Digital TV Banter

Digital TV Banter (https://www.digitaltvbanter.co.uk/forum.php)
-   uk.tech.digital-tv (Digital TV - General) (https://www.digitaltvbanter.co.uk/forumdisplay.php?f=4)
-   -   Soft BBC - AGAIN (https://www.digitaltvbanter.co.uk/showthread.php?t=32615)

Woody[_5_] November 22nd 13 06:40 AM

Soft BBC - AGAIN
 
Just been watching an item about Kennedy's assassination on BBC
Breakfast. They showed the famous colour film of the motorcade
from a high point but cut it short as "what happened next is too
horrific to show."

Eh? I remember as a 13 year old exactly where I was and what I
was doing at the time of the announcement and for days afterwards
the various pieces of film (videotape was in its infancy in those
days) of the actual shooting with Jackie K leaning across the
boot lid trying to reach the hand of a Secret Service man who was
attempting to get onto the (now) speeding car. I'm now 63 and it
has not affected me or my psyche, so why can it not be shown now?

I suspect that if 'Auntie' follows the same line in later
bulletins or programmes this evening it will be in for major
ridicule - and rightly so IMO.


--
Woody

harrogate three at ntlworld dot com



Mark Carver November 22nd 13 07:03 AM

Soft BBC - AGAIN
 
Woody wrote:
Just been watching an item about Kennedy's assassination on BBC
Breakfast. They showed the famous colour film of the motorcade
from a high point but cut it short as "what happened next is too
horrific to show."

Eh? I remember as a 13 year old exactly where I was and what I
was doing at the time of the announcement and for days afterwards
the various pieces of film (videotape was in its infancy in those
days) of the actual shooting with Jackie K leaning across the
boot lid trying to reach the hand of a Secret Service man who was
attempting to get onto the (now) speeding car. I'm now 63 and it
has not affected me or my psyche, so why can it not be shown now?


I can't speak about the day itself, I was only 9 days old, but I thought
it's UK broadcaster policy not to (willingly) show anyone's 'moment of death'.
For as long as I can remember such events are cut just before that point on
news footage ?
I'm told that even footage of the planes hitting the WTC towers has to be used
sparingly ?

Perhaps the policy was reviewed, changed, and never repealed after the Kennedy
shooting ? Tommy Cooper's collapse from a fatal heart attack was seen live on
TV, but that's never been repeated on TV (and rightly so IMHO)

There was a fuss recently about a documentary that did show the events leading
up to, and the moment of death of someone dying from natural causes, and
it seemed to generate a great deal of paperwork, and outrage from the Daily
Mail etc.

--
Mark
Please replace invalid and invalid with gmx and net to reply.

Woody[_5_] November 22nd 13 07:07 AM

Soft BBC - AGAIN
 
"Mark Carver" wrote in message
...
Woody wrote:
Just been watching an item about Kennedy's assassination on
BBC Breakfast. They showed the famous colour film of the
motorcade from a high point but cut it short as "what happened
next is too horrific to show."

Eh? I remember as a 13 year old exactly where I was and what I
was doing at the time of the announcement and for days
afterwards the various pieces of film (videotape was in its
infancy in those days) of the actual shooting with Jackie K
leaning across the boot lid trying to reach the hand of a
Secret Service man who was attempting to get onto the (now)
speeding car. I'm now 63 and it has not affected me or my
psyche, so why can it not be shown now?


I can't speak about the day itself, I was only 9 days old, but
I thought
it's UK broadcaster policy not to (willingly) show anyone's
'moment of death'. For as long as I can remember such events
are cut just before that point on news footage ?
I'm told that even footage of the planes hitting the WTC towers
has to be used sparingly ?

Perhaps the policy was reviewed, changed, and never repealed
after the Kennedy shooting ? Tommy Cooper's collapse from a
fatal heart attack was seen live on TV, but that's never been
repeated on TV (and rightly so IMHO)

There was a fuss recently about a documentary that did show the
events leading up to, and the moment of death of someone dying
from natural causes, and
it seemed to generate a great deal of paperwork, and outrage
from the Daily Mail etc.

--



I would not argue with the moment of death policy but surely the
commentator should say something to the effect that what follows
cannot be shown - or indeed why show the preceding footage at
all - but to say that it was 'too horrific' when people over a
certain age have seen it many many times just smacks of the
typical 'we know better than you' attitude of the BBC.


--
Woody

harrogate three at ntlworld dot com



Davey November 22nd 13 09:23 AM

Soft BBC - AGAIN
 
On Fri, 22 Nov 2013 11:15:15 +0100
Martin wrote:

On Fri, 22 Nov 2013 08:03:12 +0000, Mark Carver
wrote:

Woody wrote:
Just been watching an item about Kennedy's assassination on BBC
Breakfast. They showed the famous colour film of the motorcade
from a high point but cut it short as "what happened next is too
horrific to show."

Eh? I remember as a 13 year old exactly where I was and what I
was doing at the time of the announcement and for days afterwards
the various pieces of film (videotape was in its infancy in those
days) of the actual shooting with Jackie K leaning across the
boot lid trying to reach the hand of a Secret Service man who was
attempting to get onto the (now) speeding car. I'm now 63 and it
has not affected me or my psyche, so why can it not be shown now?


I can't speak about the day itself, I was only 9 days old, but I
thought it's UK broadcaster policy not to (willingly) show anyone's
'moment of death'. For as long as I can remember such events are cut
just before that point on news footage ?
I'm told that even footage of the planes hitting the WTC towers has
to be used sparingly ?

Perhaps the policy was reviewed, changed, and never repealed after
the Kennedy shooting ? Tommy Cooper's collapse from a fatal heart
attack was seen live on TV, but that's never been repeated on TV
(and rightly so IMHO)

There was a fuss recently about a documentary that did show the
events leading up to, and the moment of death of someone dying from
natural causes, and it seemed to generate a great deal of paperwork,
and outrage from the Daily Mail etc.


The person who made the film made it a condition that the frame
showing the fatal shot would never be shown


But it was later decided that the film, known as the Zapruder film,
after the man who took it, was now considered to be 'in the public
domain', and Zapruder's family had no say in its use, nor could they
claim royalties from its showing. Zapruder's condition could also be
ignored, under these condidtions, methinks.
But I agree with his motive for making that condition.

--
Davey.

Davey November 22nd 13 09:26 AM

Soft BBC - AGAIN
 
On Fri, 22 Nov 2013 07:40:35 -0000
"Woody" wrote:

Just been watching an item about Kennedy's assassination on BBC
Breakfast. They showed the famous colour film of the motorcade
from a high point but cut it short as "what happened next is too
horrific to show."

Eh? I remember as a 13 year old exactly where I was and what I
was doing at the time of the announcement and for days afterwards
the various pieces of film (videotape was in its infancy in those
days) of the actual shooting with Jackie K leaning across the
boot lid trying to reach the hand of a Secret Service man who was
attempting to get onto the (now) speeding car. I'm now 63 and it
has not affected me or my psyche, so why can it not be shown now?


A slight difference, but it does not change your main point:
A program I saw about a week ago interviewed the Secret Service man, and
he said that Jackie Kennedy was in fact reaching across the boot lid to
try to recover a piece of Kennedy's head, and that she did not even
realise that he, the Secret Service man, was trying to get over to her.
Yikes!
--
Davey.

Brian Gaff November 22nd 13 09:55 AM

Soft BBC - AGAIN
 
Yes, its ridiculous as often there is war footage on other channels during
the day, like Yesterday where there is mass killings and injuries, so are
wars OK if the majority of the people are not known persons?
All they need to do for new viewers is warn about it for goodness sake.

I'm also a bit unimpressed by the statements you hear before the shots of
press conferences of may contain flash photography. well um, its a press
conference, what might you expect.
Like may things, tv broadcasts should all contain the warning, may contain
nuts, usually in charge of the scripts.


I also have to laugh when it says later on at night contains strong language
and adult themes from the start. Not really that helpful.

Embarrassing bodies it seems contains full or partial nudity and scenes of
medical procedures, Ah, I'd never have guessed that.
Its even more obvious on stations like Really where a similar announcement
about medical procedures occurs when the programme has the words surgical,
medical, or similar in their titles!

I just wonder if there really are such clueless people out there, or if its
just some kind of perception by broadcasters that their viewers are all
thick as a brick.

Note this newsgroup may contain off topic messages.


Brian

--
From the Sofa of Brian Gaff Reply address is active
"Woody" wrote in message
...
Just been watching an item about Kennedy's assassination on BBC Breakfast.
They showed the famous colour film of the motorcade from a high point but
cut it short as "what happened next is too horrific to show."

Eh? I remember as a 13 year old exactly where I was and what I was doing
at the time of the announcement and for days afterwards the various pieces
of film (videotape was in its infancy in those days) of the actual
shooting with Jackie K leaning across the boot lid trying to reach the
hand of a Secret Service man who was attempting to get onto the (now)
speeding car. I'm now 63 and it has not affected me or my psyche, so why
can it not be shown now?

I suspect that if 'Auntie' follows the same line in later bulletins or
programmes this evening it will be in for major ridicule - and rightly so
IMO.


--
Woody

harrogate three at ntlworld dot com




Brian Gaff November 22nd 13 10:04 AM

Soft BBC - AGAIN
 
Well, I think its the context which is the thing. In the case of the natural
causes one, it was basically done deliberately, most of the others were
either accidents, wars, killings etc. I've not actually noticed them edit
the Kennedy footage before. Back when I could see, the entire thing was
shown and its pretty chaotic and hard to actually see what did happen of
course. Nobody expected it did they, after all.
Other cases such as the Tommy Cooper one were just accidents. The
Challenger crash, Columbia disintegration etc, one could not see the people
themselves, and I noticed in the latter case the tape they retrieved from
the wreckage was only broadcast up to a certain point. I was on Nasa tv at
the time and heard the last seconds on the comms, and this was quite
worrying of course, as I think everyone knew what was going to happen but
were powerless to do anything about it.

Then the room lockdown when the transmission failed.



I'm actually surprised that no ghoultape or dvd has come out with all the
nasty footage on it if by now, all the stuff from decapitation etc, must
still be out there. I have no wish to see it, but one assumes someone must
watch it all to decide what to show.
Brian

--
From the Sofa of Brian Gaff Reply address is active
"Mark Carver" wrote in message
...
Woody wrote:
Just been watching an item about Kennedy's assassination on BBC
Breakfast. They showed the famous colour film of the motorcade from a
high point but cut it short as "what happened next is too horrific to
show."

Eh? I remember as a 13 year old exactly where I was and what I was doing
at the time of the announcement and for days afterwards the various
pieces of film (videotape was in its infancy in those days) of the actual
shooting with Jackie K leaning across the boot lid trying to reach the
hand of a Secret Service man who was attempting to get onto the (now)
speeding car. I'm now 63 and it has not affected me or my psyche, so why
can it not be shown now?


I can't speak about the day itself, I was only 9 days old, but I thought
it's UK broadcaster policy not to (willingly) show anyone's 'moment of
death'. For as long as I can remember such events are cut just before that
point on news footage ?
I'm told that even footage of the planes hitting the WTC towers has to be
used sparingly ?

Perhaps the policy was reviewed, changed, and never repealed after the
Kennedy shooting ? Tommy Cooper's collapse from a fatal heart attack was
seen live on TV, but that's never been repeated on TV (and rightly so
IMHO)

There was a fuss recently about a documentary that did show the events
leading up to, and the moment of death of someone dying from natural
causes, and
it seemed to generate a great deal of paperwork, and outrage from the
Daily Mail etc.

--
Mark
Please replace invalid and invalid with gmx and net to reply.




Bill Wright[_2_] November 22nd 13 10:24 AM

Soft BBC - AGAIN
 
Woody wrote:

I would not argue with the moment of death policy but surely the
commentator should say something to the effect that what follows
cannot be shown - or indeed why show the preceding footage at
all - but to say that it was 'too horrific' when people over a
certain age have seen it many many times just smacks of the
typical 'we know better than you' attitude of the BBC.


Don't forget that what has gone before does not concern our PC and H & S
obsessed masters. A lifetime's experience counts for nothing, mainly
because people who have it are old and thus their thoughts and opinions
don't count.

Bill

Michael Chare[_3_] November 22nd 13 04:08 PM

Soft BBC - AGAIN
 
On 22/11/2013 07:40, Woody wrote:
Just been watching an item about Kennedy's assassination on BBC
Breakfast. They showed the famous colour film of the motorcade
from a high point but cut it short as "what happened next is too
horrific to show."

Eh? I remember as a 13 year old exactly where I was and what I
was doing at the time of the announcement and for days afterwards
the various pieces of film (videotape was in its infancy in those
days) of the actual shooting with Jackie K leaning across the
boot lid trying to reach the hand of a Secret Service man who was
attempting to get onto the (now) speeding car. I'm now 63 and it
has not affected me or my psyche, so why can it not be shown now?

I suspect that if 'Auntie' follows the same line in later
bulletins or programmes this evening it will be in for major
ridicule - and rightly so IMO.



I suppose you could argue that modern TVs would show the details of what
happened more clearly. Back then perhaps most people would have had
something like a 15" B&W TV. Today 32" color sets are often thought of
as small.


--
Michael Chare

Woody[_5_] November 22nd 13 06:39 PM

Soft BBC - AGAIN
 
"Michael Chare" [email protected] wrote in
message o.uk...
On 22/11/2013 07:40, Woody wrote:
Just been watching an item about Kennedy's assassination on
BBC
Breakfast. They showed the famous colour film of the motorcade
from a high point but cut it short as "what happened next is
too
horrific to show."

Eh? I remember as a 13 year old exactly where I was and what I
was doing at the time of the announcement and for days
afterwards
the various pieces of film (videotape was in its infancy in
those
days) of the actual shooting with Jackie K leaning across the
boot lid trying to reach the hand of a Secret Service man who
was
attempting to get onto the (now) speeding car. I'm now 63 and
it
has not affected me or my psyche, so why can it not be shown
now?

I suspect that if 'Auntie' follows the same line in later
bulletins or programmes this evening it will be in for major
ridicule - and rightly so IMO.



I suppose you could argue that modern TVs would show the
details of what happened more clearly. Back then perhaps most
people would have had something like a 15" B&W TV. Today 32"
color sets are often thought of as small.


--
Michael Chare



Regrettably you are shwoing your age Michael. The 'standard'
sizes for monochrome sets in those days were 19" and 23" 405
line. The degradation of the initial pictures were as a result of
the one-year old Telstar comms satellite and standards conversion
done in those days by sticking a 405/50 camera in front of a
525/60 monitor. When the film arrived a few days later the real
detail was quite obvious.

I'm sure someone will confirm or correct me but despite the fact
that the US already had colour TV by then, the actual colour
shown around most of the world was from film and that didn't
surface until years later.


--
Woody

harrogate three at ntlworld dot com




All times are GMT. The time now is 06:33 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
SEO by vBSEO 2.4.0
Copyright 2004-2006 DigitalTVBanter.co.uk