View Poll Results: BBC Coverage excessive?
- 10. You may not vote on this poll
25th Jul 12, 04:15 #1
TV coverage of the Olympics
So, I have just seen the schedules listed for the London 2012 Olympics. It seems the Beeb has created 24 new channels solely for the purpose of showing the games. Not only that, but it will be on near enough 24/7 on BBC One and Three for the entirety of the Olympics as well.
Is it just me that thinks that's grossly excessive, and a ludicrous waste of license-fee payers money? 24 channels?! Does every single event really need to be shown live and in its entirety? When the BBC has had to axe things such as half of it's Formula One coverage, a lot of it's Golf coverage, and lost events in many other sports including Snooker, Tennis and Rugby, does it not seem absolutely absurd the amount that must be being spent on the coverage of the Olympics?2nd place in the big quizz challenge!
25th Jul 12, 08:32 #2
On the one hand this is the Olympics. Undoubtedly a major sporting event. And it's the first time since 1948 the games have been in the UK.
On the other hand there is generally a low level of interest in Olympic events when the games aren't on, and this is reflected in the limited coverage of these sports on the BBC normally.
More than the actual games coverage there is the 'placement' of the games elsewhere on the BBC (radio & tv). "Olympic specials" are everywhere and you can't escape it on entertainment & news shows either.
25th Jul 12, 10:37 #3
FFS Whinge whinge whinge.
25th Jul 12, 12:58 #4
24 channles. Cant wait. If i could watch all of them at the same time i would
25th Jul 12, 15:52 #5
It is not going to be hard to avoid the Olympics when you think about it, though. 24 new channels but they are way up in the 400's on Sky's channeling and will be accessible through the red-button. If you don't want to watch it, don't watch it!!
For the record, I will mostly NOT be watching itNiente è vero, tutto è permesso
25th Jul 12, 16:09 #6
25th Jul 12, 22:37 #7
If they'd made them pay to view at a reasonable level they'd have made enough to fund F1 coverage for a couple of years!Duncan Rollo
The more you learn, the more you realise how little you know.
25th Jul 12, 23:07 #8
My problem isn't the amount of coverage at all, but the nature of the coverage — I can almost guarantee that it will be blandly corporate in tone, with awful attempts at levity and lightheartedness.
26th Jul 12, 13:08 #9
It's not really much of an expense. The events are being filmed anyway for international broadcast, and Sky are paying the costs of distribution (see below). I expect commentary on many of the minor events will be at a minimum, and by being on dedicated temporary channels they're not interfering with regular programming to much. It's exactly what a public service broadcaster should be doing: providing niche programming to the widest possible audience at the lowest possible cost.
Sky will also pick up the costs of satellite distribution, irrespective of whether other platforms join in - though we hope and believe there'll be more announcements soon.
26th Jul 12, 13:09 #10
27th Jul 12, 10:15 #11
The BBC's trouble is that they're not content with having wall-to-wall coverage on BBC1 and BBC3, as well as their dedicated channels. The Olympics have virtually taken over the News Channel, and to me the idea of a planned event taking place as planned isn't newsworthy to the extent that they seem to think. Obviously it's a huge worldwide event, and it's right that they mention it, but it seems wrong to give it so much airtime on what's supposed to be a news service.
27th Jul 12, 10:17 #12
28th Jul 12, 09:42 #13
Stupid bubble mouth Greek commentators did it again. Just ridiculous
I ended up using mute button while listening to BBC commentary.
28th Jul 12, 10:06 #14
So far this morning I've watched a few minutes each of rowing, table tennis, archery, judo, volleyball (beach and indoor), handball and badminton. Not bad
The Beeb's coverage of the opening ceremony was amazing. Trevor Nelson was awful, but there was a "no commentary" option which saved the day. The ceremony itself was odd in places, but the coverage itself was damn near faultless.
29th Jul 12, 09:47 #15
A question for our transatlantic brethren: is the NBC coverage really as bad as I'm led to believe? Tape delayed, riddled with adverts, barely mentioning sports the USA aren't excelling in, and poor commentary - that's what I'm hearing. If the BBC did that there'd be a riot, or at the very least a sternly worded letter to The Telegraph.
29th Jul 12, 17:41 #16
This is one of the examples of what we missed.
Sent from my Olympics home headquarters using TapatalkWithout sharing there can be no justice,
Without justice there can be no peace,
Without peace there can be no future.
please click here once a day: http://www.thehungersite.com
29th Jul 12, 20:40 #17
They said they didn't know what it was about. That doesn't matter. It's the Olympics they should have the respect for the events and the viewers to show it in full and uncut.
29th Jul 12, 21:08 #18
Not watched much, but the coverage of the Mens Cycling Road Race was really poor.
After watching quite a bit of the Tour de France, where they had continual updates of who was in the various groups and what the splits were between the breakaway group and the peleton, the coverage here was pretty poor. Not really the commentators fault - it was the same as those on ITV4 for the Tour, but they had no information.
29th Jul 12, 21:18 #19
- Join Date
- Jun 2003
30th Jul 12, 10:20 #20
After hearing about how NBC are doing things - 20 mins of commercials per hour? Then I'm thankful we have the BBC