|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Sky at Night
Decent slot BBC4 1930 - 2000 Thu 10th Oct but for some reason my
recorder didn't pick it up via series link so if you rely on that, don't! Adding it to be recorded doesn't offer the series link option either. Presumably because this is a "special"? Note that the showings on BBC4 are the 30 min not the 20 min version as shown on BBC1 or BBC2. Well at least that is the size of the BBC4 slots in the EPG, even if the episode listings on the BBC website all say 20 min. -- Cheers Dave. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Sky at Night
On 09/10/2013 12:06, Dave Liquorice wrote:
Decent slot BBC4 1930 - 2000 Thu 10th Oct but for some reason my recorder didn't pick it up via series link so if you rely on that, don't! Adding it to be recorded doesn't offer the series link option either. Presumably because this is a "special"? Note that the showings on BBC4 are the 30 min not the 20 min version as shown on BBC1 or BBC2. Well at least that is the size of the BBC4 slots in the EPG, even if the episode listings on the BBC website all say 20 min. Yes, the BBC4 ones are the 30 minute XL version (or should one say the NSBS [Not So Bloody Short] version?) and contain a bit more material which is edited out of the initial late night BBC1 showing. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Sky at Night
In article ,
Rob wrote: Yes, the BBC4 ones are the 30 minute XL version (or should one say the NSBS [Not So Bloody Short] version?) and contain a bit more material which is edited out of the initial late night BBC1 showing. That's the one preceded by the ... Warning: This programme contains scenes of a scientific nature that may upset some viewers -- --------------------------------------+------------------------------------ Mike Brown: mjb[-at-]signal11.org.uk | http://www.signal11.org.uk --- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: --- |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Sky at Night
"Mike" wrote in message
... In article , Rob wrote: Yes, the BBC4 ones are the 30 minute XL version ... and contain a bit more material which is edited out of the initial late night BBC1 showing. That's the one preceded by the ... Warning: This programme contains scenes of a scientific nature that may upset some viewers Hardly. More like: "This programme is one that used to include scenes of a scientific nature." James |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Sky at Night
On 09/10/2013 22:14:01, James Harris wrote:
"Mike" wrote in message ... In article , Rob wrote: Yes, the BBC4 ones are the 30 minute XL version ... and contain a bit more material which is edited out of the initial late night BBC1 showing. That's the one preceded by the ... Warning: This programme contains scenes of a scientific nature that may upset some viewers Hardly. More like: "This programme is one that used to include scenes of a scientific nature." James Yep, dumbing down is the first step on the road to oblivion. In fact on that observation the BBC should have been obliterated long ago :-) -- mick |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Sky at Night
On 10/10/2013 12:36, mick wrote:
On 09/10/2013 22:14:01, James Harris wrote: "Mike" wrote in message ... In article , Rob wrote: Yes, the BBC4 ones are the 30 minute XL version ... and contain a bit more material which is edited out of the initial late night BBC1 showing. That's the one preceded by the ... Warning: This programme contains scenes of a scientific nature that may upset some viewers Hardly. More like: "This programme is one that used to include scenes of a scientific nature." James Yep, dumbing down is the first step on the road to oblivion. In fact on that observation the BBC should have been obliterated long ago :-) Good job you put the smiley. ;o) Looking at the dire 'science' offerings now being shown by the Discovery network and History channel, at least BBC science programs do contain *some* science rather than 'rednecks' bidding on storage lockers or Eric-Von-Fvcking-Daniken appearing on shows like 'Ancient Aliens'.. All TV science is being dumbed down in every Western nation for some reason. Worrying. -- Rob |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Sky at Night
"Rob" wrote in message
... .... Hardly. More like: "This programme is one that used to include scenes of a scientific nature." .... Yep, dumbing down is the first step on the road to oblivion. In fact on that observation the BBC should have been obliterated long ago :-) Good job you put the smiley. ;o) Looking at the dire 'science' offerings now being shown by the Discovery network and History channel, at least BBC science programs do contain *some* science rather than 'rednecks' bidding on storage Agreed - the Beeb has been making excellent programmes for many years and is still doing so. .... 'Ancient Aliens'.. All TV science is being dumbed down in every Western nation for some reason. Worrying. I remember Open University programmes on BBC2 being very grey and staid but carrying real information and being fascinating. You know - really teaching something. Latterly, though, they had become very colourful and musical but were more like introductions to the subjects and didn't go in to any detail. At that point I lost interest in them. It seems there are others who feel the same. James |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Sky at Night
On 16/10/2013 20:00:02, James Harris wrote:
"Rob" wrote in message ... ... Hardly. More like: "This programme is one that used to include scenes of a scientific nature." ... Yep, dumbing down is the first step on the road to oblivion. In fact on that observation the BBC should have been obliterated long ago :-) Good job you put the smiley. ;o) Looking at the dire 'science' offerings now being shown by the Discovery network and History channel, at least BBC science programs do contain *some* science rather than 'rednecks' bidding on storage Agreed - the Beeb has been making excellent programmes for many years and is still doing so. ... 'Ancient Aliens'.. All TV science is being dumbed down in every Western nation for some reason. Worrying. I remember Open University programmes on BBC2 being very grey and staid but carrying real information and being fascinating. You know - really teaching something. Latterly, though, they had become very colourful and musical but were more like introductions to the subjects and didn't go in to any detail. At that point I lost interest in them. It seems there are others who feel the same. James They still make good programs with quality camera work and access to places where normal people would never get. But why do they seem to treat each program as a beginners guide. I can think, imagine and discuss most things in-depth, but from my experience the BBC seem to pander to the masses whose attention span is limited and will switch off if it is not edu-tainment. For example, Country File is all fragmented reports with the same reminder cropping up three or four times of what is actually being reported. Why can't they do a single report from beginning to end in one go and cut out the repeated reminders. Maybe that would give time to included a more in-depth report or another completely different subject in the same program. -- mick |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Sky at Night
On 16/10/2013 23:56, mick wrote:
On 16/10/2013 20:00:02, James Harris wrote: "Rob" wrote in message ... ... Hardly. More like: "This programme is one that used to include scenes of a scientific nature." ... Yep, dumbing down is the first step on the road to oblivion. In fact on that observation the BBC should have been obliterated long ago :-) Good job you put the smiley. ;o) Looking at the dire 'science' offerings now being shown by the Discovery network and History channel, at least BBC science programs do contain *some* science rather than 'rednecks' bidding on storage Agreed - the Beeb has been making excellent programmes for many years and is still doing so. ... 'Ancient Aliens'.. All TV science is being dumbed down in every Western nation for some reason. Worrying. I remember Open University programmes on BBC2 being very grey and staid but carrying real information and being fascinating. You know - really teaching something. Latterly, though, they had become very colourful and musical but were more like introductions to the subjects and didn't go in to any detail. At that point I lost interest in them. It seems there are others who feel the same. James They still make good programs with quality camera work and access to places where normal people would never get. But why do they seem to treat each program as a beginners guide. I can think, imagine and discuss most things in-depth, but from my experience the BBC seem to pander to the masses whose attention span is limited and will switch off if it is not edu-tainment. For example, Country File is all fragmented reports with the same reminder cropping up three or four times of what is actually being reported. Why can't they do a single report from beginning to end in one go and cut out the repeated reminders. Maybe that would give time to included a more in-depth report or another completely different subject in the same program. What is the fixation about pandering to the ratings? If people switch off they still get the licence revenue. If people zap through ad breaks on commercial TV then tough titty for the advertisers but the TV companies still get the ad revenue |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Sky at Night
"N_Cook" wrote in message
... .... Agreed - the Beeb has been making excellent programmes for many years and is still doing so. .... They still make good programs with quality camera work and access to places where normal people would never get. But why do they seem to treat each program as a beginners guide. I can think, imagine and discuss most things in-depth, but from my experience the BBC seem to pander to the masses whose attention span is limited and will switch off if it is not edu-tainment. For example, Country File is all fragmented reports with the same reminder cropping up three or four times of what is actually being reported. Why can't they do a single report from beginning to end in one go and cut out the repeated reminders. Maybe that would give time to included a more in-depth report or another completely different subject in the same program. What is the fixation about pandering to the ratings? If people switch off they still get the licence revenue. Ratings are probably a way to *justify* the expense of a programme. I suspect the managers also look at filling the schedules with so many hours of each type of programme. So if they had an allocation of hours for science the bean counters might decide to replace less-popular with more-popular. Ratings are a funny guide, though. Remember how often the TV company tried to finish off Star Trek because, at least in the time slot it ran in, it simply wasn't popular enough according to their ratings. Yet over time it has become a series they could repeat multiple times, sell merchandise for, and has led to multiple money-making spin offs. So there was a lot of support for Star Trek but perhaps it was badly managed at the time. Please note, I'm not suggesting there is a call for lots of spin-offs of The Sky at Night! James |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Night Sky | Double-A[_1_] | Misc | 0 | September 25th 07 10:56 AM |
Best night so far... | M | Amateur Astronomy | 4 | March 26th 07 11:43 PM |
Sky @ Night - special ed. last night | Paul Nutteing | UK Astronomy | 7 | July 16th 05 07:32 AM |
Last Night's Sky at Night is repeated tomorrow, very early morning | Malcolm Stewart | UK Astronomy | 0 | December 6th 04 09:57 PM |
The night of 25/26 Feb | Stephen Tonkin | UK Astronomy | 8 | February 27th 04 07:24 PM |