<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="yes"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>BBC on nostuff.org archive | Chris Keene</title>
    <link>https://nostuff.org/archive/tags/bbc/</link>
    <description>Recent content in BBC on nostuff.org archive | Chris Keene</description>
    <generator>Hugo</generator>
    <language>en-gb</language>
    <lastBuildDate>Sun, 05 Sep 2010 21:06:37 +0000</lastBuildDate>
    <atom:link href="https://nostuff.org/archive/tags/bbc/index.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
    <item>
      <title>BBC Three</title>
      <link>https://nostuff.org/archive/2010/bbc-three/</link>
      <pubDate>Sun, 05 Sep 2010 21:06:37 +0000</pubDate>
      <guid>https://nostuff.org/archive/2010/bbc-three/</guid>
      <description>&lt;div&gt;&#xA;  In 2003 I got a freeview box. I got good reception. I could see the transmitter from my window.&lt;/p&gt; &#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&#xA;    BBC One or Two had being running ‘BBC Three takeover’ sessions, with several BBC Three programmes in a row. They were good. It’s not fashionable to say that nowadays.&#xA;  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&#xA;    In its early days it was innovative, cutting edge, risk taking and alternative.&#xA;  &lt;/p&gt;&#xA;  &lt;p&gt;&#xA;    One of the programmes I saw on the BBC Three take over shows was &lt;a href=&#34;http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dreamspaces&#34;&gt;Dreamspaces&lt;/a&gt;, which simply explored modern buildings and architecture. It didn’t pad out the show with music montages, and the presenters gave facts, rather than the normal approach taking by shows of making the presenter be ‘fun but stupid’ and ask an ‘expert’ lots of basic question&lt;/a&gt;s.</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>naughty boys and lots of sheep</title>
      <link>https://nostuff.org/archive/2008/naughty-boys-and-lots-of-sheep/</link>
      <pubDate>Wed, 29 Oct 2008 22:58:26 +0000</pubDate>
      <guid>https://nostuff.org/archive/2008/naughty-boys-and-lots-of-sheep/</guid>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;I Don’t normally write about this sort of thing, but this is crazy.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Trying to ascertain the facts is almost impossible, even though supposed quality broadsheets have written huge amounts about it.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;So what happened?&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Russell Brand has an evening radio show on Radio 2.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;This is pre-recorded (really? every week? this is the biggest scandal!)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Last week he had Jonathan Ross on the show (presumably to promote his book), though it has never been made clear whether he was co-presenting or a guest&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Andrew Sachs – an actor who was in Faulty Towers – was due to be interviewed on the phone to promote a TV show.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Andrew is 78&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Russell phones Andrew while chatting to Jonathan, there is much banter going on, both are known for it.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;When they are put through to the answer&lt;/a&gt; phone the banter continues, references about Andrew’s granddaughter are made, including implying Russell has slept with her, though these are done in a somewhat joking fashion (Brand: “Andrew Sachs, I did not do nothing with Georgina – oh no I’ve revealed I know her name”)&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;The Granddaughter is currently touring in Satanic Sluts burlesque group.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Various reports (including the Times, which is less inaccurate than most of the press) said she had slept with Russell.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Reports keep on referring to them talking about Andrew Sachs killing himself on hearing the talk about his granddaughter, though the one edited transcript I have seen does not mention this at all.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;After the show was recorded, the Times claims that a junior produce contacted Andrew Sachs to confirm it was ok to be played on air (which I understand is actually normal practice), though does not state if they actually got permission, i.e. what his response was. (&lt;a href=&#34;http://entertainment.timesonline.co.uk/tol/arts_and_entertainment/tv_and_radio/article5036517.ece&#34;&gt;from the times&lt;/a&gt;) Apparently a senior executive (or senior editor – to me there’s quite a difference between an executive or editor) vetted the recording before going out, presumably due to the new guidelines which mean senior staff (above the show’s producer) have to sign off controversial content.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;After the show went out there were, apparently, two complaints.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Roughly a week later the Mail reports on it, and then 18,000 more complaints are made, one wonders how many have actually listened.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Since Tuesday this has been at the top of every major UK news site, including the websites of the ‘broadsheets’. Ultimately it is all about a few minutes of talk left on an answering machine.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Radio Pop</title>
      <link>https://nostuff.org/archive/2008/radio-pop/</link>
      <pubDate>Sat, 11 Oct 2008 17:38:10 +0000</pubDate>
      <guid>https://nostuff.org/archive/2008/radio-pop/</guid>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&#34;http://www.radiopop.co.uk/&#34;&gt;Radio Pop&lt;/a&gt; is an interesting experimental site from the fantastic &lt;a href=&#34;http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/radiolabs/&#34;&gt;BBC radio labs&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;It is a sort of soical network site for radio listening. It only records your listening through the ‘radio pop’ live streams. I (like many) mainly listen to listen again and the radio iplayer, and they are working on intergrating with both. You can &lt;a href=&#34;http://www.radiopop.co.uk/users/chriskeene&#34;&gt;see my profile here&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;You can ‘pop’ what you are currently listening to (basically a ‘i like this’ button). I’ve added my ‘pop’ rss feed to &lt;a href=&#34;http://www.dipity.com/chriskeene&#34;&gt;my dipity timeline&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>News Quiz</title>
      <link>https://nostuff.org/archive/2008/news-quiz/</link>
      <pubDate>Sun, 20 Apr 2008 15:12:01 +0000</pubDate>
      <guid>https://nostuff.org/archive/2008/news-quiz/</guid>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;On a Saturday, I’m prone to remembering the fantastic News Quiz (or equally fantastic Now Show), which starts at 12.30 (why am I saying that, you know that right?), at exactly 1pm. At this point I dash to listen again (now the radio iplayer) to listen to it there. At this point I’m often frustrated as it is still playing the show from the previous week. Do the BBC not understand by problem!&lt;/p&gt;</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>BBC Newswatch</title>
      <link>https://nostuff.org/archive/2007/bbc-newswatch/</link>
      <pubDate>Fri, 21 Dec 2007 13:25:58 +0000</pubDate>
      <guid>https://nostuff.org/archive/2007/bbc-newswatch/</guid>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&#34;http://news.bbc.co.uk/newswatch/ukfs/hi/default.stm&#34;&gt;BBC Newswatch&lt;/a&gt; was set up after the Hutton &lt;strike&gt;whitewash&lt;/strike&gt; inquiry as a place to monitor and feedback on BBC News. It seems that recently it has had a bit of a slimming down, with many parts of the site being reduced to ‘&lt;a href=&#34;http://news.bbc.co.uk/newswatch/ukfs/hi/profiles/default.stm&#34;&gt;nothing to&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&#34;http://news.bbc.co.uk/newswatch/ukfs/hi/notes_and_corrections/default.stm&#34;&gt;see here&lt;/a&gt;‘ messages. However, by following just one link from the main homepage: ‘styleguide’ and you will notice the left hand menu still has a link to the &lt;a href=&#34;http://news.bbc.co.uk/newswatch/ukfs/hi/notes_and_corrections/notes_a_-_z/default.stm&#34;&gt;archived ‘notes’ pages&lt;/a&gt;. Most BBC ‘downsized’ sites are &lt;a href=&#34;http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/default.stm&#34; title=&#34;check the notice at the top&#34;&gt;simply&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&#34;http://www.bbc.co.uk/cult/&#34;&gt;frozen&lt;/a&gt;, I wonder why they didn’t do the same here. One rational explanation might be that it was generating a large amount of email from those who objected to the BBCs stance on various matters and terminology.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>
