Religion and Ethics Forum
General Category => Politics & Current Affairs => Topic started by: Steve H on April 09, 2021, 12:12:02 PM
-
https://metro.co.uk/2021/04/09/prince-philip-dead-duke-of-edinburgh-dies-aged-99-7740354/
He's done a Grace. She was an old dear at my church who died in 2019, a few months short of her 100th birthday.
-
https://metro.co.uk/2021/04/09/prince-philip-dead-duke-of-edinburgh-dies-aged-99-7740354/
He's done a Grace. She was an old dear at my church who died in 2019, a few months short of her 100th birthday.
Disgracefully shallow and unstatesmanly performance from our ''looks like a sack of shit tied up in the middle'', scruffy PM.
-
So half the press officers in the land will have switched their laptops off, and said 'That's me for the day', and the other half will be running around trying to find some bad news to put out.
-
Disgracefully shallow and unstatesmanly performance from our ''looks like a sack of shit tied up in the middle'', scruffy PM.
What's he done?
Tony Blair did his reputation a bit of good when Diana handed in her diner-pail in '97, with a surprisingly moving off-the-cuff comment. I can't imaging Boris doing the same - "Cripes! Old Phil's gone and snuffed it! Time for Bojo to apply the old comb to the barnet, get out the black tie, and look sad! Carrie - find me a black tie, there's a good girl!"
-
Not entirely sure why BBC1 and BBC2 are showing the same programme of news about it.
-
And it's on all BBC radio channels. It's also grating the number of times I am being told how I feel about it.
-
You'd better get used to it - we're going to have weeks and weeks of fawning bollocks in all media.
I wonder how they'll manage the funeral? Normally, it'd be heads of state and government packing the Abbey to the gunwales, but with Covid, they won't be able to do that.
-
Old man dies - how unusual is that then!
Thank goodness for cable TV, Netflix and Prime video over the next few days - and this afternoons horse racing is, thankfully, unaffected.
-
I can recall the old duffer speaking to a CofS Science, religion and technonology seminar about conserving endangered species...a laudavle speech.
He spoiled it by going back to Balmoral and blasting everything in sight with the possible exception of Chairlie.
-
You'd better get used to it - we're going to have weeks and weeks of fawning bollocks in all media.
I wonder how they'll manage the funeral? Normally, it'd be heads of state and government packing the Abbey to the gunwales, but with Covid, they won't be able to do that.
Some details here
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/operation-forth-bridge-what-happens-after-death-of-prince-philip/ar-BB1fsZzc
-
and he was only weeks away from receiving a telegram from the Queen.
-
First daft comment on the death of Prince Phiilip. One minute silence observed at Aintree but the racehorses were still being lead around to limber up. One snorted and the commentator on Sky News said "and the horses obviously unaware"
-
And it's on all BBC radio channels. It's also grating the number of times I am being told how I feel about it.
I could understand one BBC channel .. but this is ridiculous...
-
I could understand one BBC channel .. but this is ridiculous...
Or even one TV and one radio channel but all of them is just stupid.
BBC - Make A Complaint (https://www.bbc.co.uk/contact/complaints/make-a-complaint/#/Complaint).
-
And speaking of the press coverage, is there any job more facile, pointless and content-free than "royal commentator"?
Radio 4 now reduced to interviewing people who have done the Duke of Edinburgh awards scheme by the way... ::)
-
And speaking of the press coverage, is there any job more facile, pointless and content-free than "royal commentator"?
Radio 4 now reduced to interviewing people who have done the Duke of Edinburgh awards scheme by the way... ::)
I qualify to be interviewed then
-
NS,
I qualify to be interviewed then
I'll find you their number then (surprised they haven't found yours already tbh). Be careful though – there seems to be a clause that all interviewees must use the word "extraordinary" at least twice.
-
NS,
I'll find you their number then (surprised they haven't found yours already tbh). Be careful though – there seems to be a clause that all interviewees must use the word "extraordinary" at least twice.
I ticked the No Publicity box when I did the award
-
The OTT reaction on BBC/STV/C4/News channels is plain silly now, as is the implied presumption that we are all greatly affected by the death of this old man.
It seems like a strange take on Parkinson's Law, where what we are seeing now is mindless sycophancy expanding to fill all the available broadcasting time on certain channels.
-
The OTT reaction on BBC/STV/C4/News channels is plain silly now, as is the implied presumption that we are all greatly affected by the death of this old man.
It seems like a strange take on Parkinson's Law, where what we are seeing now is mindless sycophancy expanding to fill all the available broadcasting time on certain channels.
Channel 4 showed mostly their normal programming
-
Channel 4 showed mostly their normal programming
Yes you're right about C4, and they've now been criticised for not wholly abandoning their planned schedule.
https://www.mirror.co.uk/tv/tv-news/channel-4-comes-under-fire-23886285
That the BBC are broadcasting the same feed on BBC1, BBC2, the separate BBC Scotland channel and the BBC news channel does seem excessive, and it seems they are receiving so many complaints they've set up fast track method of complaining.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/contact/death-duke-of-edinburgh-tv-coverage/#/Notification
-
Tweet from one of Channel 4 reps
'Today on Channel 4 we broadcast a 30 minute news special shortly after the Duke of Edinburgh's death was announced; an in-depth obituary at 4pm and there'll be an extended
@Channel4News
at 7. C4 also has a duty to offer an alternative to other channels hence a return to schedule.'
-
Good news for florist's shops.
-
Good news for florist's shops.
sensibly the RF have said give to charity not buy flowers.
-
I don't know why they keep repeating the same programmes over and over again but on the other hand I find historical stuff interesting. Phil actually seems to have had a pretty interesting childhood and life. I quite like him now I know more about him.
-
I don't know why they keep repeating the same programmes over and over again but on the other hand I find historical stuff interesting. Phil actually seems to have had a pretty interesting childhood and life. I quite like him now I know more about him.
Do you 'on the other hand find it interesting' to be repeated multiple times on multiple channels?
-
sensibly the RF have said give to charity not buy flowers.
True, but they are being ignored. The flowers are already being left outside Buck House, apparently.
-
Amazingly, viewing figures were down last night. Most popular programme was Gogglebox
https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/tv/news/prince-philip-death-bbc-ratings-b1829504.html?utm_term=Autofeed&utm_medium=Social&utm_content=Echobox&utm_source=Twitter#Echobox=1618052979
-
I don't know why they keep repeating the same programmes over and over again but on the other hand I find historical stuff interesting. Phil actually seems to have had a pretty interesting childhood and life. I quite like him now I know more about him.
There's a book by Giles Brandreth, published 2004 whose name I can't remember, which gives a much more personal view of the Duke and the Queen and their relationship. I recommend it. He does of course come into Lady Ann Tennant's book, 'Lady in Waiting' and I recommend that too.
-
More comment on the OTT reaction of some channels, and the BBC in particular.
https://www.theguardian.com/media/2021/apr/10/bbc-flooded-with-complaints-over-prince-philip-coverage
-
Do you 'on the other hand find it interesting' to be repeated multiple times on multiple channels?
Um...no. It's a bit of a weird thing to do to keep repeating the same programme on multiple channels. given how many people are ambivalent about the Royal Family. But I was impressed with his tenacity and motivation and sacrifice of his naval career, which he appears to have been good at. I also enjoyed listening to the stories about his politically incorrect jokes.
The comment about slitty eyes is the kind of thing you would hear in Sri Lanka these days, given the huge loans (plus bribes) to the government from China that the government have no chance of repaying, and presence of Chinese workers.
The fuse box that looked "as if it was put in by an Indian" is another funny comment that would probably be uttered by Indians themselves. My parents have a flat in India and it is really difficult / impossible for them to find any contractors who are actually recommended by anyone. Everyone complains about the shoddy job/ lack of attention to detail or lack of common sense of the contractors and their workers and how they need to be constantly supervised to prevent exactly what Philip was talking about. Of course they are less likely to be that lax here as the regulations and certification is stricter, especially around electrical work. Not to say you don't get cowboys here too.
-
I've changed the thread title, because the original was, on reflection, a bit childish, and not altogether accurate.
-
Do you 'on the other hand find it interesting' to be repeated multiple times on multiple channels?
I read somewhere that people were complaining about that but there were loads of channels, free, that had other things on. I flicked through them on Friday night and had I not wanted to watch something about the Duke of Edinburgh, it wouldn't have been difficult to choose something else. As it was I really liked the programmes.
The complainers make me wonder can nobody put up with the slightest inconvenience for a short while? Yesterday all was virtually back to normal.
I found the programmes about him fascinating &would watch some again.
-
Robbie my main gripe wasn't that there was too much coverage (although there was - 99 year old man dies - shocker!). My main problem was BBC1 and BBC2 showed exactly the same coverage all day.
Surely one of the two channels could have maintained normal broadcasting. I really don't think anyone could have missed the fact that he had died, and certainly no-one these days remains tuned to one channel all day. If they felt it absolutely necessary a banner could have been run along the bottom as they did on BBC4 advising people of a major news item.
And yes I could have watched a rerun of A Place in the Sun for the hundredth time on REally, but really should I have to?
-
I read somewhere that people were complaining about that but there were loads of channels, free, that had other things on. I flicked through them on Friday night and had I not wanted to watch something about the Duke of Edinburgh, it wouldn't have been difficult to choose something else.
The point is about the same coverage across multiple channels. I have no particular issue (albeit see below) with the BBC covering the death, but there is no justification whatsoever for it to be on multiple channels that are all universally available. The most appropriate place for such news, would be the BBC News channel, but I understand that there will still be a relatively small number of people who only get the five analogue channels, so I guess it would have to be either BBC 1 or 2, but not both - plus the News channel etc.
As it was I really liked the programmes.
Fine - no-one is stopping you watching it. But did you watch the programmes simultaneously on both BBC1 and 2 (and the News channel!). The issue isn't about you being able to watch coverage about the Duke but others being able to choose not to - and by blanket covering across all channels the BBC was effectively saying you shouldn't be able to watch anything else. It cannot control other broadcasters, but that's the message it sent for the channels it controls.
The complainers make me wonder can nobody put up with the slightest inconvenience for a short while? Yesterday all was virtually back to normal.
But it is an unnecessary inconvenience - the BBC could have had the coverage on one channel only. And it isn't really the inconvenience but the impression that we should be interested and watching the coverage and the BBC will make sure you cannot watch anything else on its channels. That, in my opinion, is wrong - and as much as the BBC gets lots right it really is poor when covering the 'establishment' in various forms (including the Royals and religion), in part because I think it sees itself as part of the establishment too and therefore cannot be a dispassionate observer.
I found the programmes about him fascinating &would watch some again.
Fine - no one is stopping you - but the BBC was stopping anyone who didn't want to watch its programmes from watching anything else on its channels.
But there is a broader issue - in reality there was hardly any actual news - the Duke has died - that's it, until there are details of funeral etc there is no more news. So most of the coverage wasn't actually news, but obituary/remembrance pieces. And those were unflinchingly (but understandably) biased. You aren't going to say anything bad about a person who has just died so the wall to wall coverage completely glossed over his controversial side - his jaw-dropping comments, that happened with monotonous regularity. At best there were some euphemisms (he spoke his mind - nope at times he was rude and deeply offensive in comments made during public duties). Indeed I heard one fawning commentator say he has always diplomatic (I mean WTF!).
And of course the coverage (certainly what I heard) never touched on the broader issue of royalty vs republicanism - in effect why are we celebrating this man in the first place.
So my point is that if you are going to give wall to wall coverage of a person's life surely you need to be balanced in you view. But of course the time to be balanced (and therefore report the bad stuff) probably isn't when a person has just died, so better not to give wall to wall, but completely unbalanced coverage.
-
I read somewhere that people were complaining about that but there were loads of channels, free, that had other things on. I flicked through them on Friday night and had I not wanted to watch something about the Duke of Edinburgh, it wouldn't have been difficult to choose something else. As it was I really liked the programmes.
The complainers make me wonder can nobody put up with the slightest inconvenience for a short while? Yesterday all was virtually back to normal.
I found the programmes about him fascinating &would watch some again.
It was a legitimate news story but in the case of the BBC, and bearing in mind we all have to pay a fee by default whether we like it or not, it was no more that fawning sycophancy that they showed exactly the same feed on all their channels simultaneously: presumably the received wisdom was that anyone tuning into the BBC should be force-fed monarchic propaganda - and pay for it too.
-
I think they must have run out of repeats to put on R4 Extra?
Surely they could just repeat all the Prince Philip obits?
-
The point is about the same coverage across multiple channels. I have no particular issue (albeit see below) with the BBC covering the death, but there is no justification whatsoever for it to be on multiple channels that are all universally available. The most appropriate place for such news, would be the BBC News channel, but I understand that there will still be a relatively small number of people who only get the five analogue channels, so I guess it would have to be either BBC 1 or 2, but not both - plus the News channel etc.
Fine - no-one is stopping you watching it. But did you watch the programmes simultaneously on both BBC1 and 2 (and the News channel!). The issue isn't about you being able to watch coverage about the Duke but others being able to choose not to - and by blanket covering across all channels the BBC was effectively saying you shouldn't be able to watch anything else. It cannot control other broadcasters, but that's the message it sent for the channels it controls.
But it is an unnecessary inconvenience - the BBC could have had the coverage on one channel only. And it isn't really the inconvenience but the impression that we should be interested and watching the coverage and the BBC will make sure you cannot watch anything else on its channels. That, in my opinion, is wrong - and as much as the BBC gets lots right it really is poor when covering the 'establishment' in various forms (including the Royals and religion), in part because I think it sees itself as part of the establishment too and therefore cannot be a dispassionate observer.
Fine - no one is stopping you - but the BBC was stopping anyone who didn't want to watch its programmes from watching anything else on its channels.
But there is a broader issue - in reality there was hardly any actual new - the Duke has died - that's it, until there are details of funeral etc there is no more news. So most of the coverage wasn't actually news, but obituary/remembrance pieces. And those were unflinchingly (but understandably) biased. You aren't going to say anything bad about a person who has just died so the wall to wall coverage completely glossed over his controversial side - his jaw-dropping comments, that happened with monotonous regularity. At best there were some euphemisms (he spoke his mind - nope at times he was rude and deeply offensive in comments made during public duties). Indeed I heard one fawning commentator say he has always diplomatic (I mean WTF!).
And of course the coverage (certainly what I heard) never touched on the broader issue of royalty vs republicanism - in effect why are we celebrating this man in the first place.
So my point is that if you are going to give wall to wall coverage of a person's life surely you need to be balanced in you view. But of course the time to be balanced (and therefore report the bad stuff) probably isn't when a person has just died, so better not to give wall to wall, but completely unbalanced coverage.
Well, if that isn't one of the most one-sided, biased posts, I don't know what is!!
-
Well, if that isn't one of the most one-sided, biased posts, I don't know what is!!
How is it biased?
-
How is it biased?
Perhaps I chose the wrong word, but I thought the post seemed to reflect your own views on the monarchy etc which I thought counts as bias.
-
Perhaps I chose the wrong word, but I thought the post seemed to reflect your own views on the monarchy etc which I thought counts as bias.
So if having a view on the monarchy counts as being biased, then aren't we all biased as most of us have a view on the monarchy.
Or are you only biased if you aren't uncritically supportive of the monarchy?
But if you read my post you will note that I offered no personal views on the monarchy as an institution - so perhaps you inferring views that I did not offer suggests a level of bias on your part Susan.
-
Trent:- Robbie my main gripe wasn't that there was too much coverage (although there was - 99 year old man dies - shocker!). My main problem was BBC1 and BBC2 showed exactly the same coverage all day.
......
I didn't know about all day, was working. I saw that was the case in the evening which, frankly, I expected but there were other channels showing 'normal' stuff. I flicked through them all to see what was on.
It was only for one day anyway and the 'prince' programmes were pretty interesting in my opinion.
-
Trent:- Robbie my main gripe wasn't that there was too much coverage (although there was - 99 year old man dies - shocker!). My main problem was BBC1 and BBC2 showed exactly the same coverage all day.
......
I didn't know about all day, was working. I saw that was the case in the evening which, frankly, I expected but there were other channels showing 'normal' stuff. I flicked through them all to see what was on.
It was only for one day anyway and the 'prince' programmes were pretty interesting in my opinion.
And it wasn't just that BBC1 and 2 were showing exactly the same thing. BBC News was (not unreasonably) wall to wall DofE, but I gather they basically pulled BBC4. So they were supposed to be showing a women's football match but instead they just showed a black test card with the caption 'Programmes on BBC Four have been suspended. Please switch to BBC One for a major news report'. And also all BBC radio channels also had their normal schedules suspended.
What other broadcasters did is irrelevant - we are discussing the response of the BBC. In my opinion they got it badly wrong, effectively preventing people from watching or listening to anything other than coverage of the Duke's death on their broadcast content. I think they got it badly wrong, and so it would appear do swathes of others given the deluge of complaints they've received. We are in 2021 not the 1950s ... and not in the type of country where the state broadcasters expect all the populace to be suitably reverential when a 'dear leader' dies. Or so I thought - maybe I was wrong on both counts.
-
Royal yacht tribute for Philip
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9458535/amp/Build-new-Royal-Yacht-tribute-Prince-Philip-Boris-Johnson-told.html?__twitter_impression=true
-
And it wasn't just that BBC1 and 2 were showing exactly the same thing. BBC News was (not unreasonably) wall to wall DofE, but I gather they basically pulled BBC4. So they were supposed to be showing a women's football match but instead they just showed a black test card with the caption 'Programmes on BBC Four have been suspended. Please switch to BBC One for a major news report'. And also all BBC radio channels also had their normal schedules suspended.
.
BBC Scotland channel as well
-
First of all, I am not a monarchist. I would like whatever becomes of the United Kingdom to become a republic with a non-executive president. I do consider that the present monarch has been an exceptional holder of that post ... but it is time that the nation moved on.
As far as the BBC and its response to the death of the Duke of Edinburgh is concerned, I suspect that the BBC was playing a careful game. The BBC is possibly the best known and possibly most respected broadcasting and news organisation in the world. However, the BBC is operating in a political landscape in which its every move is scrutinised, its funding resented and, in a system which knows the price of everything and the value of nothing is probably very unfavourably compared with Netflix.
I suspect the the BBC deliberately decided to treat the death Prince Philip in the manner it did because to do otherwise would delivered the corporation into the hands of the Tory right wing who would have used its behaviour as justification to emasculate, dismember and sell its remains to the highest bidders (possibly from China). Consequently it considered that its only possible reaction to the news would be to lead the national mourning.
-
First of all, I am not a monarchist. I would like whatever becomes of the United Kingdom to become a republic with a non-executive president. I do consider that the present monarch has been an exceptional holder of that post ... but it is time that the nation moved on.
As far as the BBC and its response to the death of the Duke of Edinburgh is concerned, I suspect that the BBC was playing a careful game. The BBC is possibly the best known and possibly most respected broadcasting and news organisation in the world. However, the BBC is operating in a political landscape in which its every move is scrutinised, its funding resented and, in a system which knows the price of everything and the value of nothing is probably very unfavourably compared with Netflix.
I suspect the the BBC deliberately decided to treat the death Prince Philip in the manner it did because to do otherwise would delivered the corporation into the hands of the Tory right wing who would have used its behaviour as justification to emasculate, dismember and sell its remains to the highest bidders (possibly from China). Consequently it considered that its only possible reaction to the news would be to lead the national mourning.
They gave up their virginity to save their virginity
-
I read somewhere that people were complaining about that but there were loads of channels, free, that had other things on. I flicked through them on Friday night and had I not wanted to watch something about the Duke of Edinburgh, it wouldn't have been difficult to choose something else. As it was I really liked the programmes.
The complainers make me wonder can nobody put up with the slightest inconvenience for a short while? Yesterday all was virtually back to normal.
I found the programmes about him fascinating &would watch some again.
Well said, Robbie
I found that the coverage gave me a fascinating insight into many aspects of his life which I was previously unaware of.
I shook hands with him once at the CNAA awards in the Queen Elizabeth hall many years ago - watched by my proud mum and dad . :)
-
Good morning Alan and all. Something outside just woke me, it's usually fairly quiet here. Husband went back to sleep but I can't.
OK I get this is not about television generally but the BBC specifically. It didn't bother me because I'm not tied to the BBC but obviously bothered others. However Friday is gone and there haven't been many HRH programmes since (ch4 old one last evening was quite good), so it's over now. Eastenders will be on as usual this evening. We can find something else to moan about like rugby.
I'm going to sit here with my hot chocolate and watch something on iplayer......guess what? ;)
-
National Rail tweet
National Rail
@nationalrailenq
·
3h
The National Rail website has been temporarily greyscaled as a mark of respect following the death of HRH Duke of Edinburgh. We are listening to feedback about how people are using the website and are making further changes today to make it more accessible to all our customers.
-
National Rail tweet
National Rail
@nationalrailenq
·
3h
The National Rail website has been temporarily greyscaled as a mark of respect following the death of HRH Duke of Edinburgh. We are listening to feedback about how people are using the website and are making further changes today to make it more accessible to all our customers.
I mean ... seriously :o This is just non-sense.
https://www.independent.co.uk/travel/news-and-advice/national-rail-prince-philip-death-black-b1830023.html
Thankfully they seem to have seen sense and have gone back to the normal colour version.
-
Are all the national rail customer service/IT people having a holiday today? Good for them.
I just went on there, looks like business as usual.
Good programme on London Live at 12 today about HRH, it was an old one but not very old. I hadn't seen it before. Unusual for me to watch TV during the day on my day off but I wanted to see the news and then browsed. I missed a bit because of a phone call but it will probably be repeated.
-
I just went on there, looks like business as usual.
They've reverted back to the colour version presumably because of the backlash from those concerned about people with visual impairment ... and also because it is a really, really stupid idea. Utterly pointless.
-
It was indeed, an utterly pointless gesture.
You could complain.
-
I read somewhere that people were complaining about that but there were loads of channels, free, that had other things on. I flicked through them on Friday night and had I not wanted to watch something about the Duke of Edinburgh, it wouldn't have been difficult to choose something else. As it was I really liked the programmes.
That's all well and fine and I don't begrudge you that, but the BBC ran exactly the same coverage on all of their channels except BBC4 and BBC4 they just c closed down altogether.
The radio was even worse. They broadcast exactly the same programming on Radios 1, 2, 3, 4, 4e, 5, 5e and 7. You can only watch one channel at a time. Why do they need to use all of them? It's ridiculous. In fact, as a supporter of both the BBC and the Royal Family, I found it embarrassing.
-
We've been through that one jeremy :D, read the whole thread!
-
I mean ... seriously :o This is just non-sense.
https://www.independent.co.uk/travel/news-and-advice/national-rail-prince-philip-death-black-b1830023.html
Thankfully they seem to have seen sense and have gone back to the normal colour version.
That's interesting, if a web site is unusable without colour I would suggest it fails to meet accessibility requirements.
-
We've been through that one jeremy :D, read the whole thread!
But the whole thing made me really angry. I'm a Royalist and a supporter of the BBC but now I've got to explain to all the Republicans who bring this up why we still shouldn't abolish both.
-
That's interesting, if a web site is unusable without colour I would suggest it fails to meet accessibility requirements.
Why?
-
Why?
Because if you need colour to successful navigate a web site, it means colourblind people will have trouble.
-
Because if you need colour to successful navigate a web site, it means colourblind people will have trouble.
No it doesn't - you simply need to be careful with your choice of colour. I've never heard any suggestions that a website must work in monochrome for accessibility reasons. The only reason why that might be the case would be for those with black and white monitors (are there any) or for someone who literally can only see in monochrome.
Actually the reverse is largely the case - that the use of colour (appropriately) improves accessibility.
-
No it doesn't - you simply need to be careful with your choice of colour. I've never heard any suggestions that a website must work in monochrome for accessibility reasons. The only reason why that might be the case would be for those with black and white monitors (are there any) or for someone who literally can only see in monochrome.
Actually the reverse is largely the case - that the use of colour (appropriately) improves accessibility.
RNIB conducted a survey amongst partially sighted and near blind computer users;
Few liked 'normal' screen colours.
The majority preferred a Verdana font with black background and either yellow or white letters.
-
Double Eastenders last night to make up for Friday!
It would have been better for the BBC to put out a blanket announcement on Friday warning viewers and listeners that their usual prgrammes would be disrupted because of tributes to the Duke of Edinburgh who died that morning, but reassuring them it would be business as usual the next day. Then there would have been no complaints. Perhaps they'll have learned by now and will do that on Saturday, the funeral and commentary before and after is bound to monopolise all channels.
-
Double Eastenders last night to make up for Friday!
It would have been better for the BBC to put out a blanket announcement on Friday warning viewers and listeners that their usual prgrammes would be disrupted because of tributes to the Duke of Edinburgh who died that morning, but reassuring them it would be business as usual the next day. Then there would have been no complaints. Perhaps they'll have learned by now and will do that on Saturday, the funeral and commentary before and after is bound to monopolise all channels.
No, I would still have complained, and I suspect pretty much all the other people who did would have. I would have had no problem if BBC 1, BBC News, and Radio 4 had covered it throughout the day as they did.
-
Double Eastenders last night to make up for Friday!
It would have been better for the BBC to put out a blanket announcement on Friday warning viewers and listeners that their usual prgrammes would be disrupted because of tributes to the Duke of Edinburgh who died that morning, but reassuring them it would be business as usual the next day. Then there would have been no complaints.
Yes there would have been complaints - the issue isn't the 'getting back to normal' tomorrow. The issue is that our, effectively publicly-funded broadcaster pulled all their content on pretty well every tv and radio channel and replaced it with either Duke's death-related content or nothing. That's what people were complaining about - the BBC over-reaching itself in folding into the establishment view. That things were back to normal (actually they weren't and aren't as there remains, in my view, excessive coverage etc of the Duke's death still) is irrelevant to the basic point of complaint.
And it would appear that the BBC got this very badly wrong - by a country mile the coverage generated more complaints than any other issue in the BBC's history which goes back to 1922, so just a tad younger than the Duke himself. How can they have got this so wrong.
-
Double Eastenders last night to make up for Friday!
It would have been better for the BBC to put out a blanket announcement on Friday warning viewers and listeners that their usual prgrammes would be disrupted because of tributes to the Duke of Edinburgh who died that morning, but reassuring them it would be business as usual the next day. Then there would have been no complaints. Perhaps they'll have learned by now and will do that on Saturday, the funeral and commentary before and after is bound to monopolise all channels.
I'd still have complained.
The issue isn't that the story wasn't newsworthy and merited some coverage but that the BBC, by streaming the same feed simultaneously on multiple channels, didn't provide an alternative for license fee payers, and especially those who don't subscribe to cable TV or Netflix/Prime Video. That there are these alternatives is irrelevant to the decision taken by BBC management to indulge in an OTT exercise in sycophantic virtue signalling, no doubt in case they were ever criticised for not being sufficiently sycophantic (as was, iirc, the case when the Queen's mother died a dew years ago).
It's not just the BBC that are being sycophantic though - the moving of sporting events on Saturday, so that nobody is professionally kicking a ball or riding a racehorse while a certain family funeral is taking place, is also an overreaction
-
I wonder when Madge will fall of her perch. If you think coverage of Phil's death is ott, wait till that happens!
-
I wonder when Madge will fall of her perch. If you think coverage of Phil's death is ott, wait till that happens!
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/mar/16/what-happens-when-queen-elizabeth-dies-london-bridge
-
No it doesn't - you simply need to be careful with your choice of colour. I've never heard any suggestions that a website must work in monochrome for accessibility reasons. The only reason why that might be the case would be for those with black and white monitors (are there any) or for someone who literally can only see in monochrome.
Actually the reverse is largely the case - that the use of colour (appropriately) improves accessibility.
Oh yes, I forgot, Professor Davey is the fount of all knowledge and will not rest until he has made the entire internet aware of that fact even at the expense of derailing entire threads for pages and pages so that he can demonstrate his superiority even in areas he actually knows nothing about.
-
But the whole thing made me really angry. I'm a Royalist and a supporter of the BBC but now I've got to explain to all the Republicans who bring this up why we still shouldn't abolish both.
Seconded.
-
I wonder when Madge will fall of her perch. If you think coverage of Phil's death is ott, wait till that happens!
I think they may err in the other direction. She'll probably get two minutes in the "and finally..." segment.
-
No it doesn't - you simply need to be careful with your choice of colour. I've never heard any suggestions that a website must work in monochrome for accessibility reasons. The only reason why that might be the case would be for those with black and white monitors (are there any) or for someone who literally can only see in monochrome.
Actually the reverse is largely the case - that the use of colour (appropriately) improves accessibility.
I was advised by Dolphin from first using LunarPlus that to set the browser to 'ignore colours and fonts' makes it easier to navigate and the software to work. Whether the advice is still the same now with the latest SuperNova, I don't know, but it suits me. Photos and pictures are in colour although I can no longer see most of the colour, but the background is always white and fonts are always the same size and black.
-
I'd still have complained.
The issue isn't that the story wasn't newsworthy and merited some coverage but that the BBC, by streaming the same feed simultaneously on multiple channels, didn't provide an alternative for license fee payers, and especially those who don't subscribe to cable TV or Netflix/Prime Video. That there are these alternatives is irrelevant to the decision taken by BBC management to indulge in an OTT exercise in sycophantic virtue signalling, no doubt in case they were ever criticised for not being sufficiently sycophantic (as was, iirc, the case when the Queen's mother died a dew years ago).
It's not just the BBC that are being sycophantic though - the moving of sporting events on Saturday, so that nobody is professionally kicking a ball or riding a racehorse while a certain family funeral is taking place, is also an overreaction
It certainly does make people like me quite embarassed and shows that those who have ordered this really ought to perhaps get a life or something!
-
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/mar/16/what-happens-when-queen-elizabeth-dies-london-bridge
The Queen Mother died the day before Easter Day, which is Holy Saturday. Easter Saturday - more formally, Saturday in Easter week, - is the one afterEaster Day.
-
National Rail tweet
National Rail
@nationalrailenq
·
3h
The National Rail website has been temporarily greyscaled as a mark of respect following the death of HRH Duke of Edinburgh. We are listening to feedback about how people are using the website and are making further changes today to make it more accessible to all our customers.
Unbelievable. It gets crazier and crazier. All BBC newscasters, reporters even weather presenter have been told to wear black, rather the same way that they have to be seen displaying a poppy around Remembrance Day.
-
No, I would still have complained, and I suspect pretty much all the other people who did would have. I would have had no problem if BBC 1, BBC News, and Radio 4 had covered it throughout the day as they did.
That is exactly my view too.
-
I'd still have complained.
The issue isn't that the story wasn't newsworthy and merited some coverage but that the BBC, by streaming the same feed simultaneously on multiple channels, didn't provide an alternative for license fee payers, and especially those who don't subscribe to cable TV or Netflix/Prime Video. That there are these alternatives is irrelevant to the decision taken by BBC management to indulge in an OTT exercise in sycophantic virtue signalling, no doubt in case they were ever criticised for not being sufficiently sycophantic (as was, iirc, the case when the Queen's mother died a dew years ago).
It's not just the BBC that are being sycophantic though - the moving of sporting events on Saturday, so that nobody is professionally kicking a ball or riding a racehorse while a certain family funeral is taking place, is also an overreaction
There is also another really worrying aspect.
No got much publicity, but all campaigning for the various elections at the beginning of May has been suspended until after the funeral. So 8 days of campaigning has been lost. And campaigns are important within our democratic process to set out manifestos and have them challenged. To lose over a week of campaigning is a real challenge to the democratic process and while many of the elections aren't particularly critical, the one in Scotland could be key in determining whether the UK as we know it exists in a few years time.
-
There is also another really worrying aspect.
No got much publicity, but all campaigning for the various elections at the beginning of May has been suspended until after the funeral. So 8 days of campaigning has been lost. And campaigns are important within our democratic process to set out manifestos and have them challenged. To lose over a week of campaigning is a real challenge to the democratic process and while many of the elections aren't particularly critical, the one in Scotland could be key in determining whether the UK as we know it exists in a few years time.
That isn't the case here in Scotland though: campaigning restarted today.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-56717776
Just to add that the second party leader's debate, this time on STV, goes ahead tonight as planned.
-
There is also another really worrying aspect.
No got much publicity, but all campaigning for the various elections at the beginning of May has been suspended until after the funeral. So 8 days of campaigning have been lost. And campaigns are important within our democratic process to set out manifestos and have them challenged. To lose over a week of campaigning is a real challenge to the democratic process and while many of the elections aren't particularly critical, the one in Scotland could be key in determining whether the UK as we know it exists in a few years' time.
The real impact of a successful majority vote for Scottish Independence being actioned, and the same with similar Welsh and NI votes should they occur in the future will be the ways in which those independent areas decide to punish the arrogant English for insults real and imagined inflicted during their time as parts of the (so-called) United Kingdom.
Owlswing
)O(
-
That isn't the case here in Scotland though: campaigning restarted today.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-56717776
Just to add that the second party leader's debate, this time on STV, goes ahead tonight as planned.
I hadn't realised that, but good to hear.
Actually I think that campaigning across the country has resumed so I got it wrong that it was to be suspended during the 'official' mourning period, although I sure I'd read this somewhere over the weekend.
-
That isn't the case here in Scotland though: campaigning restarted today.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-56717776
Just to add that the second party leader's debate, this time on STV, goes ahead tonight as planned.
I have to admit to feeling uncomfortable at Sturgeon doing the Covid briefing today with the good news being released that more people can meet up outside from the weekend.
-
No fuss
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/land-rover-hearse-prince-philip-23919841.amp?__twitter_impression=true