There are some odd decisions being made of late and this and the four week
delay in Inside Science podcasts are but two of them.
BBC 3 it seems nobody was watching before when it was on direct to air,
they never watched it online or I suspect now its back on air again. Most
of its shows would fit into some holes in the other bbc channels schedules
in any case. Since TV in general has gone down the inane and infantile route
anyway, nobody would be any the wiser. Indeed ITV are producing better
dramas these days.
Also on another tack, is anyone really upset that Neighbours will cease
production soon in OZ?
In my view most soaps are now past their sell by date by quite a way.
Brian

--

This newsgroup posting comes to you directly from...
The Sofa of Brian Gaff...
briang1@blueyonder.co.uk
Blind user, so no pictures please
Note this Signature is meaningless.!

On 04/03/2022 08:23, Brian Gaff (Sofa) wrote:

> BBC 3 it seems nobody was watching before when it was on direct to air,
> they never watched it online or I suspect now its back on air again.

Can you blame them? From the intrusive adverts on other BBC channels It
looks absolutely dire, as it always did of course.

> Most
> of its shows would fit into some holes in the other bbc channels schedules
> in any case.

Please, no! Let it not infest the others, but isolate it from all
interaction with the outside world until hopefully it just dies.

> Since TV in general has gone down the inane and infantile route
> anyway, nobody would be any the wiser.

Just watch out for when BBC3's adherents run the country, whose time
will surely come. We rightly moan about millennials who run it now but
we ain't seen nothing yet.

More Dragrace anyone?

On 04/03/2022 08:48, Norman Wells wrote:
> Can you blame them? From the intrusive adverts on other BBC channels It
> looks absolutely dire, as it always did of course.

Do you think they should not promote their own programmes?

Not as intrusive and annoying as the ones on commercial channels.

On 04/03/2022 09:03, MB wrote:
> On 04/03/2022 08:48, Norman Wells wrote:
>> Can you blame them?  From the intrusive adverts on other BBC channels It
>> looks absolutely dire, as it always did of course.
>
> Do you think they should not promote their own programmes?
>
> Not as intrusive and annoying as the ones on commercial channels.
>
A 30 second promotion is called an advert if it's paid for, and a promo
if it's not.
I find them equally intrusive.

I've seen BBC promos at the cinema, (where they are adverts of course)

"Mark Carver" <mark.carver@invalid.invalid> wrote in message
news:j8e3afF29ivU1@mid.individual.net...
> On 04/03/2022 09:03, MB wrote:
>> On 04/03/2022 08:48, Norman Wells wrote:
>>> Can you blame them? From the intrusive adverts on other BBC channels It
>>> looks absolutely dire, as it always did of course.
>>
>> Do you think they should not promote their own programmes?
>>
>> Not as intrusive and annoying as the ones on commercial channels.
>>
> A 30 second promotion is called an advert if it's paid for, and a promo if
> it's not.
> I find them equally intrusive.

Well said. It's like the difference between spam (advert for legitimate
company) and scam (advert for a fraudulent venture). They are equally
annoying when they turn up in your email inbox, your text message inbox, by
phone, through your letterbox, or (in the case of religious spammers) via
knock at the door.

The real problem with trailers is that even when BBC is running late because
it has prioritised sport ahead of a scheduled programme, it *still* runs all
its trailers (you almost get the impression that find a few extra ones!)
instead of ditching them to try and claw back a few minutes to get back on
schedule. My impression (and I could be wrong) is that ITV, while it keeps
the adverts which pay the bills, seems more inclined to drop trailers if
there is an overrunning programme.

On 04/03/2022 09:03, MB wrote:
> On 04/03/2022 08:48, Norman Wells wrote:
>> Can you blame them?  From the intrusive adverts on other BBC channels It
>> looks absolutely dire, as it always did of course.
>
> Do you think they should not promote their own programmes?

It seems rather desperate to be advertising in such quantity to masses
who will never watch it anyway.

I thought we paid our licence fee to be free of inane promotion of
things we don't want.

"BBC 3 Why is it back on Freeview?"

Because the BBC are obsessed with the youth market. It seems they want
to alienate the audience they already have, by putting a
disproportionate share of their budget into an almost certainly doomed
chase of an audience that prefers to get its entertainment online.
--
John Hall
"Home is heaven and orgies are vile,
But you *need* an orgy, once in a while."
Ogden Nash (1902-1971)

NY <me@privacy.invalid> wrote:
> "Mark Carver" <mark.carver@invalid.invalid> wrote in message
> news:j8e3afF29ivU1@mid.individual.net...
>> On 04/03/2022 09:03, MB wrote:
>>> On 04/03/2022 08:48, Norman Wells wrote:
>>>> Can you blame them? From the intrusive adverts on other BBC channels It
>>>> looks absolutely dire, as it always did of course.
>>>
>>> Do you think they should not promote their own programmes?
>>>
>>> Not as intrusive and annoying as the ones on commercial channels.
>>>
>> A 30 second promotion is called an advert if it's paid for, and a promo if
>> it's not.
>> I find them equally intrusive.
>
> Well said. It's like the difference between spam (advert for legitimate
> company) and scam (advert for a fraudulent venture). They are equally
> annoying when they turn up in your email inbox, your text message inbox, by
> phone, through your letterbox, or (in the case of religious spammers) via
> knock at the door.
>
> The real problem with trailers is that even when BBC is running late because
> it has prioritised sport ahead of a scheduled programme, it *still* runs all
> its trailers (you almost get the impression that find a few extra ones!)
> instead of ditching them to try and claw back a few minutes to get back on
> schedule. My impression (and I could be wrong) is that ITV, while it keeps
> the adverts which pay the bills, seems more inclined to drop trailers if
> there is an overrunning programme.
>
>

You don’t get BBC promos in the middle of programmes. There’s absolutely no
comparison between the disruptive effect of adverts vs trailers.

On 04/03/2022 11:19, Tweed wrote:
> You don’t get BBC promos in the middle of programmes.
You do. During Breakfast News, in fact all the time on the News Channel,
at half time during football and rugby matches, during tennis match
breaks etc etc....

I have concluded that the only reason BBC3 is back on air is the BBC's
desire to be seen to be "inclusive". So that includes programmes
specifically made for the pre-20s, and, of course, those of non-binary
and related diverse interests. If there is an audience who watches
Freeview for those programmes, fine. But if not, and they are generally
streamed, then why are they on Freeview?

As to the demise of "Neighbours", it was mentioned on local radio this
morning that there was evidently a petition to keep it going, signed by
600,000 and which was sent to Channel 5. Obviously, though, with no
success. Perhaps there is a bigger audience for "RuPaul's Drag Race Down
Under"? Or perhaps not...

Soaps aren't for me, but I understand EastEnders and Coronation Street
still command very large audiences. In that case, they should be on the
schedules, and at prime time.

--

Jeff

On 04/03/2022 08:23, Brian Gaff (Sofa) wrote:
> There are some odd decisions being made of late and this and the four week
> delay in Inside Science podcasts are but two of them.
> BBC 3 it seems nobody was watching before when it was on direct to air,
> they never watched it online or I suspect now its back on air again. Most
> of its shows would fit into some holes in the other bbc channels schedules
> in any case. Since TV in general has gone down the inane and infantile route
> anyway, nobody would be any the wiser. Indeed ITV are producing better
> dramas these days.
> Also on another tack, is anyone really upset that Neighbours will cease
> production soon in OZ?
> In my view most soaps are now past their sell by date by quite a way.
> Brian
>

On 04/03/2022 11:19, Tweed wrote:

>> The real problem with trailers is that even when BBC is running late because
>> it has prioritised sport ahead of a scheduled programme, it *still* runs all
>> its trailers (you almost get the impression that find a few extra ones!)
>> instead of ditching them to try and claw back a few minutes to get back on
>> schedule. My impression (and I could be wrong) is that ITV, while it keeps
>> the adverts which pay the bills, seems more inclined to drop trailers if
>> there is an overrunning programme.
>>
> You don’t get BBC promos in the middle of programmes. There’s absolutely no
> comparison between the disruptive effect of adverts vs trailers.

You get them over the credits, which is even worse, especially when you
are trying to identify an actor who has appeared in the programme.

--

Jeff

On 04/03/2022 11:19, Tweed wrote:
> You don’t get BBC promos in the middle of programmes. There’s absolutely no
> comparison between the disruptive effect of adverts vs trailers.

Also I have often, even with promotions, had people moan that they did
not know a programme was on - some seem to expect the DG to personally
ring them all to tell them :-)

On 04/03/2022 11:22, Mark Carver wrote:
> You do. During Breakfast News, in fact all the time on the News Channel,
> at half time during football and rugby matches, during tennis match
> breaks etc etc....

Aren't many on BBC News to allow other channels to join or leave them, I
expect some are to allow the presenters to be switched around.

MB <MB@nospam.net> wrote:
> On 04/03/2022 11:22, Mark Carver wrote:
>> You do. During Breakfast News, in fact all the time on the News Channel,
>> at half time during football and rugby matches, during tennis match
>> breaks etc etc....
>
> Aren't many on BBC News to allow other channels to join or leave them, I
> expect some are to allow the presenters to be switched around.
>
>

I thought also the news channel promos were to allow advert insertion into
the overseas feeds.

"Tweed" <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:svssj3$que$1@dont-email.me...
>> The real problem with trailers is that even when BBC is running late
>> because
>> it has prioritised sport ahead of a scheduled programme, it *still* runs
>> all
>> its trailers (you almost get the impression that find a few extra ones!)
>> instead of ditching them to try and claw back a few minutes to get back
>> on
>> schedule. My impression (and I could be wrong) is that ITV, while it
>> keeps
>> the adverts which pay the bills, seems more inclined to drop trailers if
>> there is an overrunning programme.
>
> You don’t get BBC promos in the middle of programmes. There’s absolutely
> no
> comparison between the disruptive effect of adverts vs trailers.

When they occur, adverts and trailers are disruptive, particularly if
trailer, continuity or advert occurs too soon after (or even during the
end-credits of) a programme that has been very moving and needs a period of
contemplative wind-down. But I agree that there are fewer occasions when BBC
run continuity and trailers than when ITV run those plus adverts.

In article <svsi9d$38i$1@dont-email.me>, Brian Gaff \(Sofa\)
<briang1@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
> There are some odd decisions being made of late and this and the four
> week delay in Inside Science podcasts are but two of them.

AIUI The 'Inside Science' delay is for the sheduled radio *broadcast* on
FM, etc. The idea seems to give podcasting an 'advantage'. Whereas in
reality what it does is *disadvantage* conventional radio listeners.

Utterly bonkers!

Jim

--
Please use the address on the audiomisc page if you wish to email me.
Electronics https://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scots_Guide/intro/electron.htm
biog http://jcgl.orpheusweb.co.uk/history/ups_and_downs.html
Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html

On 04/03/2022 10:07, Jim Lesurf wrote:
> In article <svsi9d$38i$1@dont-email.me>, Brian Gaff \(Sofa\)
> <briang1@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:

>> There are some odd decisions being made of late and this and the four
>> week delay in Inside Science podcasts are but two of them.
>
> AIUI The 'Inside Science' delay is for the sheduled radio *broadcast* on
> FM, etc. The idea seems to give podcasting an 'advantage'. Whereas in
> reality what it does is *disadvantage* conventional radio listeners.

Actually the delay only applies to podcasts through a third party
podcatcher (like Podcast Addict), and the ability to download the MP3
from the programme website. They are still broadcasting the programme as
scheduled on Radio 4, in fact I have just recorded it from Freeview on
my Humax.

You can stream the programme now from the BBC website or the Sounds app.
You can also download it on the app (for offline playing), but it
doesn't tell you where it is on your device.

--
Max Demian

On 04/03/2022 08:23 am, Brian Gaff (Sofa) wrote:

> There are some odd decisions being made of late and this and the four week
> delay in Inside Science podcasts are but two of them.
> BBC 3 it seems nobody was watching before when it was on direct to air,
> they never watched it online or I suspect now its back on air again. Most
> of its shows would fit into some holes in the other bbc channels schedules
> in any case. Since TV in general has gone down the inane and infantile route
> anyway, nobody would be any the wiser. Indeed ITV are producing better
> dramas these days.
> Also on another tack, is anyone really upset that Neighbours will cease
> production soon in OZ?
> In my view most soaps are now past their sell by date by quite a way.
> Brian

At least it proves that the BBC are not credible or truthful when they
complain about lack of money.

There is clearly scope for a reduction in the annual BBC Tax every year
between now and the end of the corporation's charter.

On 04/03/2022 11:33, Jeff Layman wrote:

> As to the demise of "Neighbours", it was mentioned on local radio this
> morning that there was evidently a petition to keep it going, signed by
> 600,000 and which was sent to Channel 5. Obviously, though, with no
> success.

It was going to die when the BBC dropped it and only saved when Ch5
carried on airing it, to a falling audience. The Aussie soap was only
viable with UK cash.

I seem to remember it "jumping the shark" when too many of the
(fictional) cast fully recovered from fatal or degenerative illnesses.

--
mailto : news {at} admac {dot} myzen {dot} co {dot} uk

Well at least drag race is sometimes funny, but I have no idea what I was
watching the other night as after 10 minutes, apart from some swearing and
concerned vox pops about not a lot it was impenetrable. I guess its my age.
Could anyone actually say who is watching this channel?

I find more and more drawn to Drama, Yesterday and ITV 3 these days to catch
up on older stuff. Most of the old BBC stuff like Horizon are not about,
Documentaries from the bbc are either inaccurate biased or full of music.

Its a great shame that the BBC seem to have flogged off their old good
stuff to a commercial channel for re runs.

Brian

--

This newsgroup posting comes to you directly from...
The Sofa of Brian Gaff...
briang1@blueyonder.co.uk
Blind user, so no pictures please
Note this Signature is meaningless.!
"Norman Wells" <hex@unseen.ac.am> wrote in message
news:j8e23hF23f2U1@mid.individual.net...
> On 04/03/2022 08:23, Brian Gaff (Sofa) wrote:
>
>> BBC 3 it seems nobody was watching before when it was on direct to air,
>> they never watched it online or I suspect now its back on air again.
>
> Can you blame them? From the intrusive adverts on other BBC channels It
> looks absolutely dire, as it always did of course.
>
>> Most
>> of its shows would fit into some holes in the other bbc channels
>> schedules
>> in any case.
>
> Please, no! Let it not infest the others, but isolate it from all
> interaction with the outside world until hopefully it just dies.
>
>> Since TV in general has gone down the inane and infantile route
>> anyway, nobody would be any the wiser.
>
> Just watch out for when BBC3's adherents run the country, whose time will
> surely come. We rightly moan about millennials who run it now but we
> ain't seen nothing yet.
>
> More Dragrace anyone?

Oh really? At least a lot of the trails for commercial shows contain Audio
description, whereas the bbc often just have snatches of unrelated bits
making me get very bemused over the shows. To really sell a show, you need
some context to what the trail is showing. There are obviously no good
trailer makers at the Beeb any more.
Brian

--

This newsgroup posting comes to you directly from...
The Sofa of Brian Gaff...
briang1@blueyonder.co.uk
Blind user, so no pictures please
Note this Signature is meaningless.!
"MB" <MB@nospam.net> wrote in message news:svskl0$lnh$1@dont-email.me...
> On 04/03/2022 08:48, Norman Wells wrote:
>> Can you blame them? From the intrusive adverts on other BBC channels It
>> looks absolutely dire, as it always did of course.
>
> Do you think they should not promote their own programmes?
>
> Not as intrusive and annoying as the ones on commercial channels.
>

Incidentally two days ago More 4 seemed to vanish. Is this a casualty of
trying to cram in more to fewer bandwidth, or has my set forgotten it?
Brian

--

This newsgroup posting comes to you directly from...
The Sofa of Brian Gaff...
briang1@blueyonder.co.uk
Blind user, so no pictures please
Note this Signature is meaningless.!
"Mark Carver" <mark.carver@invalid.invalid> wrote in message
news:j8e3afF29ivU1@mid.individual.net...
> On 04/03/2022 09:03, MB wrote:
>> On 04/03/2022 08:48, Norman Wells wrote:
>>> Can you blame them? From the intrusive adverts on other BBC channels It
>>> looks absolutely dire, as it always did of course.
>>
>> Do you think they should not promote their own programmes?
>>
>> Not as intrusive and annoying as the ones on commercial channels.
>>
> A 30 second promotion is called an advert if it's paid for, and a promo if
> it's not.
> I find them equally intrusive.
>
> I've seen BBC promos at the cinema, (where they are adverts of course)

Tee hee, Its pretty inoffensive though compared to Eastenders, which does
seem to be based in a world which is far more dangerous and more full of
idiots criminals and goodness knows what else than we live in. If I lived in
Albert Square I'd get out as soon as possible. At least Neighbours is
somehow more palatable, something I never thought I'd say about a TV show
from Australia.

Brian

--

This newsgroup posting comes to you directly from...
The Sofa of Brian Gaff...
briang1@blueyonder.co.uk
Blind user, so no pictures please
Note this Signature is meaningless.!
"alan_m" <junk@admac.myzen.co.uk> wrote in message
news:j8gnjvFhlu2U1@mid.individual.net...
> On 04/03/2022 11:33, Jeff Layman wrote:
>
>> As to the demise of "Neighbours", it was mentioned on local radio this
>> morning that there was evidently a petition to keep it going, signed by
>> 600,000 and which was sent to Channel 5. Obviously, though, with no
>> success.
>
> It was going to die when the BBC dropped it and only saved when Ch5
> carried on airing it, to a falling audience. The Aussie soap was only
> viable with UK cash.
>
> I seem to remember it "jumping the shark" when too many of the (fictional)
> cast fully recovered from fatal or degenerative illnesses.
>
> --
> mailto : news {at} admac {dot} myzen {dot} co {dot} uk

Brian Gaff (Sofa) wrote:

> two days ago More 4 seemed to vanish

More4 and More4+1 still on FTA sat, looks like More4HD is sky-only?

On 05/03/2022 09:58, Brian Gaff (Sofa) wrote:
> Tee hee, Its pretty inoffensive though compared to Eastenders, which does
> seem to be based in a world which is far more dangerous and more full of
> idiots criminals and goodness knows what else than we live in. If I lived in
> Albert Square I'd get out as soon as possible. At least Neighbours is
> somehow more palatable, something I never thought I'd say about a TV show
> from Australia.

I have never watched any of them but just sounds as if Neighbours
follows in the tradition of Crossroads!