Like your post Mossy 
Scd Does Not Rasise Money For Charity (Merged)
6 of 7
Originally Posted by catslovelycats:
“Like your post Mossy”
“Like your post Mossy
”
I aim to please (well, most of the time ....
)
Originally Posted by mossy2103:
“Yes, being sneaky by
a) NOT saying that something is NOT happening
b) removing the normal "12p donated to Children in Need" onscreen announcement
c) removing the normal "12p donated to Children in Need" voiceover announcement
d) NOT pointing out that the cost of a call was almost halved from 25p to 15p
e) NOT mentioning CiN at all, anywhere.”
“Yes, being sneaky by
a) NOT saying that something is NOT happening
b) removing the normal "12p donated to Children in Need" onscreen announcement
c) removing the normal "12p donated to Children in Need" voiceover announcement
d) NOT pointing out that the cost of a call was almost halved from 25p to 15p
e) NOT mentioning CiN at all, anywhere.”
Or, putting it another way,
a) - e) NOT publicizing a quite-significant change.
OK, you could argue that people should be smart enough to work it out for themselves.
But the need for this thread demonstrates otherwise.
Originally Posted by DavidJames:
“Or, putting it another way,
a) - e) NOT publicizing a quite-significant change.”
“Or, putting it another way,
a) - e) NOT publicizing a quite-significant change.”
Or the number of significant things that no longer appear (visually, aurally) should of course do that itself.
Quote:
“OK, you could argue that people should be smart enough to work it out for themselves.
But the need for this thread demonstrates otherwise.”
“OK, you could argue that people should be smart enough to work it out for themselves.
But the need for this thread demonstrates otherwise.”
Quite.
Originally Posted by Alli-F:
“Can you go spread the word?”
“Can you go spread the word?
”
I have been... everyone in my house was very surprised!
Good thread, keep up the good work!
Why hasn't the BBC cleared up the confusion this year about donations to charity. There is no Childen in Need sign by the telephone numbers this year but so many people STILL believe that their telephone vote charges go to charity!! Surely it could be cleared up easily by a comment from Claudia on ITT. I have read in the Daily Mail readers' comments etc and so many people still believe that Strictly is a show for charity!!
Originally Posted by Dancing Girl:
“Why hasn't the BBC cleared up the confusion this year about donations to charity. There is no Childen in Need sign by the telephone numbers this year but so many people STILL believe that their telephone vote charges go to charity!! Surely it could be cleared up easily by a comment from Claudia on ITT. I have read in the Daily Mail readers' comments etc and so many people still believe that Strictly is a show for charity!!”
“Why hasn't the BBC cleared up the confusion this year about donations to charity. There is no Childen in Need sign by the telephone numbers this year but so many people STILL believe that their telephone vote charges go to charity!! Surely it could be cleared up easily by a comment from Claudia on ITT. I have read in the Daily Mail readers' comments etc and so many people still believe that Strictly is a show for charity!!”
I suspect they haven't cleared up the confusion because it keeps people voting! Cynical? Moi?
Originally Posted by Dancing Girl:
“Why hasn't the BBC cleared up the confusion this year about donations to charity. There is no Childen in Need sign by the telephone numbers this year but so many people STILL believe that their telephone vote charges go to charity!! Surely it could be cleared up easily by a comment from Claudia on ITT. I have read in the Daily Mail readers' comments etc and so many people still believe that Strictly is a show for charity!!”
“Why hasn't the BBC cleared up the confusion this year about donations to charity. There is no Childen in Need sign by the telephone numbers this year but so many people STILL believe that their telephone vote charges go to charity!! Surely it could be cleared up easily by a comment from Claudia on ITT. I have read in the Daily Mail readers' comments etc and so many people still believe that Strictly is a show for charity!!”
probaly neatly explained in my earlier post
http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/forums/s...&postcount=125
Originally Posted by Dancing Girl:
“Why hasn't the BBC cleared up the confusion this year about donations to charity.”
“Why hasn't the BBC cleared up the confusion this year about donations to charity.”
Because they're lazy?
Seriously, if they had to explain it, they'd have to do it every week in Tess's spiel - and they'd then probably unleash a secondary set of questions about "Why" which also take time and effort to explain.
That said, a simple statement like "And please note: because of new BBC guidelines, this money does not go to charity this year" might do the trick.
Originally Posted by DavidJames:
“Because they're lazy?
That said, a simple statement like "And please note: because of new BBC guidelines, this money does not go to charity this year" might do the trick.”
“Because they're lazy?
That said, a simple statement like "And please note: because of new BBC guidelines, this money does not go to charity this year" might do the trick.”
They really should do something like that. I wasn't aware that the money doesn't go to CiN until I came on here. My family didn't know until I told them.
Originally Posted by DavidJames:
“Because they're lazy?
Seriously, if they had to explain it, they'd have to do it every week in Tess's spiel - and they'd then probably unleash a secondary set of questions about "Why" which also take time and effort to explain.
That said, a simple statement like "And please note: because of new BBC guidelines, this money does not go to charity this year" might do the trick.”
“Because they're lazy?
Seriously, if they had to explain it, they'd have to do it every week in Tess's spiel - and they'd then probably unleash a secondary set of questions about "Why" which also take time and effort to explain.
That said, a simple statement like "And please note: because of new BBC guidelines, this money does not go to charity this year" might do the trick.”
They don't need to announce it and make explanations. They just need to have a short statement scrolling across the screen underneath the phone numbers, every time the numbers are displayed.
Originally Posted by DavidJames:
“Because they're lazy?”
“Because they're lazy?”
Because they (maybe wrongly) assumed that people did not need to be treated like pre-school children?
Quote:
“
That said, a simple statement like "And please note: because of new BBC guidelines, this money does not go to charity this year" might do the trick.”
“
That said, a simple statement like "And please note: because of new BBC guidelines, this money does not go to charity this year" might do the trick.”
Probably leading to even more confusion as people then question "what guidelines?" and "why should those guidelines affect SCD?".
You can lead a horse to water .....
They don't even need to say that it's because of new BBC guidelines. Just that "Money from the phone votes no longer goes to charity and the phone charges have been reduced accordingly."
Originally Posted by mossy2103:
“Because they (maybe wrongly) assumed that people did not need to be treated like pre-school children?
”
“Because they (maybe wrongly) assumed that people did not need to be treated like pre-school children?
”
Don't think they're too worried about that. The still say several times every week "do not call after nine or your vote will not be counted and you may be charged". I know they have to because of the scandals but just don't think a message that there is no Children in Need element could sound any more patronising.
Originally Posted by Golden anemone:
“Don't think they're too worried about that. The still say several times every week "do not call after nine or your vote will not be counted and you may be charged". I know they have to because of the scandals but just don't think a message that there is no Children in Need element could sound any more patronising.”
“Don't think they're too worried about that. The still say several times every week "do not call after nine or your vote will not be counted and you may be charged". I know they have to because of the scandals but just don't think a message that there is no Children in Need element could sound any more patronising.”
In the light of those phone problems, people would shout "theft and corruption" for the former, and would remain generally silent for the latter. That's the difference.
And the more announcements/info that that is, the greater the likelihood of important info being lost/ignored. In some respects we need to blame those that raised such a fuss over the phone issues that affected all broadcasters - the BBC (not surprisingly) going to be very sensitive about getting the vote lines message across.
Originally Posted by mossy2103:
“Because they (maybe wrongly) assumed that people did not need to be treated like pre-school children?”
“Because they (maybe wrongly) assumed that people did not need to be treated like pre-school children?”
[Columbo]
You sheee, ma'am, there was just one minor problem with that...
[/Columbo]
Possibly they should read this forum to get an idea of the average level of viewer intelligence
Originally Posted by DavidJames:
“[Columbo]
You sheee, ma'am, there was just one minor problem with that...
[/Columbo]
Possibly they should read this forum to get an idea of the average level of viewer intelligence”
“[Columbo]
You sheee, ma'am, there was just one minor problem with that...
[/Columbo]
Possibly they should read this forum to get an idea of the average level of viewer intelligence
”
Ah, yes ..... you have a point there.
Originally Posted by mossy2103:
“Because they (maybe wrongly) assumed that people did not need to be treated like pre-school children?”
“Because they (maybe wrongly) assumed that people did not need to be treated like pre-school children?”
But SCD is presented as a family entertainment, something watched and enjoyed by a significant number of children, that is one of it's strong selling points.
Originally Posted by mossy2103:
“Probably leading to even more confusion as people then question "what guidelines?" and "why should those guidelines affect SCD?". ”
“Probably leading to even more confusion as people then question "what guidelines?" and "why should those guidelines affect SCD?". ”
Are you the BBC (un)official Devils Advocate in disguise? One minute you are arguing that the viewers are not pre school children, then next minute apparently we viewers are confused by the terminology "BBC guidelines".
I, like many if not most regular SCD viewers, had assumed the BBC SCD/CIN charity relationship to be extant.
As memmh said "They just need to have a short statement scrolling across the screen underneath the phone numbers, every time the numbers are displayed".
Using the disclaimer DavidJames suggested "And please note: because of new BBC guidelines, this money does not go to charity this year"
BBC, please keep it respectable and honest, your integrity is under observation.
Originally Posted by ennui:
“But SCD is presented as a family entertainment, something watched and enjoyed by a significant number of children, that is one of it's strong selling points.”
“But SCD is presented as a family entertainment, something watched and enjoyed by a significant number of children, that is one of it's strong selling points.”
Note that I posted pre-school children. And the comment related to clearing up any (assumed) confusion.
Quote:
“Are you the BBC (un)official Devils Advocate in disguise?”
“Are you the BBC (un)official Devils Advocate in disguise?”
Nope (and I am neither sponsored by, or employed by, the BBC), just putting forward what I (and it seems a few others here) see as reasonable explanations.
Quote:
“ One minute you are arguing that the viewers are not pre school children, then next minute apparently we viewers are confused by the terminology "BBC guidelines".”
“ One minute you are arguing that the viewers are not pre school children, then next minute apparently we viewers are confused by the terminology "BBC guidelines".”
Where did I state the bit about confusion with the terminology "BBC guidelines"? I actually indicated that they would question WHAT guidelines (as they are likely to be unaware that such guidelines existed and quite how they related to SCD/CiN). This is exactly what I posted:
Quote:
“Probably leading to even more confusion as people then question "what guidelines?" and "why should those guidelines affect SCD?".”
“Probably leading to even more confusion as people then question "what guidelines?" and "why should those guidelines affect SCD?".”
Being unaware of something and how it relates to a programme is somewhat different from not understanding the terminology, and has little to do with whether you are of pre-school age or older. To assist in that, the announcement (probably on-screen) would have to indicate to the viewer where those guidelines could be viewed - even more "noise" threatening to swamp the main (and important) compenent of the message.
Maybe there is a fine dividing line, and maybe a subjective interpretation means that I am quite possibly seen to be straddling that dividing line.
Quote:
“I, like many if not most regular SCD viewers,”
“I, like many if not most regular SCD viewers,”
That is a BIG assumption when you speak on behalf of most regular SCD viewers
Quote:
“ had assumed the BBC SCD/CIN charity relationship to be extant”
“ had assumed the BBC SCD/CIN charity relationship to be extant”
I have found it rather presumptive (and sometimes risky) to assume the status quo, especially when previous announcements that most are used to hearing over many years (verbal & on-screen) no longer appear AND the cost of the call has mysteriously nearly halved.
In truth, apart from the relatively small number of posters on the forum who appear to have been mistaken in their belief, and perhaps a small group of viewers in general, I don't see it as a big issue, not least as there has not been any obvious public outcry, or massed complaints/questions.
6 of 7
