Sending older celebrities abroad for TV shows

[horribleblob 212]

What's Dion Dublin know? the estate agents don't tell us what they actually get only what they could get.

 

I suspect he's more conversant with the offside rule than most estate agents are.

[andyofborg 11]

Oooops ! didn't realize I'd already moaned about this.

Just goes to show how much it annoys me.

They are still wasting our money in the same way ..... last year the three stooges were in Lanzarote, this time in Tenerife !!

 

is someone putting a gun to your head and forcing you to watch it?

 

there are 15million other channels you could watch

 

it seems to be reasonably popular amongst some groups and the BBC is tasked with trying to please all arbitrary groupings though not all the time

[PRESLEY 1,228]

is someone putting a gun to your head and forcing you to watch it?

 

there are 15million other channels you could watch

 

it seems to be reasonably popular amongst some groups and the BBC is tasked with trying to please all arbitrary groupings though not all the time

 

Not having to watch this rubbish is not the point, If their doing a report about British resorts what the flippin hell are they doing reporting from foreign countries. Money could be better spent.

[ECCOnoob 1,029]

Not having to watch this rubbish is not the point, If their doing a report about British resorts what the flippin hell are they doing reporting from foreign countries. Money could be better spent.

 

Oh god not this old chestnut again. Put simply its because us simple minded viewers expect it. It gives a show context, narrative and a suitable setting in which to aid any story or image they are trying to portray. If the show has a general theme of "holidays" then they will portray that "holiday" image a viewer expects to see.

 

Its exactly the same reason why weather presenters reporting about heavy snowfall are pointlessly sent out to film in the middle of a freezing cold blizzard or traffic reporters are sent out to stand on top of some motorway bridge to describe how busy a road is or why news reporters have to stand outside of some closed up courthouse or some government department's office hours after everyone has left just because the story they are reporting relates to it in some way.

 

YES, they could just sit in a studio and be able to produce exactly the same "content" a lot easier. BUT, its the backdrop and narrative which us trigger remote happy viewers expect these days.

 

Never ever underestimate how little attention span a viewer has. Television (even the most basic of things) is vastly expensive to make. Trust me, broadcasters dont fritter money away unless they had some good reason for it.

 

I dont know how much of a jolly you think a lower level consumer show presenter really has. They are hardly hollywood starlets with an entourage catering to their every whim.

 

They get to travel out somewhere yes. They probably get stay in a hotel yes. But they spend their days stood around for hours filming public interviews, gathering B roll filming in hotel rooms, shops, kitchens or some resort attraction due to be featured, do a few links to camera and then that's it. They fly straight back to work on the next part of the programme and do the voiceovers back in a studio somewhere.

 

Just like most people who are "perceived" by to be spoilt by having the luxury of travelling abroad for their job - the actual reality is far from it. Staff might travel out to film somewhere and be back in less than 48 hours. I know of one radio broadcast techie who was flown for 12/14 hours to some far flung destination to set up show but then returned the next working day.

 

Hardly a "jolly". The majority of TV crew will be very similar.

Edited January 7, 2018 by ECCOnoob

[PRESLEY 1,228]

Oh god not this old chestnut again. Put simply its because us simple minded viewers expect it. It gives a show context, narrative and a suitable setting in which to aid any story or image they are trying to portray. If the show has a general theme of "holidays" then they will portray that "holiday" image a viewer expects to see.

 

Its exactly the same reason why weather presenters reporting about heavy snowfall are pointlessly sent out to film in the middle of a freezing cold blizzard or traffic reporters are sent out to stand on top of some motorway bridge to describe how busy a road is or why news reporters have to stand outside of some closed up courthouse or some government department's office hours after everyone has left just because the story they are reporting relates to it in some way.

 

YES, they could just sit in a studio and be able to produce exactly the same "content" a lot easier. BUT, its the backdrop and narrative which us trigger remote happy viewers expect these days.

 

Never ever underestimate how little attention span a viewer has. Television (even the most basic of things) is vastly expensive to make. Trust me, broadcasters dont fritter money away unless they had some good reason for it.

 

I dont know how much of a jolly you think a lower level consumer show presenter really has. They are hardly hollywood starlets with an entourage catering to their every whim.

 

They get to travel out somewhere yes. They probably get stay in a hotel yes. But they spend their days stood around for hours filming public interviews, gathering B roll filming in hotel rooms, shops, kitchens or some resort attraction due to be featured, do a few links to camera and then that's it. They fly straight back to work on the next part of the programme and do the voiceovers back in a studio somewhere.

 

Just like most people who are "perceived" by to be spoilt by having the luxury of travelling abroad for their job - the actual reality is far from it. Staff might travel out to film somewhere and be back in less than 48 hours. I know of one radio broadcast techie who was flown for 12/14 hours to some far flung destination to set up show but then returned the next working day.

 

Hardly a "jolly". The majority of TV crew will be very similar.

My god, a bit long winded, War and Peace springs to mind. Its not an old chestnut, if reporting on Skeggy be in Skeggy and not in Teneriefy or Lanzarote . People have a right to grumble when their Lisence fee is being miss used. A previous quote from Martin Clunes on the holiday show, Its great being here in Paradise on Lisence payers money. Mind you at least he was in the country he was reporting on.

[grand 10]

More fool anyone for actually paying for a licence to watch it

 

In the first place

 

Why don't the bbc just have adverts and scrap the licence

[ECCOnoob 1,029]

My god, a bit long winded, War and Peace springs to mind. Its not an old chestnut, if reporting on Skeggy be in Skeggy and not in Teneriefy or Lanzarote . People have a right to grumble when their Lisence fee is being miss used. A previous quote from Martin Clunes on the holiday show, Its great being here in Paradise on Lisence payers money. Mind you at least he was in the country he was reporting on.

 

As you will be aware from when you raised this exact same argument in your January 2016 post, the point I am arguing is that licence fee monies are NOT being misused. Its the cost of making a television broadcast which us feeble minded viewers expect and demand.

 

Yes, I concede that specific report you refer may well have been on somewhere in the UK. BUT the remainder of the show and/or further episodes refer to other destinations including abroad. You dont need to be a tv expert to know that the presenters will record dozens of links for different topics in a single filming session in a single place - that's how they can get 8-10 episodes out of just a couple of days on location.

 

As I said earlier, if the overall narrative to be portrayed is "holidays" our minds expect to see a holiday image. The producers will know full well that image would be far more towards a nice Spanish beach rather than a wet pavement in skegness. The same reason applies why a report on some retail issue must always be filmed in a big supermarket or department store. Any car complaint must be always be filmed in a mechancis garage or dealership compound.

 

Yes they could absolutely save money just sitting at a desk with pictures behind them - but that is not the image we viewers expect to see. Its all about keeping attention, keeping narrative and keeping viewing figures up. Three old boilers doing nothing but sitting behind a desk hardly has the visual appeal or hook as multiple locations and constant feeder images.

 

Whether you agree or not, there is no denying that is how the majority of viewers minds work and exactly why television companies spend money obtaining and producing such things. Why else would they do it? They are business operations after all.

 

Alleging "oooh what a waste of money" could be applied to lots of aspects of television production but cheapen it too much and viewers zap away all that effort, expense and time at the single click of a remote.

 

Now being as its a one year anniversary shall we just agree to disagree on this one.

 

 

---------- Post added 08-01-2018 at 00:00 ----------

 

More fool anyone for actually paying for a licence to watch it

 

In the first place

 

Why don't the bbc just have adverts and scrap the licence

 

Firstly, what makes you think that putting adverts on the BBC would remove the licence fee. There are television licences active in many other countries but they still have ads.

 

Secondly, making the BBC fully commerical would have massive consequences as has been argued on many other threads of this forum. There are entire types of programming which would be wiped out deemed not profitable, all the specialist access services and disability services would be chopped, your web services would disappear behind paywalls or lengthy advertising blocks. That's before we get on to the dozens of local and national radio services, news services, politics broadcasts, contribtutions to the national broadband rollout, broadcast infrastructure and minority language stations which the licence fee pays for.

 

See how long ITV / C4 / Sky and Viacom (C5) will absorb those costs before hitting the wider consumers financially or in quality.

 

Be careful what you wish for.

Edited January 8, 2018 by ECCOnoob

[ukdobby 224]

A load go cruising in France for the umpteenth time.

[ECCOnoob 1,029]

Its Criminal.

 

Why is it? Its television. Commerical television at that too.

 

Advertisers pay the channel. Channel makes programmes. Programmes pay celebs to star in it. Celebs attract viewers. Viewers watch it and increase the advertisers audience. Advertisers keep paying money to channel.

 

Round and round it goes.

 

Why blame the producers or the channel?

 

If WE the public watch it and keep being attracted to it, they will keep making it.

[*_ash_* 88]

These programes make my blood boil. Why send this lot who have plenty of money, Christine horrible Hamilton, Ann posh face Diamond and Ainsley I want the Lime light Harriot ect on holiday when Orphans from places like Bernadoes or Pensioners or Genuine hard up people need oppertunaties like this. Its all flippin wrong.

 

Not that I have looked into it, and neither will I, as this isn't the type of programme that I watch - this bold - I'd guess most people who do these things need money / or have money but are out of work and want to work for money on TV.

 

Why is it? Its television. Commerical television at that too.

 

Advertisers pay the channel. Channel makes programmes. Programmes pay celebs to star in it. Celebs attract viewers. Viewers watch it and increase the advertisers audience. Advertisers keep paying money to channel.

 

Round and round it goes.

 

Why blame the producers or the channel?

 

If WE the public watch it and keep being attracted to it, they will keep making it.

 

and this ^^

[tinfoilhat 11]

These programes make my blood boil. Why send this lot who have plenty of money, Christine horrible Hamilton, Ann posh face Diamond and Ainsley I want the Lime light Harriot ect on holiday when Orphans from places like Bernadoes or Pensioners or Genuine hard up people need oppertunaties like this. Its all flippin wrong.

 

How much of it did you watch or did you just catch the ad for it?

[ukdobby 224]

How much of it did you watch or did you just catch the ad for it?

 

If any sense none of it.