Nice People Thread No. 14, all Nice and Proper

lostinrates

Generali wrote: »

Should the country be banned or the individuals?

We could stop the whole thing. Its a bit of fun, but would it be a travesty to lose it? Watching Jonathan strange last night (having loved the book) I kinda know that bbc money, under pressure as it is, could be better spent on such drama, or education. And other money going into it ...well, I'm very pro arts and culture spend, even if I don't like the art and culture. But...a change is as good as a rest maybe.

Generali

lostinrates wrote: »

We could stop the whole thing. Its a bit of fun, but would it be a travesty to lose it? Watching Jonathan strange last night (having loved the book) I kinda know that bbc money, under pressure as it is, could be better spent on such drama, or education. And other money going into it ...well, I'm very pro arts and culture spend, even if I don't like the art and culture. But...a change is as good as a rest maybe.

It's gotta be pretty cheap TV. Does the host country still pay most/all the costs? That's great news for the Brits

PasturesNew

Generali wrote: »

Should the country be banned or the individuals?

I'd ban both. Individuals/companies for life - and the country for 5 years as they must have had some part of the choosing/hiring and culture of those people that believe that's acceptable.

I might also broadcast, on each of those 5 years, "And here we would have had the entry from XXXX but due to them being rotten team players they are on their 5 year ban" so people don't forget.

lostinrates

Generali wrote: »

It's gotta be pretty cheap TV. Does the host country still pay most/all the costs? That's great news for the Brits

I guess the thing is, do we need this ( on bbc). I bet channel five would snap it up, so I don't think uk would 'lose out ' ( if bbc might).


This morning on the news a vox pop comment about children's tv is that 'it's too education, nothing just for fun'. My heart sinks. Why is learning not to be seen as fun. Does no one remember as a child being excited to be watching nature programmes and tomorrow's world in the evening after homework, not how people whine or shop or whatever in the eastern Home Counties?

vivatifosi

lostinrates wrote: »

I guess the thing is, do we need this ( on bbc). I bet channel five would snap it up, so I don't think uk would 'lose out ' ( if bbc might).


This morning on the news a vox pop comment about children's tv is that 'it's too education, nothing just for fun'. My heart sinks. Why is learning not to be seen as fun. Does no one remember as a child being excited to be watching nature programmes and tomorrow's world in the evening after homework, not how people whine or shop or whatever in the eastern Home Counties?

People under estimate the size of the Eurovision audience in the UK. I don't think the numbers for this year are in yet, but last year Eurovision was watched by 9m in the UK, not much less than 11m for the FA Cup. Plus its only once a year, like the FA Cup. That's a huge audience compared to the biggest shows on C4 or 5. The only channels big enough to broadcast at BBC1 and ITV 1.

The current most watched shows are Britain's Got Talent, which also gets an audience of 9m, or Eastenders, at 7m. So it's easily on a par with those.

SingleSue

Can't say I ever got excited about nature programmes to be honest. I did however get excited by Tomorrow's World or anything to do with nursing or ballet.

Oh and Black Beauty...

lostinrates

vivatifosi wrote: »

People under estimate the size of the Eurovision audience in the UK. I don't think the numbers for this year are in yet, but last year Eurovision was watched by 9m in the UK, not much less than 11m for the FA Cup. Plus its only once a year, like the FA Cup. That's a huge audience compared to the biggest shows on C4 or 5. The only channels big enough to broadcast at BBC1 and ITV 1.

The current most watched shows are Britain's Got Talent, which also gets an audience of 9m, or Eastenders, at 7m. So it's easily on a par with those.

O, I don't underestimate it. And watch it myself for a hoot many years

The numbers watching it is and money involved is where my sadness rests really. ( a complaint of a philosophical and social nature as much or more than a practical one )

kabayiri

Generali wrote: »

It's gotta be pretty cheap TV. Does the host country still pay most/all the costs? That's great news for the Brits

It's only cheap if it attracts viewers. I don't know anyone who watched it.

I think it should move to one of the commercial channels to fund coverage.

Ads could be targetted towards different parts of the show :

- Fancy dress companies when they intro the acts.

- Fudge manufacturers when it comes to the voting

kabayiri

The voting scale for Eurovision is broken I would suggest.

It should go negative as well as positive; so that voters can indicate which acts they particularly detest.

The spread betting for the UK vote would generate a lot of interest. I think we would score between -70 and -85.

vivatifosi

lostinrates wrote: »

O, I don't underestimate it. And watch it myself for a hoot many years

The numbers watching it is and money involved is where my sadness rests really. ( a complaint of a philosophical and social nature as much or more than a practical one )

The money involved is not that much IMO. A Freedom of Info request in 2012 put the direct cost of Eurovision to the BBC at £310k. The BBC is also a member of the European Broadcasting Union, which costs £1.2m pa, but not only relates to Eurovision but other joint activities also. Again, I don't think that's very high.

The cost of hosting however is massive. Sweden hosted the cheapest Eurovision in recent years and even that cost about €20m plus €4m for the hosting city.

I don't have a problem with it as tv fodder, but then I wouldn't as I'm a fan.