Channel 4's 'Big Brother' - Love it or Hate it?

[wannadivenotwork]

Interestingly, My wife LOVES TV Trash. Eastbenders, Concussion Street, Follyfolks, BB and all the american trash. She will watch it all till the cows come home and grow horns....

HOWEVER, the last BB? She watched the first night, and a couple of hours over the next couple of days, and then announced that (and she is one very well spoken ladylike girlie) "this is a pile of horse spunk" and switched it over to Blackhawk down. Which means something cos she hates war films.

Personally, they should have kept that militant Lesbian on cos she was funny. Better than Naaaaaaaaaadia.

[Mr T.]

And not before time...the antithesis to Gash TV



Nelson expected to do his duty in TV ratings war
By Tom Leonard, Media Editor
(Filed: 19/08/2004)


A string of new peak-time factual series, including a six-part "history of God" and a dramatic reconstruction of the Battle of Trafalgar, have been commissioned for BBC1, its controller, Lorraine Heggessey, said yesterday.

The seven separate commissions by the BBC's specialist factual department - which amount to 15 hours of new programming - come at a time when the corporation's governors are conducting an independent review of the balance of programmes in BBC1's schedules.

There has been criticism that the channel relies too heavily on soaps and reality shows.

The History of God, which will be presented by Prof Robert Winston, will provide a chronological thread from our earliest ancestors to look at the development of religious beliefs.

In The Story of One, Terry Jones, the former Monty Python star, also delves into history, this time to trace the development of numbers.

The programme will argue that while numbers have elevated mankind to its greatest achievements, they have also inspired our greatest stupidities, such as the Greek terror of infinity and the Catholic Church's attempt to ban zero.

Trafalgar will draw on the blend of dramatic reconstruction and computer-generated graphics used widely in history television shows to mark the 200th anniversary of Nelson's most famous victory.

BBC1 viewers will be shown an "unflinching depiction" of the effects of a nuclear explosion in Hiroshima, a documentary looking at the story of the scientists, politicians and airmen involved in the bombing.

The recent discovery that the Amazon is as deep as 400ft has inspired Amazon Abyss, a five-part series exploring the depths of the river and the creatures that live there.

The remaining new commissions also focus on the natural world. Ocean Odyssey will provide a "grand tour" of the deep, in a mix of computer technology and live action.

Life in the Undergrowth, another landmark wildlife production, will see the return of David Attenborough, this time focusing on the tiny world of invertebrates.

[HelenM]

BBC's Humphrys slates reality TV


By Darren Waters
BBC News Online entertainment staff in Edinburgh


BBC Radio 4 news presenter John Humphrys has attacked British reality television as "seedy, cynical and harmful" to society.

Humphrys, who presents the Today programme, told an audience of media executives at the Edinburgh Television Festival on Friday night that "some of our worst television is indeed indefensible".

Humphrys is known for his tough-talking style

He called for greater regulation of terrestrial television and even possible government intervention to ensure standards are maintained.

The three-day festival is host to the most important figures in British television, and features talks and seminars given by the heads of Channel 4, Five, Sky and the BBC.

Humphrys used the prestigious McTaggart lecture to say reality TV "eroded the distinction between the public and the private, which is a profoundly important aspect of our culture".

He called Channel 4's hit show Big Brother "damaging" and said the most recent show had "bequeathed us a legacy; the way to get ratings is to get evil".


Reality TV turns human beings into freaks for us to gawp at


John Humphrys

People who wanted to watch reality television could do so on subscription channels but society should "limit the harm" by stronger regulation of commercial channels by the government, he said.



The Cardiff-born presenter said TV was now "a battle between people who are concerned about society and those whose overwhelming interest is simply to make programmes that make money".

Humphrys also warned that news coverage of politics should not be made "more fun" in an attempt to boost public interest.



He said he disagreed with the former BBC director general Greg Dyke who said it was the broadcaster's job to make politics less boring by making the coverage less boring.

"We shouldn't be trying to lure [viewers and listeners] into politics by pretending that it's just another game show.

"Greg got it wrong," he said.

And as the presenter on Radio 4 when Andrew Gilligan's news report into the government's Iraq dossier unleashed a storm of controversy, he said news needed "more, not less in-depth interviewing of politicians".







In a thinly-veiled dig at the BBC's measures taken since the Hutton report criticised the BBC's approach to news, he said mistakes would always be made "however many notes we take and however many people we send back to college".




He told the conference he has not watched television for the last five years, but said he had based his opinions on watching programmes sent to him by executives as examples of the best of the medium.

He praised programmes such as Channel 4's Operatunity and the BBC's Life of Mammals, saying he had been "informed, entertained and deeply moved by some of what I've seen".



"I've been reminded that television... can help maintain the momentum that takes us from barbarity to civilisation".

But he said a "vast amount of the rest is simply mediocre" and did not tell the audience if his recent viewing would mean he would become a regular viewer again.

The veteran broadcaster expressed incredulity that programmes such as Your Face or Mine, The Pilot Show, Banzai and Nip/Tuck were considered quality television.

Examples of good television "cannot pay the dues of the bad when the bad is indefensible", he added. And television was "more aggressive and confrontational" and "vulgar and obsessed with sex" than he remembered. He warned that such television could "coarsen" and "brutalise" and said the level of aggression he found in soaps "fits my definition of harmful - especially given that they're broadcast pre-watershed". He also admitted that the BBC produced its share of rubbish and quality programmes - the corporation's responsibilities were greater than they have ever been, he added.

[Lou]

He praised programmes such as Channel 4's Operatunity and the BBC's Life of Mammals, saying he had been "informed, entertained and deeply moved by some of what I've seen".

Is this not somewhat hypocritical and snobbish? Operatunity was a reality tv/talent show. Being based on opera makes it more acceptable to the "intellectual classes" apparently.

I can't quite reconcile his double standards frankly, and to make such a speech, which is designed to appeal to a certain type of person, yet says nothing new or insightful is less than I would have expected from a broadcaster of his standing.

Lou

[Mr T.]

Originally Posted by Lou

Is this not somewhat hypocritical and snobbish? Operatunity was a reality tv/talent show. Being based on opera makes it more acceptable to the "intellectual classes" apparently.

I can't quite reconcile his double standards frankly, and to make such a speech, which is designed to appeal to a certain type of person, yet says nothing new or insightful is less than I would have expected from a broadcaster of his standing.

Lou

Sorry Lou,

It's got nothing to do with 'class'.

The 'cert type of person', to whom you refer, were his immdiate audience: the combined and largely effete chairmen, media-chiefs, heads and commissioning editors of the UK's terrestrial, cable and satellite TV - who better to rip the piss out of, given the subject matter of JH's précis of the state of broadcasting? Indeed, never more apposite criticism made - given their collective output of the last few years.

I think you might be being a tad unfailry selective, too (ref. Opera coments), when we take into account the breadth of his criticism: 'Soaps', Home/Garden 'Make Over' programmes, 'Neighbours from Hell', 'Wife Swap' et al and other such trite and cheap-to-screen gash.

And as regards 'reality' (for that read "Joe and Joanna Public being staged and prompted into doing things they might not ordinarily do - but now there's a camera here and they might, when the whole things through and they've made a sufficient twat of themselves, get a 'HELLO!' article out of it") TV: I thinks it's worth remembering that any fool can get pissed, argue, bed-hop, share a jacuzzi in the nude with onetime strangers, argue about who's doing/isn't doing the cooking, sit in front of a camera and bitch and moan about whom in the 'house' they detest or why, perhaps, others might not 'like them'; that is not a 'skill' or human attribute requiring any great mental ability or, indeed, something to be held up as same.


And "hypocritical and snobbish..."?

Is Jumphrys making 'reality' TV shows on any subject and then criticising them? No. Then how so 'hypocritical'? You must remember that the BBC - who pay his wages - also came in for some crisp criticism for their output.

And I do have to say that the word 'snob' is used way too freely (and incorrectly) with an almost derisive sneer nowadays: by contrast, picture the howls in liberal 'middle class' (to use your delineation) indignation if anyone were too attribute the term 'peasants', 'hoi polloi' or 'those of limited attention-span and understaning' to any sector of the viewing audience? There'd be civil unrest and the worthies and Guardianistas would be up in arms. Why is one term 'OK' and the other not? I think you'd have to agree that they are polarities and that there are plenty of us who fill the middle-ground between them.

Just as any fool can adequately make a fist of any of the above listed Big Brother 'passtimes', not everyone would either think to, attempt to or even submit themselves to attempting - good or bad - Opera. At least this approach makes it sufficiently different from the usual pap and makes for challenging TV.

It certainly sounds more appealing than watching Mr & Mrs ASBO and family make other folks in their neighbourhood's lives a singing, dancing misery for the cameras. This and Big Brother are cheap (and to make) titillation and in no way challenging.

And as for saying anything "new or insightful", perhaps it was neither: but it's damned refreshing to watch someone (from within the industry) have the balls to stand up and upbraid these peddlers of gash (and they're all guilty) for the crap they try and punt (and would have us believe and take) as 'quality viewing', which it most certainly isn't.

There are whole swathes of people out there who simply don't/won't watch commercial TV as a direct result of the fact that there is, it has to be said, sod-all of sufficient quality or challenge to view: and yet they still have to pay their licence-fee and/or Sat/Cable subsciption.

So damned right, if they are paying out all that money and just getting product of dubious and poor quality in return, they have both the desire and right to speak out in protest; or have it done for them by someone who shares their views and has a public platform from which to do so.

Well done John Humphrys.

[Spacehopper]

Well argued Bren.

I missed the "Pure shite" option otherwise I would have included that in my vote.

Gareth