Blog Archives

Snapshot of Indian TV

India’s ‘vulgar’ reality TV shows judged too real for viewers | World news | The Guardian

When someone is called impotent on Indian TV, It leads to a death – if it happens in England in ends in serialisation of their Autobiography in The Sun. However, Indian culture is such that there is an expectation of morals in the media. Within the last decade, we have seen fire-boming of the film “Fire” because of the main story about two women in love. Other films have been censored by the Bollywood system – why deal with a serious issue in a serious way when you can throw in a song and dance routine? Read the rest of this entry

Advertisements

Women in TV and Film

Pressure grows for action on ratio of women in TV industry | Maggie Brown | Media | guardian.co.uk

Speaking last night at the debate Women in Television – Is it a Young Girl’s Game? organised by Bafta and the MediaGuardian Edinburgh International Television festival, Shaps, now chairman of the National Film and Television School board, urged firm action on the issue.

Shaps, the only male panellist, said he was “horrified” by statistics compiled by Skillset, the sector’s training body, which show that 5,000 women have left the industry in the past two years, compared with just 750 men. Skillset also reported that women are finding freelance contracts and long hours incompatible with raising children.

He added that the issues of sexism and ageism had completely “slipped off the agenda”, because people in charge had assumed that they had been remedied years ago, and had moved on to concentrate on cultural diversity and the inclusion of people with disabilities.

Video On demand Service will not happen

Watchdog vetoes video-on-demand plan – TV & Radio, Media – The Independent

This would have been interesting – all of BBC’s, ITV’s and Ch4’s programming available via (essentially) the Iplayer.

Read the rest of this entry

Accuracy in News

Organ Grinder: Newsnight in fakery row over Obama report | Media | guardian.co.uk

Or is this just going too far? Does it matter that the sentences are in a different order, as long as the meaning has not been altered?

The context is the same, the sentiment is the same – even the emphasis seems to have not changed. So, what is the problem? Are we just over sensitive?

The news is perceived as being fact. It is not, it is a factual narrative that tells us the story in a simplified way. How simple depends on the target audience.

Whenever we tell a story, we alter the actual events. Any set of witness statements to an event will all be different – often, the police will get suspicious if some of the statements are too similar.

The important thing is that there are specifics that are accurate – the objective figures, etc. Names, times, places, numbers etc. Everything else is subjective – opinion, order of unconnected events, etc.

We select the events or facts that help to tell the story. News, The One Show, Homes under the hammer – they never tell the whole story, they do not have the time or the space -and neither do the audience.

So, by editing two paragraphs into one, and rearranging it so that it makes sense – this is what the news does every day.

Example of Factual issues….

BBC pays £50k to man featured in car crime programme | Media | guardian.co.uk

OK, so besides factual inaccuracy and general stereotyping, there was also a lack of research and permission. Programmes like this (that feature CCTV footage of real events) may be cheap, but unless the proper research is done the are also breaking the law themselves.

Change4Life campaign

BBC NEWS | Health | Government targets obesity rates

The government has launched a healthy living campaign in a bid to stem rising obesity rates in England.

It includes television adverts warning that too much fat in the body leads to cancer, diabetes and heart disease.

Ministers warned that, if left alone, obese and overweight people would cost the taxpayer in England £50bn by 2050.

Tesco, Kellogg’s and Unilever are among the companies who will
be promoting the “eat well, move more, live longer” message in the
“Change4Life” strategy.

The three-year initiative follows a Foresight
report, published last year, which warned the government must act to
stop Britain “sleepwalking” into a crisis.

Media Bias Example: Dan Rather Vs Conservatism

CBS newsman’s $70m lawsuit likely to deal Bush legacy a new blow | World news | The Observer

Christmas Day Viewing Figures

BBC NEWS | Entertainment | Wallace and Gromit top TV ratings

Brand and Ross – do they deserve it?

BBC NEWS | Entertainment | BBC pressured to sack presenters

The BBC is coming under increased pressure to sack Russell Brand and Jonathan Ross following their prank calls to actor Andrew Sachs.

So – 2 people complained after the show, before it hit the newspapers.
4,700 people had complained after it hit the newspapers, before it hit the TV.
After 1 day as a major headline, 10,000 people have complained.

Now – did they actually leave the messages on the answer machine, or did they make listeners believe it? It’s not hard to do. Is it suitable humour for 10pm? Of course. Is that what the pair are known for? Of course.

Andrew Sachs may not have heard the messages – he listened to the show initially on a poor mobile connection – and agreed to the show, and now says he wasn’t sure what he was hearing. It kind of implies it wasn’t on his machine. So, it is just the idea of the jokes we are looking at, not the actual leaving of messages. Let’s get that clear.

Now, the granddaughter has stated she is upset at what they are doing to her grandfather – on assumes she is talking about the messages. But the only way he has heard them is if he has looked for them. If it wasn’t a story, he probably wouldn’t know.

Andrew Sachs has stated they should apologise to his granddaughter – so both are basically offended on the others behalf.

One assumes that the 10,000 plus MINUS the original 2 people are offended by knowing about the idea of what happened, and are offended on other peoples behalf as well. They didn’t hear it originally, so how could they be offended by the show? They are offended by either what they think happened, or they have hunted down the show and listened to it. If you watch hardcore porn, you will see sex. Don’t then complain about it.

After all that I did have an opinion against them, but you know what? it suddenly seems really unimportant considering the rabid reaction that has now been spawned by the reporting of it. And lets face it – would The Sun report it if Andrew Sachs Granddaughter wasn’t a satanic slut?

On question we can ask against Brand and Ross is, how does this effect society in general? Most of the complaints are against Prank Calling to a Pensioner. But if that didn’t happen, we are left with two people making prank call for a cheap (6 figure sums each) laugh. Now, this is not a socially acceptable act. This is bullying. This is intimidation – or at least, the promotion of it. Read the transcript. Think for yourself. don’t just react. And for god’s sake, DON’T complain!

Is anyone actually watching?

Mainstream TV fights back against invaders | Media | The Guardian

Tv is losing viewers at an alarming rate – Also see BARB’s home site.