Forum for former BBC staff

Forum for former BBC staff
http://www.ex-bbc.net/cgi-bin/yabb/YaBB.pl >> News and Comment >> Jubilee coverage http://www.ex-bbc.net/cgi-bin/yabb/YaBB.pl?num=1338971015 Message started by david en france on Jun 6^th, 2012, 8:24am

Title: Jubilee coverage
Post by david en france on Jun 6^th, 2012, 8:24am

Perhaps we should have a new header so we can all share our opinions on the Jubilee coverage? My only comment (yet) is that the late and truly great Tom Fleming will be spinning in his grave. I feel sure others will want to discuss sound levels, camera positions and shots, use of celebs, lack of research, etc etc etc.

Title: Re: Jubilee coverage
Post by Administrator on Jun 6^th, 2012, 8:37am

This from The "Today" programme web-site:-

"The Jubilee weekend is over but there is plenty of post-match analysis of the BBC's coverage of the event.
Gillian Reynolds, the Daily Telegraph's radio critic, says she felt "let down" by the BBC's coverage of the Thames River Pageant.
"I couldn't reconcile the beautiful framing of the shots with the words," she told the Today programme.
"I thought - someone's going to tell me what these boats are. And nobody did."
Mark Damazer, former controller of BBC Radio 4, said that the coverage was attempting to be "informal… inclusive and warm".
"The BBC just probably tried too hard," he said."

Meanwhile, Grace Dent of The Independent" has a different take here.

"Don't blame the BBC that we didn't get that wow factor, blame the twonk who planned the flotilla. The flotilla was less "X-Factor final meets Spanish Armada........
.......Back at the flotilla the BBC earned every penny of the licence fee keeping fun afloat. "Look! Some of these boats have hanging baskets on them!" said Huw in tones of pant-scorching glee. What Huw? Someone has managed to visit B&Q and carry a £4 spiderplant onto that floating rust-bucket? Will no one mind my pelvic floor?! Don't blame the BBC. Blame the Establishment Pugwash who dreamed the whole thing up....."

Title: Re: Jubilee coverage
Post by HMG on Jun 6^th, 2012, 8:58am

That comment by Grace Dent is as pathetic as the BBC coverage. After 33 years in the Beeb I was utterly ashamed of the level of the coverage (St Paul's was good) and commentary etc. The real low spot was some squeaky bimbo singer showing me a "SICK BAG" with the Queen's photo on it and telling me it was a "must buy"
I had Sky on the the PC at the time as well and they were showing the pictures of the streets etc which I wanted to see not a SICK BAG with a SICK BLONDE BIMBO :'(

Daily Maily (sorry) coverage sums it up.
Wonder how many bonus' will be paid out?

Title: Re: Jubilee coverage
Post by Amigo on Jun 6^th, 2012, 9:51am

For me, the best programme during the long weekend.......was the HRH Prince Charles' "Home Movie" show.

It was well-shot and the sound balance was excellent (you could hear his off-camera thoughts).

Title: Re: Jubilee coverage
Post by david en france on Jun 6^th, 2012, 11:14am

Well that's started it off.......So here's what I would have wanted from the Pageant: A complete inventory of every boat. Involvment of Regions in filming preparations, boat building, refurbing etc. Human interest stories from every boat. (Must have been hundreds) A complete inventory of buildings etc on the route with detailed history and architectural report. (Did you hear Lambeth Palace mentioned? No, neither did I) Detailed account of the importance of The Thames in commercial, social and historical terms. Detailed breakdown of all Pageant related activity, i.e. the semaphore, the War Horse. Details of all normally-moored boats e.g. HMS Wellington.
A chain of experienced commentators with access to all the above.
Live coverage of Regions on the day. eg The Humber Boat Procession. I bet there were things on the Forth, Clyde, Severn and Mersey too, but you would never have known it.
Would this have cost that much more? I doubt it when you take "Celebs" handouts into account.
If there was one good thing about the St Pauls Service it was the total absence of Celebs (apart from the DG, of course). But even there they kept knocking Naughtie off air in the build-up. We were never shown an Order of Service and subtitles would have been welcomed.
As for Paul Dickenson.....what a dismal performance. "I think the Queen must be enjoying this......." Tom Fleming would deplore the phrase "I think" but I heard it far too often. What I heard was shallow, without detail and fact and delivered without the absolute gravitas that viewers clearly expect. Blame John Birt ! Blame the heads of department who were saying in the 90s "this kind of broadcasting has passed its sell by date" and took Ceremonial off the schedules. But blame the current hierachy most of all for their determined campaign of dumbing-down.

Title: Re: Jubilee coverage
Post by FoxyFace on Jun 6^th, 2012, 12:09pm

Surely less is more where commentary is concerned? Both Tom Fleming and the Dimblebys knew this instinctively.
Audiences are far more sophisticated these days and are happy with periods of silence and reflection as they soak up events, people and comings/goings.
It is rare on TV to see sight of ex-Prime Ministers chatting to Deputy Prime Ministers, lesser known Royal children sitting quietly with their parents or picture coverage of other well known and even unknown ordinary invitees.
Surely most people accept inactivity and dislike being interrupted and told to " pause for a minute" whilst they are then lectured to by a specialist or historian asked crass questions by an uninformed presenter.
ITV's split screen was an excellent idea and Sky's coverage was broadly more focussed.
In summary-pictures brilliant-commentary and presentation- could do better.

Title: Re: Jubilee coverage
Post by Peter_Neill on Jun 6^th, 2012, 7:24pm

I don't think that the DG has been reading the Daily Mail!

This email is going to everyone

Dear all,

This long bank holiday weekend has seen teams from across the BBC come together to cover Her Majesty the Queen’s Diamond Jubilee celebrations on TV, radio and online. Our output has been impressive not only in its scale, but in its ambition, quality and outstanding journalism. By capturing the spectacle of the Thames Pageant and yesterday’s ceremonies alongside smaller local celebrations we reflected reaction from up and down the country. Our role in creating and staging Monday’s incredible Diamond Jubilee concert also meant we made our own contribution to a special moment in our nation’s history. If you missed anything you can watch highlights from the weekend here.

The audience response has been overwhelming with peak audiences of almost 12 million people tuning in for the Pageant, 17 million for the concert and 7.4 million for yesterday’s carriage procession. Overall across the Jubilee weekend 68.5% of the nation watched some of our Diamond Jubilee programming, a stunning figure.

This was a weekend when most British households put understandable cares and anxieties aside and celebrated a moment of national reflection and thanks for the Queen’s lifetime of service and devotion. I am very proud that the BBC was able to bring them together in such a unique and memorable way.

All the best,

Mark Thompson

Director-General

Title: Re: Jubilee coverage
Post by Roundabout on Jun 6^th, 2012, 11:13pm

It looks as if the DG didn't see the Thames broadcast!
Whatever the BBC was attempting to do in the 'informalising' of the events coverage there were so many glaring errors , there was for instance no apparent co-ordination between the commentators and the 'director(s)', the descriptions often being up to minutes out of sync with whatwe were seeing or often pictures cut to something different whilst the commentators were still talking about the subject. And why was there no engineering guidance to stop directors cutting to on board mobiles when the ships in question were just about to pass under a bridge which led to many many losses of picture.
By the way Her Majesty is HER MAJESTY not Her Royal Highness and what happenened to any coverage at all of the floating musicians till they reached Tower Bridge? It's not a matter of 'we didn't do it that way in my day' it's a matter of covering or not covering an event.If you are coverng a procession as full as the Thames Procession you should see it from one place and cut to other items to expand description or cover gaps not rush up and down and in and out of the procession.

Title: Re: Jubilee coverage
Post by HMG on Jun 7^th, 2012, 3:59am

I think Mark Thompson must have been watching Sky (Lucky for him) and of course hasn't read the log or the newspapers or even listened to Today Programme or watched Breakfast, read Torin Douglas' Blog etc etc

Title: Re: Jubilee coverage
Post by Roger Fleming on Jun 7^th, 2012, 9:03am

The best programme over the weekend involving the Queen was
on ITV1 about the Queen's love of horses and her trips overseas
to Canada and the USA, etc., with her visits to rodeos. Also
the parades of horses from all over the Commonwealth at Windsor.
I even put up with Alan Titchmarsh doing the commentary on this one!

Title: Re: Jubilee coverage
Post by Administrator on Jun 7^th, 2012, 9:40pm

Claire Balding is quoted by "The Daily Telegraph" as having said at the Hay Festival:-

“The pageant was going to be done as a much more festive atmosphere because I think they were worried that a camera looking at boats for however many hours might be dull,” she said.
“I think it was done with the best intentions... I don’t think anyone intended to get it wrong. But the public reaction was that it was wrong.

“They were trying to be very adventurous on river pageant day and it misfired for lots of reasons - communications reasons with things not working, weather reasons, all sorts.

“I don’t think it was done out of bad intent. Obviously nobody was intending to make a programme that everyone will hate.”

Balding, a freelance presenter and not a BBC employee, said staff did the best they could but were beset by technical problems.

She explained: “There were cameras on nine boats and we had three working. There was a lot going on that was very, very difficult to deal with. So you do what you can.
“It’s a very difficult thing to cover a big event. You’re trying very hard, everybody in quite a big team is trying very hard to contribute but if you can’t hear people and your camera’s not working, you can’t help.

Title: Re: Jubilee coverage
Post by FoxyFace on Jun 8^th, 2012, 9:23am

Thompson is dis-engaging anyway-it doesn't matter what he says now.

Title: Re: Jubilee coverage
Post by david en france on Jun 8^th, 2012, 4:33pm

"They were worried that people looking at boats....." etc. I like Clare B but is she really being serious here? Any long programme involves looking at something for a long time be it "resplendent scarlet tunics' ( a phrase I banned when I was Senior Events Producer Radio) or athletes in a large arena (sounds like a predicition).....it is the job of the broadcaster to make it interesting enough to keep the audience. She says there were 9 cameras but only a third of them were working? Really? Is this what the Beeb's 70 year record of technical excellence has come to?
It doesn't bode well for the rest of the Summer's great OB's, does it?
Clare Balding was good, so, too, was John Sergeant, strange that they are both mature, experienced broadcasters, isn't it?

Title: Re: Jubilee coverage
Post by Administrator on Jun 9^th, 2012, 12:45pm

In "The Independent" Sebastian Faulks has a view:-

"BBC1 apparently decided its lengthy broadcast (of theDiamond Jubilee flotilla) would come not in the mould of election night but in that of The One Show, its cosy, early-evening magazine. Editors seem to have feared that six hours of watching boats might become dull. It's easy to see in hindsight that the better way to fill the longueurs would have been with more facts – with Kipling's six honest stout serving-men, What and Why and When and How and Where and Who. As Clare Balding, herself part of the broadcast, put it at the Hay Festival: "My belief is always that facts are my friend... And if you ever hear me say, 'The atmosphere here is wonderful' – shoot me." Ms Balding admitted that the coverage of the flotilla had "misfired", and I think we should take her word for it, even if the Monday evening concert was well covered, particularly in the use of helicopter shots to give a sense of place. But there it is. One bad decision, one weak day at the office ...

Only a fool would argue from a single disappointment that the whole of BBC is in some way fatally flawed. However, when tribal politics and business interests are involved, fools abound.......

........so the BBC is in my view the greatest cultural possession this country now has left.

Its importance grows daily, as newspapers lose readers and influence. Without Radio 4, the United Kingdom would, I believe, have a collective nervous breakdown. It is our agora, our parish pump, our water cooler; it exerts a defining and centripetal force on our society. Without its binding coherence, we would be left with the atomised Babel of deregulation, Facebook and "on-demand" streaming, each with our own little headset."

The full article and comments may be found here.

Admin.

Title: Re: Jubilee coverage
Post by HMG on Jun 9^th, 2012, 1:09pm

Reposted from a well respected cameraman from TFS (Ealing Film Studios) on the TFS website

I appear to have started this debate on Blue book and its 0400 sparrows and I cant sleep, I had better take off my grumpy old man hat. Technically the OB crews were magnificent despite the elements, I remember only too well the problems you had in Yorkshire, many moons ago with XLR's in the rain. What it must be like now with blu tooth connections beggars belief. What I have problems with is the use of the subject matter. If HM, or somebody near to her can do research into Elisabeth 1 dress worn many ages ago and use it in the 20th centaury, why cant the directors researchers do the same. I find it difficult to believe that the BBC's lack of it was so blooming obvious. Didn't anybody in authority in production have a running order, doesn't anybody know semaphore signals, The War Horse was obvious, where was the music in relation to the churches and buildings?. What about the history of buildings and boats. I can go on making cheep jokes about the presenters and perceived role or lack of it, there certainly was a butch presence on the rowing barge, and camp in the campanology one, one can go on and on about the inane and trivial treatment of this wonderful event.

Both you and Mary explain in some detail the reasons as to why it was such an abject failure, but the fault goes far deeper, and it is probably a generation thing, the target audience, the young,? wanted, immediate gratification, not knowledge. There appeared to nobody in charge with sufficient gravitas to overrule the "keep it sharp brigade" so beloved by daytime TV. From what I saw the other channels were not much better in both the approach and content matter.

What sticks in the craw is the self belief that the BBC were right, and it was a magnificent OB, it wasn't, and the DG was so wrong in his self congratulatory massif to staff. The BBC doesn't deserve the license fee any more, it wastes it rather than using it program making. To be told that it is cheaper to bring back a programme to London rather than host it In Salford makes one wonder about the cost of train fares , hire cars, flights to Salford, let alone the relocation costs of staff, Our money is not being well spent.

We used to keep our family problems" in house" in the past, this should be blasted from the roof tops and the senior management should be embarrassed by the reaction to their ex staff, anybody

Title: Re: Jubilee coverage
Post by Administrator on Jun 9^th, 2012, 5:17pm

And then, with a tongue in cheek..

From The Media Blog.

"Has it not crossed you mind that actually the 2,400 complaints you initially received equated to little more than 0.015 per cent of the viewing audience?.....

..Finally, I would like to say, thank goodness for the Daily Mail and The Telegraph who have been a rock through all this scandal, ensuring people such as myself who missed the coverage completely were kept informed as to which bits we were meant to find offensive."

Title: Re: Jubilee coverage
Post by Mikej on Jun 9^th, 2012, 6:33pm

Todays Guardian says the compliants about theJubilee coverage generally have now reached a total of 4,500.
See here:-
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2012/jun/08/bbc-diamond-jubilee-coverage-complaints
If this link is too long for you to see, go here and follow the menus:-
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media

Mike

Title: Re: Jubilee coverage
Post by Administrator on Jun 10^th, 2012, 7:32am

"Yougov / Sunday Times" poll.

Page 9 refers to "The BBC" and the coverage.

It may be found here.

Title: Re: Jubilee coverage
Post by Mikej on Jun 10^th, 2012, 12:44pm

This is going to "Run and Run" and get mixed up with the new DG choice.

See more here:-
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2012/jun/10/bbc-director-general-jubilee-coverage

And Henry Porter's comments in The Observer asking;

The BBC belongs to us. Yet we are kept in the dark about its new leader

View it here:-

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/jun/10/henry-porter-new-bbc-director-general

Mike

Title: Re: Jubilee coverage
Post by Administrator on Jun 10^th, 2012, 9:43pm

Torin Douglas (BBC Media Correspondent) writes on the BBC web-site:-

"As interviews begin for one of the biggest jobs in public life, the candidates must surely expect to be asked what they thought of the Diamond Jubilee coverage as a whole - and the river pageant in particular - and how well the BBC responded to its critics?"

Title: Re: Jubilee coverage
Post by Administrator on Jun 19^th, 2012, 8:12pm

BBC News web-site has a statement by the DG.

"BBC Director General Mark Thompson has told MPs that the corporation has "lessons to learn" from its coverage of the Queen's Diamond Jubilee........

Mr Thompson told MPs that bad weather and technical difficulties had hampered the coverage.

"The weather had the specific effect of making communications between our cameras very difficult," he said.

"We lost most of our cameras for a period on the boats and some of our cameras on dry land as well, and that meant in the middle of the coverage we were spending a bit less time on the river covering the event and a bit more time away from the river than we would have liked."

He then added..

"Asked when he expected to leave the BBC, Mr Thompson said "I would hope the handover would happen sooner rather than later," suggesting September would be the earliest possible date."

Title: Re: Jubilee coverage
Post by Roundabout on Jun 20^th, 2012, 8:02am

A feeble excuse using the technicalities , On an operation of this size and historical significance any really organised Senior Producer would have had a fall back set up of some land based cameras and a commentator so that at least the procession could have been seen from one viewpoint, in fact the lack of that was one of the great weaknesses of the coverage.
The BBC has always blamed 'technical difficulties' as an excuse for production inadequacies as any ex-engineer will verify.

Title: Re: Jubilee coverage
Post by Mikej on Jun 20^th, 2012, 11:21am

More comments on Daily Mail

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2161942/Rain-blame-poor-Diamond-Jubilee-coverage-BBC-chief-tells-MPs-4-500-complaints.html

Agree that lack of working equipment (what ACTUALLY didn't work?) is not an excuse for poor production and commemtary

Mike

Title: Re: Jubilee coverage
Post by david en france on Jun 21^st, 2012, 11:04am

As a strictly radio person in my time at the Beeb, it seemed to me that one of the failings of the processions and the Pageant was that there were too many very brief ultra-close-up shots and too few wide and longer duration shots. Would someone from TV confirm my theory that this is because TV producers were hoping to use HDV to get revealing facials (i.e. HMQ scowling, HRH picking his nose) rather than conveying the bigger
story? Also there seemed to be far too many cameras? If you have a recording, look at the Procession from Westminster, as an example. If I am right then it is a trend I hope will soon be reversed.

Title: Re: Jubilee coverage
Post by Roundabout on Jun 22^nd, 2012, 6:49am

David you are quite right. when cameras were very big and heavy and there were only four available to a scanner the producers had to actually survey the area and decide where to place them to get best coverage. Now there are dozens of lightweight shaky cameras pointing in all directions and the schoolboy directors seem to cut randomly between them hoping not to miss anything and just using them as source material for over edited highlights which can be set to beat music using flashing visual transitions. .........or am I just getting to my Victor Meldrum stage if life?

Title: Re: Jubilee coverage
Post by Mikej on Jun 23^rd, 2012, 11:31am

Some years ago when I was involved in the Communications planning for a possible Royal Event going from central London to Windsor, we surveyed loads of possible camera sites all along the A4 to provide "continuous coverage".
So one had single camera positions at Hyde Park Corner, Knightsbridge, Earls Court, Hammersmith, Hogarth Roundabout - to name just a few
However, shortly after, with a chance in thoughts, it was realised that it was far far better to have fewer groups of several cameras so the scene could be established beforehand, the whole procession shown arriving and leaving and still have a camera to do close-ups at the relevant point.
All this seems to have been forgotten now and so a very "thin" continuous coverage is provided with no "establishing shots" and minimal production skills (or scanners) required at intermediate sites to give lots of interesting views.
I suppose it is "production efficient" to bring everything to one site and do simple continuous single camera shots.

Ah well - plus ca change!

Mike