They made it obvious the results show isn't live, is any of it shown live?
Is any of Strictly Come Dancing Live TV?
Originally Posted by Corabal:
“They made it obvious the results show isn't live, is any of it shown live?”
“They made it obvious the results show isn't live, is any of it shown live?”
All of Saturday night is live, then they record Sunday's show on the Saturday night after recording of live show is finished.
I think the only thing that may not be live on Saturday is opening number as they all have to change get into make-up/costumes after they've danced it. Especially obvious this week as themed
Originally Posted by wazzyboy:
“I suspect there might be a slight time delay, in case anything untoward occurs...?”
“I suspect there might be a slight time delay, in case anything untoward occurs...?”
Can't see that otherwise they'd have cut out Ramps' mike disaster surely.
Originally Posted by jeffiner1892:
“Can't see that otherwise they'd have cut out Ramps' mike disaster surely.”
“Can't see that otherwise they'd have cut out Ramps' mike disaster surely.”
And Bruno's 'the hills are alive with the sound of bullshit!'
Did Zoe have to apologise for someone swearing last year, or was that on ITT (or in my head)?
Originally Posted by Arcana:
“Well Alan Dedicoat says 'Live..from the BBC' in his intro on a Saturday night.”
“Well Alan Dedicoat says 'Live..from the BBC' in his intro on a Saturday night.”
gives you a really big clue doesnt it
I would imagine they have a short delay in transmission so they can blank out anything similar to the original 'wardrobe malfunction'. I'm guessing they let through the odd verbal cock-up, as demonstrated by Bruno on Saturday.
In recent series both Bruno and Len made remarks which Tess apologised for shortly afterwards.
(It later transpired that Len had not actually f-bombed it! )
Does anyone actually have proof / verification re this time-delay mechanism, or, as I am assuming, is it just a question of "I think that....."?
(It later transpired that Len had not actually f-bombed it! )
Does anyone actually have proof / verification re this time-delay mechanism, or, as I am assuming, is it just a question of "I think that....."?
Originally Posted by scarlotti:
“In recent series both Bruno and Len made remarks which Tess apologised for shortly afterwards.
(It later transpired that Len had not actually f-bombed it! )
Does anyone actually have proof / verification re this time-delay mechanism, or, as I am assuming, is it just a question of "I think that....."?”
“In recent series both Bruno and Len made remarks which Tess apologised for shortly afterwards.
(It later transpired that Len had not actually f-bombed it! )
Does anyone actually have proof / verification re this time-delay mechanism, or, as I am assuming, is it just a question of "I think that....."?”
I'd always assumed that live programmes were broadcast with a 10 second delay in case they needed to beep out swear words or to give them time to react to 'a situation' but now I'm not sure. There's this on the BBC iPlayer site (about subtitling):
Quote:
“For a programme that’s broadcast live (like the News) or close to live (like Mock the Week), a technician will generate the subtitles as it is being transmitted. This means you’ll often notice a delay when watching these programmes, be it live or via catch-up.”
“For a programme that’s broadcast live (like the News) or close to live (like Mock the Week), a technician will generate the subtitles as it is being transmitted. This means you’ll often notice a delay when watching these programmes, be it live or via catch-up.”
And there's a news story about Chris Evans wanting to do the new Top a Gear live, but execs think they might have to use a time delay for fear of language slips.
Sounds like they decide on a programme by programme basis depending on how risky they think it is. Not sure Strictly would be considered high risk ...
I said "I suspect" though I stand to be corrected. I was thinking more of avoiding showing unfortunate incidents like when Marie Osmond fainted on DWTS, which they showed live (and kept in the recording shown on Watch) but it being broadcast live on a commercial channel they did not linger on it and quickly cut to a break.
Originally Posted by fridgesoup:
“Sounds like they decide on a programme by programme basis depending on how risky they think it is. Not sure Strictly would be considered high risk ...”
“Sounds like they decide on a programme by programme basis depending on how risky they think it is. Not sure Strictly would be considered high risk ...”
Strictly has a plenty of clothes getting ripped accidentally and deliberately so I'd guess the risk of a 'wardrobe malfunction' is comparatively high. They would also take the show off air if there was a security threat in the audience, a horrible accident, and so on. Bad language is the least of their worries.
I can't see why a time delay isn't standard for these sort of live events now. The technology is there. The public understand why it is needed.
I'm not sure where I read this, so don't quote me on it, but I think a programme on a time delay can still be said to be 'live' up to a certain point - once the time delay is so long it can no longer be promoted as 'live'?
Originally Posted by cwickham:
“I'm not sure where I read this, so don't quote me on it, but I think a programme on a time delay can still be said to be 'live' up to a certain point - once the time delay is so long it can no longer be promoted as 'live'?”
“I'm not sure where I read this, so don't quote me on it, but I think a programme on a time delay can still be said to be 'live' up to a certain point - once the time delay is so long it can no longer be promoted as 'live'?”
I think I read it somewhere too. Ten minutes rings a bell, but I can't find any specific online reference to this right at this moment.
Originally Posted by davads:
“I think I read it somewhere too. Ten minutes rings a bell, but I can't find any specific online reference to this right at this moment.”
“I think I read it somewhere too. Ten minutes rings a bell, but I can't find any specific online reference to this right at this moment.”
After Janet Jackson's breat was revealed at the Superbowl in 2004, the USA introduced a 7 second delay on all live broadcasts.
The BBC has editorial guidelines on time delay
http://www.bbc.co.uk/editorialguidel...ve-output-full
but doesn't specify a time. They are planning a time delay when Chris Evans takes over Top Gear but, again, haven't specified how long. For all live programmes, they do say "To try and minimise the risk we should consider whether a member of the production team should be nominated to monitor the live output. It should be someone who can react quickly and effectively in the event of a problem."
There are problems for deaf viewers because the delay before subtitles appear was 5.6 seconds, and Ofcom asked the BBC for ways of reducing it to 3 seconds. With modern technology there's no reason why they couldn't delay the picture and sound broadcast that subtitles apprared without a delay in what's received on TVs.
