Official: British telly really is almost all repeats
One thing you can say about the rise of digital telly: there are now more repeats shown on British television than at any time since 2003.
In decades gone by, Brits would regularly moan about the number of repeats on the box - "another Christmas, another showing of The Great Escape" - but it's hard to imagine that repeats …
If the choice is between a repeat of Mock the Week (or whatever is on Dave at the time), or I'm a Celebrity Mud Wrestling Singer with Xfactor on Coro'fucking'nation Enders Street, I'd go for Dave every time.
On a more serious note , er, well, I was being serious anyway, but since the number of recorded programs is always increasing (most are crap, but some are worth repeating), but the number of new programs stays fairly constant (well, its dropped a bit), the market for repeats gets larger.
Retransmissions are important as, unlike TCP/IP, DVB does not provide a back-channel. Therefore it's important to transmit everything several times in case a frame gets lost the first time.
A nice explanation! I bet if you put that to the head of Ofcom he wouldn't have a bollocking clue what you were talking about. Do Ofcom really understand digital communication....
i would love to know where all the bbc license fee goes. i know loads goes to bbc radio with overpaid tubbies like moyles getting far too much for a couple of hours speaking in the morning.
plus, no decent movies, no decent sport, not much comedy (buzzcocks, mock the week & frankie howard being the only 3 i can think of)
the only thing they excel at is nature - but i could buy all the stuff i watch on blu-ray for less than 150/year!
bbc breakfast is just a platform to talk about celebrity fucking dancing.
"Incidentally, we should thank, first, the UK's telecommunications and broadcasting regulator for finally putting out numbers that are almost a year out of date, a fact that many a news story today about Britain's digital viewing habits has cheerfully ignored."
Here are some of the countries in the world, with GDPs less than Ofcoms annual budget of £136.8m.
Palau population 20,000, GDP 70% of Ofcoms annual budget.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palau
The Cook Islands, population, again about 20,000, GDP about 80% of Ofcoms annual budget
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cook_Islands
Marshall Islands
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marshall_Islands
Anguilla
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anguilla
Kiribati
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kiribati
Tuvalu
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tuvalu
And so on. Makes you wonder how on earth do these countries survive while still being able to regulate telecoms and TV in their own country!
As I understand it, anything repeated within 7 days is officially a "retransmission", not a "repeat".
How do the figures cope with that? Do they eliminate all retransmissions, whether of new material or repeated material, and then compare? I hope so, because counting a half hour program retransmitted three times as two hours of "new" material would be pretty shoddy in my view.
C4+1 plays entirely repeats, as do all the other "+1" channels. Even a new program on C4 is a repeat by the time it hits C4 + 1. So, I would expect there to be a lot of repeats. Are these counted?
There are also channels now dedicated to showing repeats of shows from the 70s, 80s or 90s. This seems to mean that the main channels are showing fewer repeats than ever before - I suspect a net rise in the proportion of new material on, say, BBC1 since the days of only 4 channels. And even the Two Pints of Lager and a Packet of Crisps Channel occasionally shows something original.
A bit silly to talk of proportions when we have so many more channels now. It's a lot easier to add channels than to fill them. I expect the proportion will indeed rise to 100% (to 3 s.f.) once people start including the channel capacity of iPlayer et al., and once the BBC pulls its finger out about putting its archives up there.
We're paying a full TV license for content, 50% of which we've already paid for already?
Yes?
Nice work if you can get it.
Posted Thursday 17th December 2009 16:19 GMT
Anonymous Coward
I don't understand, why is anyone still paying for TV?
#
The TV License fee is BS, and lawfully avoidable, and other satellite tends to force you to take junk channels with the good ones.
Cut off their money supply, then see them forced to provide value for money, lawfully, oh, and you might waste less time on the idiot box too, maybe learn something.
they wouldn't produce value for money, they'd produce the most profitable, lowest common denominator tripe imaginable. At least with the licence fee they are some-way accountable for the crap that's pushed out.
I only watch telly on iPlayer and it's always programmes from the catch-up service, never any live streaming as I don't have a TV Licence. This means technically 100% of all the programmes I watch are repeats! Yay I win!
Mines the one with all the unopened letters from Capita/TV Licensing sticking out of the pockets!
The complaints about TV being "All repeats" were perfectly valid when we only had three terrestrial channels to watch and no satellite or cable, let alone 4od, iPlayer, Watch Again etc.
Now we have +1 channels, BBC 3, More4, Sky 2 and 3, Dave, Alibi, Watch, Yesterday etc etc yes, we're getting old stuff shown again, but this is *not* to the exclusion of *new* material.
And are all these "repeats" such a bad thing? When Blake's 7 was first broadcast I missed the first two episodes due to my parents insisting I do my homework first (which dates me!) and it was a long while before I could actually see what happened in the beginning. These days I'd just switch to a +1 channel or watch the repeat later in the week on BBC3 or equivalent.
We might be there already - I'm assuming that the figures don't include the I Love The 1000 Best All-Time TV Out-take Moments of the 90s.
It's getting to the stage where TV looks like it's approaching terminal decline. It might be advancing age, but I can't help seeing superficiality taking over from originality. And I keep thinking of this quote from a very well-known story:
""The fall of Trantor," said Seldon, "cannot be stopped by any conceivable effort. It can be
hastened easily, however. The tale of my interrupted trial will spread through the Galaxy.
Frustration of my plans to lighten the disaster will convince people that the future holds no
promise to them. Already they recall the lives of their grandfathers with envy. They will see that
political revolutions and trade stagnations will increase. The feeling will pervade the Galaxy that
only what a man can grasp for himself at that moment will be of any account. Ambitious men
will not wait and unscrupulous men will not hang back. By their every action they will hasten the
Re: Re: Re: Official: British telly really is almost all repeats
#
Really? I thought simple percentages would be well within the grasp of even a journalist. Looks it's not bloody Mensa stuff is it? It's a sensationalist headline and you know it.
The Bond film is always a great reason not to switch to ITV!
The next day - unless 26th was a Sunday - usually has a decent film noir on, or Marx Bros late at night (on BBC2). Though they show far too few of those anymore. Another indicator that our TV is shite on a pedestal today.
The Great Escape! If it weren't for that the stupid English schweinhundts wouldn't know to 'sing' it at the England games in their acknowledgment that we'll make an audacious bid for freedom that will fail, after which we'll be machine gunned and the winners of the match will be USA despite not even being there!
The internet is going to completely skew the stats regardless - pretty much everyone I know watches overseas TV shows before they hit UK screens (If they actually do reach here)
As far as local TV goes, with services such as iPlayer etc., there's no need to record TV, unless you want to store it for later.
With home media centers (DIY PVR, TV on computers, steamed/shared content around the home), the schedule the various channels dish up is immaterial. There's no need for the old fashioned Radio Times, or even online TV schedules.
Then there's services such as Love Films, which will inevitably switch from a postal service to an on-demand service at some point.
For those of us who are savvy enough, we're pretty damn close to media on demand already and with such a massive wealth of stuff available, watching repeats is a moot point.
It's entirely possible than in 5 to 10 years, or sooner, the TV industry is going to face a similar battle the music industry did - although the industry does appear to be focusing on keeping up with the times.
Let's face it - we don't have enough new programming to fill one channel per broadcaster, never mind the plethora each one transmits.
I reckon we should adopt a model of one, perhaps two, channels per broadcaster and no more, and then insist that all of them be broadcast in HD (if we slash the number of channels, there'd be plenty of bandwidth to go around).
Perhaps part of the reason for there being a higher percentage of repeats is the increase in the number of channels. Specifically channels such Dave and G.O.L.D which show almost nothing but repeats. Also, do the figures include the output of the +1 channels and if so, how is that classed? Strictly speaking they show only repeats.
The annoying thing I find is when the description in the EPG doesn't get updated, and described it as a new episode... when I watched it 6 months ago.
That, and all the +1 channels... surely digital could be used for something better? I have a PVR so I can watch it an hour later if I want, or 2 minutes later, etc,etc... I don't need extra channels to allow me to do it.
I stopped owning/watching TV over a year ago. Aside from it being all death/war/famine/doom/repeats, Why do we need it? we still have books, the internet, and god forbid: other people to meet and talk to.
was worth it for Mock The Week...before the pathetic Beeb drove Frankie Boyle away. It isn't bad for Have I Got News For You and Q.I., as long as Jimmy Carr isn't on.
The quality of TV in the UK has been gradually sinking into the gutter for the last 20 years. I used to think that the existence of the BBC was the only reason it hadn't slipped faster than it has, but I'm not even sure of that any more.
Repeats aside (and yes, they ARE reaching stupid proportions), the new programs are mostly rubbish and cater only for the dumb masses - X-Factor (with bloody Dermot putting painfully long pauses where they are not needed - yes it's "dramatic" - we get the idea - you don't need to keep reminding us!), bloody Come Dancing (why the "Strictly"? What's that about???), relentless "reality" programs (thank goodness Big Brother is finally ending next year, but that still leaves "cops in uniform" and "oooo... Scary weather" and "average person cooking"), East Enders (which is mind-crushingly depressing), Coronation St (which while not as depressing, is certainly as tedious), Family Fortunes (god help us!), Casualty (started off as a reasonable drama many years ago, but has long since turned into yet another soap), ...need I go on?
The thing is, even the programs that are NOT repeats, seem like repeats. They are all so open-ended, and the same! Surely if you've seen one episode of Come Dancing you've seen them all? Surely ALL the story lines in East Enders have, by now, been done to death (they just keep recycling them like a Scooby-Doo cartoon). The same goes for Casualty et-al. And WHY would anyone watch Family Fortunes or some cruddy cooking or house-hunting program? You'll forget it all in a couple of hours anyway!!!
Answer - it's all cheap, and (in the case of stuff like X-Factor and Big Brother) rakes in HUGE amounts of cash; totally disproportionately to the actual entertainment value.
than suffer more "I'm a celebretards big brother" or "Strictly come Ice Dancing" or "Britain's X Idol Fame Academy" or "East Emmerdale Street" or "Police, Camera, whack-a-chav" or "Real Helicopter Hero Rescue Cops".
This incessant bandwagoning by the TV companies is ridiculous. One comes up with a "winning" format the rest copy it and then they all do the format to its death.
I see the latest "victim" is the early evening magazine show. The BBC decide to revive the old "Nationwide" format and, surprise, surprise, Five copy it with "Live from Studio Five".
In fairness if you sit and watch any significant amount of RTE's home-made television you'd understand why they import so much of it. There's only so much uniformly fucking awful alleged comedy you can inflict on a viewing audience before you offer them at least the possibility of something that might actually be worth watching.
Register
Official: British telly really is almost all repeats
One thing you can say about the rise of digital telly: there are now more repeats shown on British television than at any time since 2003. In decades gone by, Brits would regularly moan about the number of repeats on the box - "another Christmas, another showing of The Great Escape" - but it's hard to imagine that repeats …
This topic is closed for new posts.
Page:
Posted Thursday 17th December 2009 15:58 GMT
James Hughes 1
Well.... #
If the choice is between a repeat of Mock the Week (or whatever is on Dave at the time), or I'm a Celebrity Mud Wrestling Singer with Xfactor on Coro'fucking'nation Enders Street, I'd go for Dave every time.
On a more serious note , er, well, I was being serious anyway, but since the number of recorded programs is always increasing (most are crap, but some are worth repeating), but the number of new programs stays fairly constant (well, its dropped a bit), the market for repeats gets larger.
Probably.
Posted Thursday 17th December 2009 15:58 GMT
Dean Burrows
Hmmm... #
Haven't I seen this before?
Posted Thursday 17th December 2009 15:58 GMT
Christian Berger
Repeats are important #
Retransmissions are important as, unlike TCP/IP, DVB does not provide a back-channel. Therefore it's important to transmit everything several times in case a frame gets lost the first time.
Posted Thursday 17th December 2009 16:26 GMT
Anonymous Coward
W00t? #
The BOLLOCKS are you on about?
Posted Thursday 17th December 2009 16:26 GMT
Anonymous Coward
Rubbish #
If this is a joke then fine. Ha Ha.
If not then you are talking rubbish. DVB frames are not transmitted multiple times in a given ES (Elementry Stream).
Posted Thursday 17th December 2009 22:40 GMT
Anonymous Coward
great theory #
A nice explanation! I bet if you put that to the head of Ofcom he wouldn't have a bollocking clue what you were talking about. Do Ofcom really understand digital communication....
Posted Thursday 17th December 2009 15:59 GMT
Citizen Kaned
bbc == pants now #
i would love to know where all the bbc license fee goes. i know loads goes to bbc radio with overpaid tubbies like moyles getting far too much for a couple of hours speaking in the morning.
plus, no decent movies, no decent sport, not much comedy (buzzcocks, mock the week & frankie howard being the only 3 i can think of)
the only thing they excel at is nature - but i could buy all the stuff i watch on blu-ray for less than 150/year!
bbc breakfast is just a platform to talk about celebrity fucking dancing.
YET they think they deserve ~£150/year!
Posted Thursday 17th December 2009 17:33 GMT
Beelzeebub
Not to mention... #
... the overtly left handed political bias constantly output:-
- nice to NuLab politicians
- tear apart opposition politicians
- reinforce AGW propaganda
- fail to report on the unfettered immigration scandal
mind you it's not just the BBC, it is most of the mainstream media (excepting EL Reg, of course)
Posted Thursday 17th December 2009 15:59 GMT
Sarev
New content #
> Over the same period, the transmission of new, home-made shows has fallen from 58.8 per cent to 50.1 per cent.
and 99% of that is Strictly Come Celebrity Master Plumber, Cops with Truncheons and I'm a Wanker, Get Me Out of Here.
Posted Thursday 17th December 2009 15:59 GMT
Anonymous Coward
Ofcom #
"Incidentally, we should thank, first, the UK's telecommunications and broadcasting regulator for finally putting out numbers that are almost a year out of date, a fact that many a news story today about Britain's digital viewing habits has cheerfully ignored."
Here are some of the countries in the world, with GDPs less than Ofcoms annual budget of £136.8m.
Palau population 20,000, GDP 70% of Ofcoms annual budget.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palau
The Cook Islands, population, again about 20,000, GDP about 80% of Ofcoms annual budget
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cook_Islands
Marshall Islands
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marshall_Islands
Anguilla
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anguilla
Kiribati
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kiribati
Tuvalu
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tuvalu
And so on. Makes you wonder how on earth do these countries survive while still being able to regulate telecoms and TV in their own country!
Posted Thursday 17th December 2009 15:59 GMT
Anonymous Coward
Repeat+1 #
Do all those +1 channels count as repeats? They're pretty handy usually.
Posted Thursday 17th December 2009 17:02 GMT
The Indomitable Gall
Repeats vs retransmission #
Good question.
As I understand it, anything repeated within 7 days is officially a "retransmission", not a "repeat".
How do the figures cope with that? Do they eliminate all retransmissions, whether of new material or repeated material, and then compare? I hope so, because counting a half hour program retransmitted three times as two hours of "new" material would be pretty shoddy in my view.
Posted Thursday 17th December 2009 16:19 GMT
Chris Pollard
Spend a little time watching.... #
....and its difficult to believe the figure isn't far higher than 44%
Posted Thursday 17th December 2009 16:19 GMT
Anonymous Coward
"British telly really is almost all repeats" #
Oh, not this old one again! I'm sure I've seen it before a dozen times!
"British telly really is almost all repeats" really is almost all repeats!
Posted Thursday 17th December 2009 16:19 GMT
Eddie Edwards
How is this counted? #
C4+1 plays entirely repeats, as do all the other "+1" channels. Even a new program on C4 is a repeat by the time it hits C4 + 1. So, I would expect there to be a lot of repeats. Are these counted?
There are also channels now dedicated to showing repeats of shows from the 70s, 80s or 90s. This seems to mean that the main channels are showing fewer repeats than ever before - I suspect a net rise in the proportion of new material on, say, BBC1 since the days of only 4 channels. And even the Two Pints of Lager and a Packet of Crisps Channel occasionally shows something original.
A bit silly to talk of proportions when we have so many more channels now. It's a lot easier to add channels than to fill them. I expect the proportion will indeed rise to 100% (to 3 s.f.) once people start including the channel capacity of iPlayer et al., and once the BBC pulls its finger out about putting its archives up there.
Posted Thursday 17th December 2009 16:19 GMT
Pete B
+1 #
If you count all of the +1 channels as repeats then the figure must be around 82.5% already.
Posted Thursday 17th December 2009 16:19 GMT
Ian Stephenson
I would still rather.. #
...watch a repeat than any realityTV or Karaoke show.
Big Brother icon for obvious reasons.
"Killing in the name of" for Xmas number 1!
Posted Thursday 17th December 2009 16:19 GMT
g e
So, let me get this right... #
We're paying a full TV license for content, 50% of which we've already paid for already?
Yes?
Nice work if you can get it.
Posted Thursday 17th December 2009 16:19 GMT
Anonymous Coward
I don't understand, why is anyone still paying for TV? #
The TV License fee is BS, and lawfully avoidable, and other satellite tends to force you to take junk channels with the good ones.
Cut off their money supply, then see them forced to provide value for money, lawfully, oh, and you might waste less time on the idiot box too, maybe learn something.
Posted Thursday 17th December 2009 16:38 GMT
fifi
Value for money? #
they wouldn't produce value for money, they'd produce the most profitable, lowest common denominator tripe imaginable. At least with the licence fee they are some-way accountable for the crap that's pushed out.
Posted Thursday 17th December 2009 20:40 GMT
Anonymous Coward
It'd be worth it #
if they stopped giving Jonathon Woss a banker's bonus salary. Or, indeed, anything. Even if he was on fire.
Posted Thursday 17th December 2009 16:19 GMT
LinkOfHyrule
But I don't watch telly!!! #
I only watch telly on iPlayer and it's always programmes from the catch-up service, never any live streaming as I don't have a TV Licence. This means technically 100% of all the programmes I watch are repeats! Yay I win!
Mines the one with all the unopened letters from Capita/TV Licensing sticking out of the pockets!
Posted Thursday 17th December 2009 16:19 GMT
Graham Marsden
Meaningless comparisons #
The complaints about TV being "All repeats" were perfectly valid when we only had three terrestrial channels to watch and no satellite or cable, let alone 4od, iPlayer, Watch Again etc.
Now we have +1 channels, BBC 3, More4, Sky 2 and 3, Dave, Alibi, Watch, Yesterday etc etc yes, we're getting old stuff shown again, but this is *not* to the exclusion of *new* material.
And are all these "repeats" such a bad thing? When Blake's 7 was first broadcast I missed the first two episodes due to my parents insisting I do my homework first (which dates me!) and it was a long while before I could actually see what happened in the beginning. These days I'd just switch to a +1 channel or watch the repeat later in the week on BBC3 or equivalent.
So, really, what's the big deal?
Posted Thursday 17th December 2009 16:19 GMT
Pete 2
not just TV programmes #
this comment was first posted in 2003
Posted Thursday 17th December 2009 16:22 GMT
Mike Smith
Compilations? #
We might be there already - I'm assuming that the figures don't include the I Love The 1000 Best All-Time TV Out-take Moments of the 90s.
It's getting to the stage where TV looks like it's approaching terminal decline. It might be advancing age, but I can't help seeing superficiality taking over from originality. And I keep thinking of this quote from a very well-known story:
""The fall of Trantor," said Seldon, "cannot be stopped by any conceivable effort. It can be
hastened easily, however. The tale of my interrupted trial will spread through the Galaxy.
Frustration of my plans to lighten the disaster will convince people that the future holds no
promise to them. Already they recall the lives of their grandfathers with envy. They will see that
political revolutions and trade stagnations will increase. The feeling will pervade the Galaxy that
only what a man can grasp for himself at that moment will be of any account. Ambitious men
will not wait and unscrupulous men will not hang back. By their every action they will hasten the
decay of the worlds."
Posted Thursday 17th December 2009 16:26 GMT
Anonymous Coward
Its fair to say... #
The proliferation of new channels is at least partially responsible, and overall we are likely getting more content both new and old across the board.
(Just tune out Dave and Watch and you eliminate a vast amount of regurgitated pannel shows and Clarkson right there!)
Posted Thursday 17th December 2009 16:26 GMT
DrunkenMessiah
Re: Official: British telly really is almost all repeats #
Well... except it's not is it? It's only 44.8% repeats. How that translates to "almost all" is beyond me.
Posted Thursday 17th December 2009 16:28 GMT
Anonymous Coward
foreigners? #
So, 'foreign' broadcasts are American broadcasts (ok, the odd Australian or Canadian show).
So, if I understand correctly, 90% of the world has no tv worth even a repeat of Get Me Out.
Am I the only one that thinks we should thank our lords & masters for saving us from all this foreign torture?
Posted Thursday 17th December 2009 16:28 GMT
Tony Smith, Editor, Reg Hardware
Re: Re: Official: British telly really is almost all repeats #
Because it's infotainment not a fecking maths exam?
Posted Thursday 17th December 2009 16:38 GMT
DrunkenMessiah
Re: Re: Re: Official: British telly really is almost all repeats #
Really? I thought simple percentages would be well within the grasp of even a journalist. Looks it's not bloody Mensa stuff is it? It's a sensationalist headline and you know it.
Posted Thursday 17th December 2009 20:40 GMT
Anonymous Coward
You #
have to think 'one step beyond'
Posted Thursday 17th December 2009 16:33 GMT
BenG
Don't forget #
that this "repeats" figure also includes all of the repeated programs with signing for the blind etc, so the true figure for repeats is a lot less.
The tabloid watch blog has a good breakdown of sample fortnight:
http://tabloid-watch.blogspot.com/2009/12/lack-of-repeats-on-prime-time-bbc1-over.html
And besides it christmas - don't a lot of people want the repeats? What would boxing day be without a Bond film?
Posted Thursday 17th December 2009 20:40 GMT
Anonymous Coward
Exactly! #
The Bond film is always a great reason not to switch to ITV!
The next day - unless 26th was a Sunday - usually has a decent film noir on, or Marx Bros late at night (on BBC2). Though they show far too few of those anymore. Another indicator that our TV is shite on a pedestal today.
Posted Thursday 17th December 2009 20:40 GMT
Anonymous Coward
Also #
The Great Escape! If it weren't for that the stupid English schweinhundts wouldn't know to 'sing' it at the England games in their acknowledgment that we'll make an audacious bid for freedom that will fail, after which we'll be machine gunned and the winners of the match will be USA despite not even being there!
Posted Friday 18th December 2009 10:20 GMT
Mike Flugennock
Bond... Rerun Bond #
Wow, you guys get a Bond picture the day after Christmas every year?
Damn, that settles it; I'm moving to England.
Actually, it depends on the film. Anything with Connery or Moore works for me. OK, so I'm a geezer.
Posted Thursday 17th December 2009 16:33 GMT
Matt 89
.. but TV as we know it is changing... #
The internet is going to completely skew the stats regardless - pretty much everyone I know watches overseas TV shows before they hit UK screens (If they actually do reach here)
As far as local TV goes, with services such as iPlayer etc., there's no need to record TV, unless you want to store it for later.
With home media centers (DIY PVR, TV on computers, steamed/shared content around the home), the schedule the various channels dish up is immaterial. There's no need for the old fashioned Radio Times, or even online TV schedules.
Then there's services such as Love Films, which will inevitably switch from a postal service to an on-demand service at some point.
For those of us who are savvy enough, we're pretty damn close to media on demand already and with such a massive wealth of stuff available, watching repeats is a moot point.
It's entirely possible than in 5 to 10 years, or sooner, the TV industry is going to face a similar battle the music industry did - although the industry does appear to be focusing on keeping up with the times.
Posted Thursday 17th December 2009 16:33 GMT
Steve Foster
More Channels... #
...more repeats.
Simples.
Let's face it - we don't have enough new programming to fill one channel per broadcaster, never mind the plethora each one transmits.
I reckon we should adopt a model of one, perhaps two, channels per broadcaster and no more, and then insist that all of them be broadcast in HD (if we slash the number of channels, there'd be plenty of bandwidth to go around).
Posted Thursday 17th December 2009 16:33 GMT
Anonymous Coward
The number of TV channels increases over time. #
Perhaps part of the reason for there being a higher percentage of repeats is the increase in the number of channels. Specifically channels such Dave and G.O.L.D which show almost nothing but repeats. Also, do the figures include the output of the +1 channels and if so, how is that classed? Strictly speaking they show only repeats.
Posted Thursday 17th December 2009 16:33 GMT
Anonymous Coward
i don;t mind the repeats #
they're better than the god awful, lowest common denominator, junk than passes for most of the new stuff.
Posted Thursday 17th December 2009 16:33 GMT
Robert Carnegie
We can't afford US cop shows #
We get The Professionals. And Heartbeat.
Posted Friday 18th December 2009 10:20 GMT
Mike Flugennock
Can't afford US cop shows? #
M'eh, you're not missing anything. Take "Law And Order". Please.
Posted Thursday 17th December 2009 16:33 GMT
Anonymous Coward
Annoying #
The annoying thing I find is when the description in the EPG doesn't get updated, and described it as a new episode... when I watched it 6 months ago.
That, and all the +1 channels... surely digital could be used for something better? I have a PVR so I can watch it an hour later if I want, or 2 minutes later, etc,etc... I don't need extra channels to allow me to do it.
/rant
Posted Thursday 17th December 2009 16:33 GMT
Fred 24
This is another why #
I stopped owning/watching TV over a year ago. Aside from it being all death/war/famine/doom/repeats, Why do we need it? we still have books, the internet, and god forbid: other people to meet and talk to.
Posted Thursday 17th December 2009 20:40 GMT
Anonymous Coward
It #
was worth it for Mock The Week...before the pathetic Beeb drove Frankie Boyle away. It isn't bad for Have I Got News For You and Q.I., as long as Jimmy Carr isn't on.
Posted Thursday 17th December 2009 16:33 GMT
Anonymous Coward
British telly is rubbish #
The quality of TV in the UK has been gradually sinking into the gutter for the last 20 years. I used to think that the existence of the BBC was the only reason it hadn't slipped faster than it has, but I'm not even sure of that any more.
Repeats aside (and yes, they ARE reaching stupid proportions), the new programs are mostly rubbish and cater only for the dumb masses - X-Factor (with bloody Dermot putting painfully long pauses where they are not needed - yes it's "dramatic" - we get the idea - you don't need to keep reminding us!), bloody Come Dancing (why the "Strictly"? What's that about???), relentless "reality" programs (thank goodness Big Brother is finally ending next year, but that still leaves "cops in uniform" and "oooo... Scary weather" and "average person cooking"), East Enders (which is mind-crushingly depressing), Coronation St (which while not as depressing, is certainly as tedious), Family Fortunes (god help us!), Casualty (started off as a reasonable drama many years ago, but has long since turned into yet another soap), ...need I go on?
The thing is, even the programs that are NOT repeats, seem like repeats. They are all so open-ended, and the same! Surely if you've seen one episode of Come Dancing you've seen them all? Surely ALL the story lines in East Enders have, by now, been done to death (they just keep recycling them like a Scooby-Doo cartoon). The same goes for Casualty et-al. And WHY would anyone watch Family Fortunes or some cruddy cooking or house-hunting program? You'll forget it all in a couple of hours anyway!!!
Answer - it's all cheap, and (in the case of stuff like X-Factor and Big Brother) rakes in HUGE amounts of cash; totally disproportionately to the actual entertainment value.
Posted Thursday 17th December 2009 20:41 GMT
Anonymous Coward
Heh! #
You 'talk' like you watch all that shite. Presumably for somethinjg to do...but still...
Posted Thursday 17th December 2009 16:33 GMT
Eponymous Cowherd
I'd rather The Great Escape #
than suffer more "I'm a celebretards big brother" or "Strictly come Ice Dancing" or "Britain's X Idol Fame Academy" or "East Emmerdale Street" or "Police, Camera, whack-a-chav" or "Real Helicopter Hero Rescue Cops".
This incessant bandwagoning by the TV companies is ridiculous. One comes up with a "winning" format the rest copy it and then they all do the format to its death.
I see the latest "victim" is the early evening magazine show. The BBC decide to revive the old "Nationwide" format and, surprise, surprise, Five copy it with "Live from Studio Five".
Posted Thursday 17th December 2009 16:33 GMT
andyb 2
Plus one channels #
Does this include all the +1 channels on Freeview.....as that is 100% repeats! :)
Posted Thursday 17th December 2009 17:01 GMT
Eponymous Cowherd
or the shopping channels #
which are 100% live.
Posted Thursday 17th December 2009 16:37 GMT
Captain Underpants
RE: Ireland #
In fairness if you sit and watch any significant amount of RTE's home-made television you'd understand why they import so much of it. There's only so much uniformly fucking awful alleged comedy you can inflict on a viewing audience before you offer them at least the possibility of something that might actually be worth watching.
Page:
This topic is closed for new posts.