This is currently not receiving its 7.45am showing on BBC Breakfast on Saturday mornings.
Samira did explain in the edition this week that it is not been shown in that slot for a few weeks because of the Commonwealth Games, however, that was in the edition not shown at the time and the presenters didn't mention why it wasn't been shown.
I can't see why it cant be shown anyway as at 7.45 they had a report that was shown at least three times in Breakfast that morning so there was room for it.
The 10.30 pm paper preview on the BBC News channel which normally runs to 30 minutes is curtailed to 15 on Saturday nights for the completely irrelevant screening of Reporters which recycles news reports several days old, just another quirk of the News channel. And another quirk - why does the channel sometimes give timings in the 24 hour clock and sometimes the 12 hour clock - all their trails are usually in the 12 hour clock but on-the-day events in the 24 hour clock.
The 10.30 pm paper preview on the BBC News channel which normally runs to 30 minutes is curtailed to 15 on Saturday nights for the completely irrelevant screening of Reporters which recycles news reports several days old, just another quirk of the News channel. .
Now I am pretty certain that the BBC Paper Review has always been 15 mins long, 22:30-22:45 with either Clive Myrie or Martine Croxall (followed by Sportsday I think), with the same at 23:30 or so. I have watched a number at that time during the weekdays, and they have all been 15 mins.
It has never been 30 mins (certainly not since the channel moved into NBH), pre-NBH, the review consisted of the presenter, a single reviewer, and an overhead camera to show the page in question laid on the desk. That was maybe 10 mins or so, and it went out at 22:20 or thereabouts.
Now I am pretty certain that the BBC Paper Review has always been 15 mins long, 22:30-22:45 with either Clive Myrie or Martine Croxall (followed by Sportsday I think), with the same at 23:30 or so. I have watched a number at that time during the weekdays, and they have all been 15 mins.
It has never been 30 mins (certainly not since the channel moved into NBH), pre-NBH, the review consisted of the presenter, a single reviewer, and an overhead camera to show the page in question laid on the desk. That was maybe 10 mins or so, and it went out at 22:20 or thereabouts.
Sky News Paper Review is 30 mins though.
They've always had two guests ever since I've been watching it. A Saturday night paper review would probably be a bit more interesting with the Sunday papers and to curtail it for a completely irrelevant programme seems bizarre.The only thing even more bizarre would be to curtail it for the umpteenth screening of Click, the most repeated programme on British TV:D
They've always had two guests ever since I've been watching it
When it was broadcast from TVC, there was only one guest, sat around the same table as the presenter, and as I said, an overhead camera to display the pages as the presenter leafed through them. One presenter.
They went to two presenters with the new look News Channel from NBH in HD.
It has never been 30 mins
. A Saturday night paper review would probably be a bit more interesting with the Sunday papers and to curtail it for a completely irrelevant programme seems bizarre
They didn't curtail it at all, it has always been 15 mins.
.The only thing even more bizarre would be to curtail it for the umpteenth screening of Click, the most repeated programme on British TV:D
Out of interest, Click wasn't shown yesterday morning at 6:45 (its normal early Breakfast slot).
When it was broadcast from TVC, there was only one guest, sat around the same table as the presenter, and as I said, an overhead camera to display the pages as the presenter leafed through them. One presenter.
They went to two presenters with the new look News Channel from NBH in HD.
It has never been 30 mins
They didn't curtail it at all, it has always been 15 mins.
Out of interest, Click wasn't shown yesterday morning at 6:45 (its normal early Breakfast slot).
I assume Click wasn't shown because of the Commonwealth Games,which seems to be the excuse for dropping everything until next Sunday.
I assume Click wasn't shown because of the Commonwealth Games,which seems to be the excuse for dropping everything until next Sunday.
Yes, correct.
But it is being shown elsewhere, thankfully. Glad that it is repeated so many times (unlike the Film Review with Doctor Kermode ) so that I can catch it (as it too gets chopped sometimes).
Usual form on BBC Newswatch earlier today. Various viewers complained about the coverage of the police arriving at the address of Cliff Richard. The complaints were along the lines of his name being smeared when no charges have yet been made and the cost of the helicopter shots.
The BBC executive give the usual reply which is that he knows best..
Frankly there is little point to Newswatch if it is only a vehicle for the BBC to tell us it was right all along.
But it is being shown elsewhere, thankfully. Glad that it is repeated so many times (unlike the Film Review with Doctor Kermode ) so that I can catch it (as it too gets chopped sometimes).
The Film Review seems to get repeated on both Saturday and Sunday mornings at 6.25 on Breakfast. Might it not be an idea to repeat it at different times to appeal to a different audience ?
Newswatch is a complete waste of time - the BBC invites viewers to comment on its news programmes but when they are critical it just ignores them so there is no point to the programme.
The Film Review seems to get repeated on both Saturday and Sunday mornings at 6.25 on Breakfast. Might it not be an idea to repeat it at different times to appeal to a different audience ?
Well, it's also on Fri 5.45pm, 9.45pm and Sat 11.45pm to name but a few.
OK, it must be a new thing showing it on Sundays, but what will people do without the 23rd repeat of Click!!!!!:p
Better than it not showing at all, as has happened in the past meaning that, stupidly, they weren't allowed to put it on Iplayer. All the segments were on the Click website but separately (and without Spencer's links, obviously)
Not really. He didn't seem able to justify the use of the helicopter, for example.
Wow! Well done on picking on the one thing he didn't mention. And I don't believe that should have to justify every single thing they do.
That said, I also agree the chopper wasn't absolutely necessary; but it also wasn't worth complaining about. Much like a lot of what gets complained about.
Wow! Well done on picking on the one thing he didn't mention. And I don't believe that should have to justify every single thing they do.!
Well, that is kind of the point of the programme! And it was something that was specifically mentioned by the featured viewers.
That said, I also agree the chopper wasn't absolutely necessary; but it also wasn't worth complaining about. Much like a lot of what gets complained about.
Definitely worth complaining about in my view - apart from its use being unpleasantly voyeuristic, it must have been quite an expense, and an unnecessary one, as you say.
Re: the helicopter, in Lord Hall's evidence to the Home Affairs Select Committee last Tuesday (Police, the media, and high-profile criminal investigations ):
Asked if sending a helicopter above Richard’s residence to film the raid on 14 August was “OTT”, Hall said: “The reporter was told by South Yorkshire police it would be difficult to get good shots from the ground, the operational decision was then taken to use a helicopter.”
He added: “Looking at the output was it used disproportionately, no. Was it, as some people say, running the search live, we weren’t. The only live shots were run ... at 4.30pm when the cars came out.”
I recall that it was also stated that the helicopter is contracted jointly to the BBC and ITN (as a shared resource).
Q136 Chair: You thought that was fine in terms of the use of licence payers’ money?
Jonathan Munro: The helicopter is not paid by the job, so to speak. We keep the helicopter on retainer, on standby, for any breaking news. There is no financial issue about launching the helicopter.
Q137 Chair: It is your permanent helicopter that you would use for any breaking news story anywhere in the country?
Jonathan Munro: It is operated by a freelance contractor and we share it with ITN in order to minimise the financial commitment of both companies.
Q138 Chair: This view that you hired a helicopter especially at great expense in order to take photographs of this raid—
Jonathan Munro: There are lots of myths about the helicopter, and you are correct, that is a myth. It is also a myth that we broadcast anything live of the raid during the day, until the very end of the following day.
and
Q164 Paul Flynn: I would like to come back to the other one. We cannot resist this. On the question of how you cover a news story, how does it elevate the value of the news story to have a picture from a helicopter rather than a picture from the side of the road? Can you tell us how many licence fees it costs to pay for a helicopter every year?
Lord Hall: It is an annual contract shared with ITN. It covers a very wide range of stories and my own judgment, looking back at this coverage, was what you saw from the air was a number of police cars and you saw the scale of their operation. But, look, this is very much an operational issue for the news. It is a way that stories are covered often, Mr Flynn, in all sorts of ways. We use a helicopter to add context to a story.
Re: the helicopter, in Lord Hall's evidence to the Home Affairs Select Committee last Tuesday (Police, the media, and high-profile criminal investigations ):
Doesn't change my view there was no actual justification for helicopter shots showing the police rummaging through Cliff Richard's apartment.
Just adding the context and factual background information regarding the costs of the helicopter.
I have subsequently edited my post to include the relevant Select Committee exchanges,
It is notable that it was SYP who stated that it would be difficult to get good shots from the ground. I would wonder why they felt the need to state that.
BTW, "rummaging through Cliff Richard's apartment"? There were no interior shots at all. The helicopter only showed exterior shots. No "rummaging~" to be seen. But emotive language noted,.
Definitely worth complaining about in my view - apart from its use being unpleasantly voyeuristic, it must have been quite an expense, and an unnecessary one, as you say.
Just adding the context and background information regarding the costs of the helicopter.
Thanks. I am happy to accept that it was not a huge extra cost.
I have subsequently edited my post to include the relevant Select Committee exchanges,
It is notable that it was SYP who stated that it would be difficult to get good shots from the ground. I would wonder why they felt the need to state that..
Yes, I wonder too.
BTW, "rummaging through Cliff Richard's apartment"? There were no interior shots at all. The helicopter only showed exterior shots. No "rummaging~" to be seen. But emotive language noted,.
Sorry for the "emotive language", but that's how it struck me at the time! Police could definitely be seen through the window searching his apartment.
"We use a helicopter to add context to a story. "
The usual meaningless BBC-speak!
Comments
Samira did explain in the edition this week that it is not been shown in that slot for a few weeks because of the Commonwealth Games, however, that was in the edition not shown at the time and the presenters didn't mention why it wasn't been shown.
I can't see why it cant be shown anyway as at 7.45 they had a report that was shown at least three times in Breakfast that morning so there was room for it.
Maybe I should complain to Newswatch!!
Now I am pretty certain that the BBC Paper Review has always been 15 mins long, 22:30-22:45 with either Clive Myrie or Martine Croxall (followed by Sportsday I think), with the same at 23:30 or so. I have watched a number at that time during the weekdays, and they have all been 15 mins.
It has never been 30 mins (certainly not since the channel moved into NBH), pre-NBH, the review consisted of the presenter, a single reviewer, and an overhead camera to show the page in question laid on the desk. That was maybe 10 mins or so, and it went out at 22:20 or thereabouts.
Sky News Paper Review is 30 mins though.
They've always had two guests ever since I've been watching it. A Saturday night paper review would probably be a bit more interesting with the Sunday papers and to curtail it for a completely irrelevant programme seems bizarre.The only thing even more bizarre would be to curtail it for the umpteenth screening of Click, the most repeated programme on British TV:D
They went to two presenters with the new look News Channel from NBH in HD.
It has never been 30 mins
They didn't curtail it at all, it has always been 15 mins.
Out of interest, Click wasn't shown yesterday morning at 6:45 (its normal early Breakfast slot).
I assume Click wasn't shown because of the Commonwealth Games,which seems to be the excuse for dropping everything until next Sunday.
Yes, correct.
But it is being shown elsewhere, thankfully. Glad that it is repeated so many times (unlike the Film Review with Doctor Kermode
The BBC executive give the usual reply which is that he knows best..
Frankly there is little point to Newswatch if it is only a vehicle for the BBC to tell us it was right all along.
The Film Review seems to get repeated on both Saturday and Sunday mornings at 6.25 on Breakfast. Might it not be an idea to repeat it at different times to appeal to a different audience ?
Newswatch is a complete waste of time - the BBC invites viewers to comment on its news programmes but when they are critical it just ignores them so there is no point to the programme.
Not really. He didn't seem able to justify the use of the helicopter, for example.
It's certainly shown on Saturday morning but don't think it's on Sunday.
OK, it must be a new thing showing it on Sundays, but what will people do without the 23rd repeat of Click!!!!!:p
Well, it's also on Fri 5.45pm, 9.45pm and Sat 11.45pm to name but a few.
Better than it not showing at all, as has happened in the past meaning that, stupidly, they weren't allowed to put it on Iplayer. All the segments were on the Click website but separately (and without Spencer's links, obviously)
Well, he doesn't like to get facts get in the way of a smug moan at other DS contributors...
I am pretty sure it has been like this for a long time, they also repeat Click on Sat & Sun, God awful show that it is
That said, I also agree the chopper wasn't absolutely necessary; but it also wasn't worth complaining about. Much like a lot of what gets complained about.
No it isn't. That's right in the middle of Dateline. (Unless they show it in that slot if Dateline isn't on I guess.)
Hypocrisy and (given the factual inaccuracy of the sentence) irony too. Nicely done!
Definitely worth complaining about in my view - apart from its use being unpleasantly voyeuristic, it must have been quite an expense, and an unnecessary one, as you say.
http://www.theguardian.com/media/2014/sep/02/bbc-cliff-richard-police-keith-vaz
I recall that it was also stated that the helicopter is contracted jointly to the BBC and ITN (as a shared resource).
and
http://data.parliament.uk/writtenevidence/committeeevidence.svc/evidencedocument/home-affairs-committee/police-the-media-and-highprofile-criminal-investigations/oral/12268.pdf
Doesn't change my view there was no actual justification for helicopter shots showing the police rummaging through Cliff Richard's apartment.
I have subsequently edited my post to include the relevant Select Committee exchanges,
It is notable that it was SYP who stated that it would be difficult to get good shots from the ground. I would wonder why they felt the need to state that.
BTW, "rummaging through Cliff Richard's apartment"? There were no interior shots at all. The helicopter only showed exterior shots. No "rummaging~" to be seen. But emotive language noted,.
It was so high up you hardly saw anything anyway!
This is TV and they were the only pictures they could have got. That's the justification.
Again, facts don't usually help with some people
Yes, I wonder too.
Sorry for the "emotive language", but that's how it struck me at the time! Police could definitely be seen through the window searching his apartment.
"We use a helicopter to add context to a story. "
The usual meaningless BBC-speak!