces next to each other saying they were similar in dimensions shape etc (so what?) I couldn't understand the point of it.
I've come across obvious American programmes dubbed with English commentary, so I wonder if Channel 4 have made an alternative version for the export market and this was shown in error.
Someone is probably getting a roasting right now for being so careless.
I do remember one of the porn channels showing the wrong version of a programme suitable for the time of day, Ofcom were not amused after being told that an inexperienced member of staff had put on the wrong copy of the tape in error.
It was pulled because they played out the wrong version which had no narration.
You know, I thought that was odd, but assumed it was just the style of the programme. Actually quite refreshing to just have the people and the science speaking for themselves without an explanatory voiceover.
Strangest thing of all, the narration-free version was still properly subtitled throughout - only the speaking of the participants, no voiceover - so apparently even the subtitler didn't think there was actually anything wrong or faulty with the programme.
I do remember one of the porn channels showing the wrong version of a programme suitable for the time of day, Ofcom were not amused after being told that an inexperienced member of staff had put on the wrong copy of the tape in error.
This can happen fairly frequently if you check the Ofcom bulletins, where a channel holds various pre- and post-watershed edits of a show (Ice Road Truckers, say) and occasionally the wrong edit for the slot gets flung into the machine, and the F-bombs fly in daylight... That's probably why you get the inverse situation a lot now, E4 showing daytime edits of Big Bang Theory and such post-11pm 'cos they're selected from the same pool as the daytime broadcasts...
I was watching YFSIA and I did notice an unusual lack of linking narration, though I wasn't finding it particularly hard to follow; I'm more annoyed that as I'm working morning shifts all this weekend, the 4seven midnight broadcast is less than useless to me, meaning I don't get to see the last half-hour!
Before realising what had actually happened, I did worry at one point that the response was so bad they'd decided to pull the show half-through and dump it to the back of beyond in favour of something more popular, but C4 aren't quite so bad... yet...
I wonder if the lack of subtitles was part of the reason to pull the programme? Assuming it was an ingest error, don't they keep the original tapes handy in case of server problems? Perhaps they decided not to go with that because the subtitles were only partial?
I wonder if the lack of subtitles was part of the reason to pull the programme? Assuming it was an ingest error, don't they keep the original tapes handy in case of server problems? Perhaps they decided not to go with that because the subtitles were only partial?
Hmmm, maybe they were afraid of being fined for failing to subtitle the programme properly, but there again the actual spoken words were subtitled in full (even though they were actually incomplete)!j
The repeats appear to have been corrected, as I recorded the first repeat since the incident with the first showing.
I'm not sure if the subtitles were corrected though. I'll see if I can undelete it to check.
Edit: Yes, both dialogue & subtitles were correct. Perhaps the subtitler had to quickly do it again!
I wonder if the lack of subtitles was part of the reason to pull the programme? Assuming it was an ingest error, don't they keep the original tapes handy in case of server problems? Perhaps they decided not to go with that because the subtitles were only partial?
No, there were subtitles and there was nothing wrong with them - they appeared whenever there was spoken dialogue in the programme. But the whole programme was missing the narration. All the subtitles tell us is that they must also have been produced from a copy of the show with no narration present - which makes it less likely to be an ingest error and more a case that an incorrect version (or an unfinished version) was somehow supplied as the master.
Either way, once it became apparent that a version not intended for transmission was actually being... er... transmitted, seemingly C4 felt they had no choice but to stop it at the first available opportunity. Makes sense, really, if you think about it.
That's my point - if the subtitles didn't contain the (missing) narration, that might be why they didn't switch across to a different source to the faulty one at the break, because the subtitles would have been incomplete for the narrated version.
That's my point - if the subtitles didn't contain the (missing) narration, that might be why they didn't switch across to a different source to the faulty one at the break, because the subtitles would have been incomplete for the narrated version.
Oh, I see what you mean.
Impossible to guess, really, but I would have thought that if they'd actually got the narrated version on hand to switch to, they would have done that and just apologised for the loss of subtitles and pointed people towards the next airing. I don't think a lack of subtitles would cause them to abandon an otherwise savable transmission. (If they took it THAT seriously they could even have got someone to jump in and subtitle it live, as an emergency short-cut, if it came to that.)
No, there were subtitles and there was nothing wrong with them - they appeared whenever there was spoken dialogue in the programme. But the whole programme was missing the narration. All the subtitles tell us is that they must also have been produced from a copy of the show with no narration present - which makes it less likely to be an ingest error and more a case that an incorrect version (or an unfinished version) was somehow supplied as the master.
Either way, once it became apparent that a version not intended for transmission was actually being... er... transmitted, seemingly C4 felt they had no choice but to stop it at the first available opportunity. Makes sense, really, if you think about it.
I wonder why a 'clean' copy exists at all? The only thing I can think of is to sell to another country with someone narrating it with a local accent.
I don't work in post production, but the following scenario could have happened.
The whole programme is compiled, and ready to have the voice over added.
The narrator comes in to do it, but afterwards a human error saves the clean version as the final programme file (I doubt there is tape in the process at all).
As far as Channel 4 are concerned the programme is correctly labelled, and when checked has pictures, sound and subtitles. Nobody spots that there is no narration, it may sound a little odd, but not enough for someone to flag it.
It is played out, and someone from the production company watching the transmission at home spots that the programme being aired is not what they expected, and call Channel 4's duty editor, who contacts the play out.
They can't do anything. The only version of the programme they have been given is the wrong one, and there is no time to get the correct version. They don't know what state the programme going to air is - are there other unedited bits later on?
There is only one thing to do, and that is to drop it, although I would expect some sort of apology.
After the event there is a big arse kicking exercise down the chain until whoever saved the wrong file is identified.
They can't do anything. The only version of the programme they have been given is the wrong one, and there is no time to get the correct version. They don't know what state the programme going to air is - are there other unedited bits later on?
Exactly. Even if they think "well, this is odd, but maybe nobody else will notice", if it's not a version intended for broadcast you don't know, and just can't be sure, that there's not a 'FILL THIS IN LATER' slate instead of the credits, or a 'Derek Shithammers' caption sitting somewhere as a placeholder.
There is only one thing to do, and that is to drop it, although I would expect some sort of apology.
After the event there is a big arse kicking exercise down the chain until whoever saved the wrong file is identified.
Exactly. Even if they think "well, this is odd, but maybe nobody else will notice", if it's not a version intended for broadcast you don't know, and just can't be sure, that there's not a 'FILL THIS IN LATER' slate instead of the credits, or a 'Derek Shithammers' caption sitting somewhere as a placeholder.
.
I'm sure I've seen Derek in a Charlie Brooker show.
How well are programmes checked before transmission?
If they aren't played the whole way through, there's nothing to stop a disgruntled employee putting something offensive in, or saying/showing a political statement.
In a similar vein, I can remember when a political message received coverage in the 1970's when someone dug up a cricket field the night before the match was due to be covered by the BBC. The following morning BBC1 went live to the cricket field as intended and they had to explain that X organisation had dug up the field in the night and daubed slogans in paint everywhere so the match couldn't go ahead.
Thus, they got their political message onto national television and it was in all the papers!
How easy would it be to say something over the audio or show a slate with a political or offensive message midway through the programme if this went unnoticed on Channel 4?
This would be particularly embarrassing for the Government if it were to involve Channel 4!
How well are programmes checked before transmission?
If they aren't played the whole way through, there's nothing to stop a disgruntled employee putting something offensive in, or saying/showing a political statement.
I bet that is what happened from the sound of it.
How well are programmes checked before transmission?
I agree .... but the playout house ( on behalf of the broadcaster) is not really meant to do any checks on the content .
The producer signs off the delivered programmebas being fit for transmission both technically ( e.g. No colour bars in the middle) and content (e.g. Correct captions , no unflagged rude words) ....
So the playout just checks certificates and reports,
The fact that they got the right version onto All 4 pretty much instantly makes me wonder if the final version was delivered with the narration on the wrong track? Perhaps delivered as 5.1 with the narration on the centre track, and only the left and right got ingested for broadcast. The workflow for online ingest is different and all tracks get mixed down?
Comments
I thought it was a pretty dull programme TBH - maybe due to the lack of narration?. Just people sliding pictures of faces next to each other saying they were similar in dimensions shape etc (so what?) I couldn't understand the point of it.
Was this because U Matic was cheaper and/or lower quality?
Reminds me of Peter Kaye's mum not wanting to pause her PVR because everyone else in the country would want to carry on seeing the film
I've come across obvious American programmes dubbed with English commentary, so I wonder if Channel 4 have made an alternative version for the export market and this was shown in error.
Someone is probably getting a roasting right now for being so careless.
I do remember one of the porn channels showing the wrong version of a programme suitable for the time of day, Ofcom were not amused after being told that an inexperienced member of staff had put on the wrong copy of the tape in error.
Strangest thing of all, the narration-free version was still properly subtitled throughout - only the speaking of the participants, no voiceover - so apparently even the subtitler didn't think there was actually anything wrong or faulty with the programme.
This can happen fairly frequently if you check the Ofcom bulletins, where a channel holds various pre- and post-watershed edits of a show (Ice Road Truckers, say) and occasionally the wrong edit for the slot gets flung into the machine, and the F-bombs fly in daylight... That's probably why you get the inverse situation a lot now, E4 showing daytime edits of Big Bang Theory and such post-11pm 'cos they're selected from the same pool as the daytime broadcasts...
I was watching YFSIA and I did notice an unusual lack of linking narration, though I wasn't finding it particularly hard to follow; I'm more annoyed that as I'm working morning shifts all this weekend, the 4seven midnight broadcast is less than useless to me, meaning I don't get to see the last half-hour!
Before realising what had actually happened, I did worry at one point that the response was so bad they'd decided to pull the show half-through and dump it to the back of beyond in favour of something more popular, but C4 aren't quite so bad... yet...
Hmmm, maybe they were afraid of being fined for failing to subtitle the programme properly, but there again the actual spoken words were subtitled in full (even though they were actually incomplete)!j
The repeats appear to have been corrected, as I recorded the first repeat since the incident with the first showing.
I'm not sure if the subtitles were corrected though. I'll see if I can undelete it to check.
Edit: Yes, both dialogue & subtitles were correct. Perhaps the subtitler had to quickly do it again!
Either way, once it became apparent that a version not intended for transmission was actually being... er... transmitted, seemingly C4 felt they had no choice but to stop it at the first available opportunity. Makes sense, really, if you think about it.
Impossible to guess, really, but I would have thought that if they'd actually got the narrated version on hand to switch to, they would have done that and just apologised for the loss of subtitles and pointed people towards the next airing. I don't think a lack of subtitles would cause them to abandon an otherwise savable transmission. (If they took it THAT seriously they could even have got someone to jump in and subtitle it live, as an emergency short-cut, if it came to that.)
I wonder why a 'clean' copy exists at all? The only thing I can think of is to sell to another country with someone narrating it with a local accent.
The whole programme is compiled, and ready to have the voice over added.
The narrator comes in to do it, but afterwards a human error saves the clean version as the final programme file (I doubt there is tape in the process at all).
As far as Channel 4 are concerned the programme is correctly labelled, and when checked has pictures, sound and subtitles. Nobody spots that there is no narration, it may sound a little odd, but not enough for someone to flag it.
It is played out, and someone from the production company watching the transmission at home spots that the programme being aired is not what they expected, and call Channel 4's duty editor, who contacts the play out.
They can't do anything. The only version of the programme they have been given is the wrong one, and there is no time to get the correct version. They don't know what state the programme going to air is - are there other unedited bits later on?
There is only one thing to do, and that is to drop it, although I would expect some sort of apology.
After the event there is a big arse kicking exercise down the chain until whoever saved the wrong file is identified.
Does that sound plausible?
100%, I'd say.
I'm sure I've seen Derek in a Charlie Brooker show.
How well are programmes checked before transmission?
If they aren't played the whole way through, there's nothing to stop a disgruntled employee putting something offensive in, or saying/showing a political statement.
In a similar vein, I can remember when a political message received coverage in the 1970's when someone dug up a cricket field the night before the match was due to be covered by the BBC. The following morning BBC1 went live to the cricket field as intended and they had to explain that X organisation had dug up the field in the night and daubed slogans in paint everywhere so the match couldn't go ahead.
Thus, they got their political message onto national television and it was in all the papers!
Edit: Found a link from 1975: http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/weird-news/brewery-workers-prank-causes-200000-7746510
I can also remember reading about a canning factory where an employee changed the wording of the best before date stamp to say something offensive!
Edit: This isn't the incident that I mean, but is similar http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/weird-news/brewery-workers-prank-causes-200000-7746510
How easy would it be to say something over the audio or show a slate with a political or offensive message midway through the programme if this went unnoticed on Channel 4?
This would be particularly embarrassing for the Government if it were to involve Channel 4!
Two words: Chris Morris.
I agree .... but the playout house ( on behalf of the broadcaster) is not really meant to do any checks on the content .
The producer signs off the delivered programmebas being fit for transmission both technically ( e.g. No colour bars in the middle) and content (e.g. Correct captions , no unflagged rude words) ....
So the playout just checks certificates and reports,
Pure speculation of course