Options

Is BBC One going through a golden era?

12346»

Comments

  • Options
    Doghouse RileyDoghouse Riley Posts: 32,491
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Damn! Are you two going to go quietly ? I'll put the popcorn and deckchairs back if you are ;)

    How many times have I said to him let it go?

    I saw one post of his yesterday where all he'd posted was "I can't be bothered"
    I'd have left it at that, but five minutes later, he'd edited it, deleted that and was having another go!
    He always comes back with multiple quotes and comments, it must take him quite some time..
    We shouldn't judge, maybe he's nothing better to do?
  • Options
    Doghouse RileyDoghouse Riley Posts: 32,491
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Lets hope the commons report published today that backs up our criticisms, puts an end to the constant excuses offered for the poor performance and value we receive from the BBC.

    http://www.parliament.uk/business/committees/committees-a-z/commons-select/culture-media-and-sport-committee/news/report-future-of-bbc/

    Yes there's some good bits, which we can accept, but it's pretty damning overall.

    I've lost count of the times I've said, (a fact mentioned in the report) that the BBC, "try to be all things to all people." That's a waste of resources and manpower, the cost of which we experience in the falling standards of programming.

    It ain't "rocket salad."

    I'm not going to bother reading any further excuses.

    As I said early in this thread, the only "golden era" was that of the generous pay-offs.
  • Options
    ForGodsSakeForGodsSake Posts: 16,235
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    MrJames wrote: »
    Everything they touch seems to turn to gold at the moment. From reality shows like Strictly, The Voice and the colossal GBBO, to their epic dramas like The Missing, Happy Valley and now The Casual Vacancy to their long running favourites like Silent Witness, Call The Midwife, Death in Paradise - heck, even EastEnders is being lauded for its recent resurgence. They seem to be toppling ITV in every respect, as they nearly always fill every spot in the top five of the official ratings.

    What are your thoughts?


    Why dodn't they blow the whistle on Jimmy Savile ?
    I can never trust them again.
  • Options
    Glenn AGlenn A Posts: 23,877
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    I wouldn't say BBC One is as good as it was in the seventies and eighties, but when you see some of the drivel ITV churn out now, and how BBC One is regularly beating them in the ratings, the channel is going through a ratings golden era. Personally I'd sooner watch BBC Two and BBC Four, but the main channel is light years ahead of ITV, which is full of braindead daytime shows, a rubbish breakfast service, overkilled soaps and rubbish entertainment. Also ITV 2 and Be are an insult to your intelligence and their other channels are full of repeats with few new shows.
  • Options
    Doghouse RileyDoghouse Riley Posts: 32,491
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Why didn't they blow the whistle on Jimmy Savile ?
    I can never trust them again.

    You have to put it down to the culture. Too many people would have been embarrassed by the revelations which might have led to them losing their jobs. Others might have been told to keep their mouths shut if they still wanted a career at the BBC.
    We don't know of course, but far better to keep it under wraps until those with authority and in the know, had accumulated a bigger pension pot, before they baled out.

    One of our relatives has an IT/facilitation company in London. He says the £100 million IT fiasco was common knowledge to many in that field, long before the Corporation "'fessed up."
  • Options
    carl.waringcarl.waring Posts: 35,705
    Forum Member
    Using your "feast or famine option" with a reference to MacDonalds was a bit pathetic.
    'Extreme' I would have accepted. It was certainly not 'pathetic. But I note you still avoided actually replying to the point :)
    Try to accept, I'm not interested in your opinions
    Then what the heck are you doing on a Forum when people are suppose to post and discuss their opinions? :o:confused:
    Let it go.
    You could have done that at any point.
    @ carl waring........ This thread is about the BBC...... that's why I only mentioned them in my post. :p
    Yes, and? :confused:
    How many times have I said to him let it go?
    Which begs the question... why haven't you?
    We shouldn't judge, maybe he's nothing better to do?
    Yes. I know. It's ridiculous. Using a forum to discuss opinions. You know, exactly what they're there for!! >:(
  • Options
    carl.waringcarl.waring Posts: 35,705
    Forum Member
    Lets hope the commons report published today that backs up our criticisms, puts an end to the constant excuses offered for the poor performance and value we receive from the BBC.
    BIB. You should really only speak for yourself you know ;)
    I've lost count of the times I've said, (a fact mentioned in the report) that the BBC, "try to be all things to all people."
    That's because they are a PUBLIC SERVICE Broadcaster. If this report can't even get that fact right then the whole thing can be dismissed as a nonsense.
    That's a waste of resources and manpower, the cost of which we experience in the falling standards of programming.
    And yet BBC1 and BBC2 are still the most-watched pair of channels from any single broadcaster so they must be doing something right.
    I'm not going to bother reading any further excuses.
    No surprise there then. It's hard to argue with facts anyway I suppose :)
    Why dodn't they blow the whistle on Jimmy Savile ?
    I can never trust them again.
    I assume you have the same opinion of the NHS then? Because if not you'd be a hypocrite.
  • Options
    Doghouse RileyDoghouse Riley Posts: 32,491
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭

    Oh dear!

    The commons report (available on line) has pasted the BBC and highlighted many of the points several of us have been making on this thread and on others for years.

    The press has had a field day.

    And then you still want to add your two'pennoth of excuses for them.
    But it was to be expected.

    Bless!
  • Options
    Glenn AGlenn A Posts: 23,877
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    BBC One might be better than ITV 1, but that's not saying a lot. Fair does they have some good drama, they cover big sports events well, their news is far better than ITN and Strictly is a good show, but the rest of their output is endless antiques, quizzes, dreary Eastenders, Holby and lifestyle shows about selling houses and DIY. I much preferred BBC One thirty years ago when they had some great sitcoms like Allo Allo and In Sickness and In Health and kids shows like Grange Hill.
    BBC One only does well because ITV is so awful, not because it's some fantastic, quality channel.
  • Options
    Ed R.MarleyEd R.Marley Posts: 9,159
    Forum Member
    I can't see it as a golden era as I hardly watch the channel. Strictly, Doctor Who, Call the Midwife, etc, are just drivel. The main BBC channels I watch are BBC 2 & 4. Much better quality programming on those two.
  • Options
    Glenn AGlenn A Posts: 23,877
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    I can't see it as a golden era as I hardly watch the channel. Strictly, Doctor Who, Call the Midwife, etc, are just drivel. The main BBC channels I watch are BBC 2 & 4. Much better quality programming on those two.
    BBC Two is currently showing sitcoms from the seventies and eighties. It makes you realise how good the BBC was then. I can remember Thursdays having Tomorrow's World, TOTP, Hi de Hi and Whicker's World. Now you have The One Show, Deadenders, Watchdog and cookery.
  • Options
    carl.waringcarl.waring Posts: 35,705
    Forum Member
    Oh dear!

    The commons report (available on line) has pasted the BBC and highlighted many of the points several of us have been making on this thread and on others for years.

    The press has had a field day.

    And then you still want to add your two'pennoth of excuses for them.
    But it was to be expected.

    Hang on! You are always having a go at me for not posting any actual opinions (nonsense of course, but whatever...) and now you're having a go at me for expressing my opinions.

    Seriously?:o:confused:

    Of course, your real issue is that I'm not just agreeing with you. Well that's just tough. Or, as you might put it...


    Bless!

    Glenn A wrote: »
    BBC One might be better than ITV 1, but that's not saying a lot. Fair does they have some good drama, they cover big sports events well, their news is far better than ITN and Strictly is a good show, but the rest of their output is endless antiques, quizzes, dreary Eastenders, Holby and lifestyle shows about selling houses and DIY. I much preferred BBC One thirty years ago when they had some great sitcoms like Allo Allo and In Sickness and In Health and kids shows like Grange Hill.
    BBC One only does well because ITV is so awful, not because it's some fantastic, quality channel.

    Of course, what you really meant was....
    Glenn A wrote: »
    BBC One might be better than ITV 1, but that's not saying a lot. Fair does they have some good drama, they cover big sports events well, their news is far better than ITN and Strictly is a good show, but they also show programmes I don't like.

    Which is fair enough. They show a lot of programme I don't like either. But then I don't expect to like everything they show because we all have different tastes.
  • Options
    Glenn AGlenn A Posts: 23,877
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Surely, though, people would much rather watch top quality comedy, drama and documentaries, which were always a strong point of the BBC, than repeats of people selling houses and The One Show. Mind you at least they have dumbed down to the extent ITV have and created an equivalent of Jeremy Kyle.
  • Options
    carl.waringcarl.waring Posts: 35,705
    Forum Member
    Glenn A wrote: »
    Surely, though, people would much rather watch top quality comedy, drama and documentaries, which were always a strong point of the BBC, than repeats of people selling houses and The One Show.
    Why can't they watch all of those? They can. On the BBC.
  • Options
    Doghouse RileyDoghouse Riley Posts: 32,491
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Hang on! You are always having a go at me for not posting any actual opinions (nonsense of course, but whatever...) and now you're having a go at me for expressing my opinions.

    Seriously?:o:confused:

    Of course, your real issue is that I'm not just agreeing with you. Well that's just tough. Or, as you might put it...


    Bless!



    I seriously think you are as you admit, "shocked and confused."

    First of all, yours wasn't an "original thought," something of which I've said you have few, it was a bit of your usual nit-picking of their thoughts, when quoting someone else's.

    I found it amusing that once again, as you have done before, you dragged in a reference to the problems of the NHS, as your "mitigating circumstances" for all the examples of waste and poor management at the BBC.

    Of course the NHS has problems, it's a huge multifaceted and complex organisation, but why you think it should be mentioned on a message board about television and particularly a topic about the BBC., is beyond comprehension.

    Of course when I said previously the BBC had "too many finger in too many pies," (a fact, unsurprisingly mentioned later in the Common's report), you were quick to post that the BBC had only one pie, PSB.

    So not like the NHS at all then eh?

    I think this shows you're more confused than then you previously thought you were.

    So "Bless!" back at you.
Sign In or Register to comment.