AlanHo Posted May 26, 2008 Author Report Share Posted May 26, 2008 That's exactly why we only have four channels (can't get 5) and don't watch much TV at all, with the exception of 'Springwatch', which starts tonight, and one or two others suitable for wrinklies B)Suitable programmes being'til death us do partWaiting for GodLast of the Summer WineWeakest LinkReady-Steady...........CookHave I Got News for YouSex and the SetteeCountdownetc. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andsome Posted May 26, 2008 Report Share Posted May 26, 2008 I am still trying to fathom out why on earth we have taken part in such rubbish for the last twenty years, and why on earth anyone watches it at all. Together with the constant make over programmes, reality programmes, build this and build that, repair this repair that, buy a house here, buy a house there programmes, and constant repeats, sometimes after only a couple of days, British TV is now plumbing the depths.So you have identified the problem - but what is your recommendation?Unfortunately - programme makers cater for popular taste - and the majority of the population do not share the tastes of us wrinklies. We can recall the time when there was only one channel - and that was only on for a few hours a day. Thus talent was concentrated in just a few hours. Today there are hundrds of channels and there does not exist the talent or money to fill them with quality programmes. Hence low budget, low quality, low taste programming to appeal to the masses with lots of repeats.The BBC are spending licence payers money, and there is no reason why we should have so much crap broadcast. The lower tastes should not be receiving the lions share of this money just by virtue of the fact that unfortunately they are a majority. ALL who pay their money should receive a fair share. There are many such minority tastes which those of us on here do not share, but nevertheless these tastes should all get a fair share. One thing which does annoy me is the money spent on screening premiership football. This is one instance where the vast majority of people watch teams in the lower divisions, but rarely if ever do they get a chance to see their team on TV. These house programmes must cost a lot of money paying for expensive trips abroad for those seeking a property, plus the presenters plus the camera recording crews. Surely one such programme a week is more than enough. Why these constant repeats, sometimes after only a couple of days? Surely it is not beyond the capabilities of producers who are paid damned good salaries to come up with more low cost interesting programmes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rong Posted May 26, 2008 Report Share Posted May 26, 2008 The lower tastes should not be receiving the lions share of this money just by virtue of the fact that unfortunately they are a majority. ALL who pay their money should receive a fair share.Do you not contradict yourself here . I think I agree about the football though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andsome Posted May 26, 2008 Report Share Posted May 26, 2008 The lower tastes should not be receiving the lions share of this money just by virtue of the fact that unfortunately they are a majority. ALL who pay their money should receive a fair share.Do you not contradict yourself here . I think I agree about the football though.I don't think so. If you read what I posted, I said that ALL tastes shoud receive a fair share for their licence money. :D Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
catgate Posted May 26, 2008 Report Share Posted May 26, 2008 Could it not be that the whole thing comes down, as so much does these days, to advertising. Over 90% of broadcasting (both sound and vision) is paid for by advertising. He who pays the piper calls the tune. The "Norm" is set these days by the commercial stations, and the BBC just follow suite with what money they have left, after following government policy. The commercial stations are there basically to make money...not programmes, whereas in the "good old days", of BBC only, their sole purpose was to make interesting quality programmes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rong Posted May 26, 2008 Report Share Posted May 26, 2008 Could it not be that the whole thing comes down, as so much does these days, to advertising. Over 90% of broadcasting (both sound and vision) is paid for by advertising. He who pays the piper calls the tune. The "Norm" is set these days by the commercial stations, and the BBC just follow suite with what money they have left, after following government policy. The commercial stations are there basically to make money...not programmes, whereas in the "good old days", of BBC only, their sole purpose was to make interesting quality programmes.These interesting quality programmes, where only interesting quality programmes, if you where interested the same as they are now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Watchful Posted May 26, 2008 Report Share Posted May 26, 2008 That's exactly why we only have four channels (can't get 5) and don't watch much TV at all, with the exception of 'Springwatch', which starts tonight, and one or two others suitable for wrinklies B)Suitable programmes being:'til death us do part - not anymoreWaiting for GodLast of the Summer WineWeakest Link - can't stand the botoxed redheadReady-Steady...........CookHave I Got News for YouSex and the Settee - never 'eard of it :D Countdownetc. add to this, historical dramas, political shows (comedy), and detective series. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CurlyWhirly Posted May 26, 2008 Report Share Posted May 26, 2008 I am still trying to fathom out why on earth we have taken part in such rubbish for the last twenty yearsIt wouldn't be so bad if the BBC wasn't helping to fund it though.and why on earth anyone watches it at all.Years ago it used to be quite enjoyable and was a joy to watch (like when ABBA won it with their song 'Waterloo') but now it's just too political hence the reason why I haven't watched it for a number of years. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
catgate Posted May 26, 2008 Report Share Posted May 26, 2008 All TV is there simply to fill in, as cheaply as possible, the space between adverts....even the beeb. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gandalph Posted May 26, 2008 Report Share Posted May 26, 2008 On a better note, we will go Digital here in the Borders on 6th Nov. At least we will be able to watch better quality rubbish. :lol: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Irene Posted May 26, 2008 Report Share Posted May 26, 2008 On a better note, we will go Digital here in the Borders on 6th Nov. At least we will be able to watch better quality rubbish. :lol:You'll be able to watch 'my rubbish' if Chris manages to sort the video lift out. :lol: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gandalph Posted May 26, 2008 Report Share Posted May 26, 2008 On a better note, we will go Digital here in the Borders on 6th Nov. At least we will be able to watch better quality rubbish. :lol:You'll be able to watch 'my rubbish' if Chris manages to sort the video lift out. :lol:How could such a wonderful Ladie as yourself have rubbish My Little Rose Bud. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
catgate Posted May 26, 2008 Report Share Posted May 26, 2008 On a better note, we will go Digital here in the Borders on 6th Nov. At least we will be able to watch better quality rubbish. :lol:I'm sure you mean the same rubbish but with better quality reproduction, although mentioning "reproduction" on WF might not be acceptable to Mary Whitehouse. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Watchful Posted May 26, 2008 Report Share Posted May 26, 2008 Mary Whitehouse knew a thing or two :D Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gandalph Posted May 26, 2008 Report Share Posted May 26, 2008 Mary Whitehouse knew a thing or two :DYou should keep that part of your life quiet Watchful. There's no need to let Mary Whitehouse know about it. :lol: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Watchful Posted May 27, 2008 Report Share Posted May 27, 2008 Mary Whitehouse knew a thing or two :DYou should keep that part of your life quiet Watchful. There's no need to let Mary Whitehouse know about it. :lol: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
artist Posted May 27, 2008 Report Share Posted May 27, 2008 How could such a wonderful Ladie as yourself have rubbish My Little Rose Bud. Purleease.............!!!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gandalph Posted May 27, 2008 Report Share Posted May 27, 2008 How could such a wonderful Ladie as yourself have rubbish My Little Rose Bud. Purleease.............!!!!! You're only jealous artist. :D Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Irene Posted May 27, 2008 Report Share Posted May 27, 2008 How could such a wonderful Ladie as yourself have rubbish My Little Rose Bud. Purleease.............!!!!! You're only jealous artist. :D Prrrrrrrrr..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
artist Posted May 28, 2008 Report Share Posted May 28, 2008 How could such a wonderful Ladie as yourself have rubbish My Little Rose Bud. Purleease.............!!!!! You're only jealous artist. :DI might be................................ :D :D :D Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.