BBC tows the "company line" when it comes to police harassment
in [Digital Cameras]
|
Prev: Xmas Themes For Uploaded Photos
Next: Just out: 'Hot - Life in the Australian outback' - could use some help
From: Wilba on 4 Dec 2009 21:04 Paul Heslop wrote: > Jim Bob wrote: >> >> As for Top Gear, sometimes it appears that they do seem to push the >> boundaries when it comes to causing disruption. That said, most of the >> time, I think it's all just an act for the show anyway. Who knows. > > It's all tongue in cheek but it has always struck me that much of what > they do is set up to look a lot worse than it really is. Obviously > when they play tricks on each other they are all well aware of what is > going on or the danger would be unacceptable and as far as I am > concerned most of what we see is scripted and played for laughs. I don't know how they get away with not wearing helmets when they are cutting up the track. (I understand why they wouldn't want to wear them while they are performing for the camera - that's not the point.) I wonder how they get away with setting such an irresponsible and unsafe example, and how they get away with it from an insurance and liability POV? I guess there's some lawyer's distinction between an activity that requires a helmet (e.g. "a speed event"), and what they get up to.
From: tony cooper on 4 Dec 2009 21:09 On Sat, 5 Dec 2009 00:57:54 -0000, "michael adams" <mjadams25(a)onetel.net.uk> wrote: >If it's not a better class of rubbish than yours, then how comes you buy our >junkas well as our good stuff ? Whereas with the odd exception such as Gerry >Springer we only ever buy your good stuff ? I don't know that you do. What you may think of as our "good stuff" is not what I might think of as our "good stuff". I don't know what you are buying over there. Based on some off-hand comments I read in other newsgroups, Brits are pretty familiar with some of what I consider to be pretty crappy shows. Rating something as the "good stuff" is purely personal. >In any case it's about improving themselves. Its aspirational. Aspirational? It's Jerry - not Gerry - Springer, by the way. -- Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
From: Paul Heslop on 5 Dec 2009 03:16 Wilba wrote: > > Paul Heslop wrote: > > Jim Bob wrote: > >> > >> As for Top Gear, sometimes it appears that they do seem to push the > >> boundaries when it comes to causing disruption. That said, most of the > >> time, I think it's all just an act for the show anyway. Who knows. > > > > It's all tongue in cheek but it has always struck me that much of what > > they do is set up to look a lot worse than it really is. Obviously > > when they play tricks on each other they are all well aware of what is > > going on or the danger would be unacceptable and as far as I am > > concerned most of what we see is scripted and played for laughs. > > I don't know how they get away with not wearing helmets when they are > cutting up the track. (I understand why they wouldn't want to wear them > while they are performing for the camera - that's not the point.) I wonder > how they get away with setting such an irresponsible and unsafe example, and > how they get away with it from an insurance and liability POV? I guess > there's some lawyer's distinction between an activity that requires a helmet > (e.g. "a speed event"), and what they get up to. The insurance thing is an interesting point though. Mind you even the track runs are not completely honest in that they apparently only shoot so much themselves and the rest is left to someone else, who probably does wear a helmet. I just look at it as pure entertainment nowadays, like a bunch of kids playing with their toys. -- Paul (we break easy) ------------------------------------------------------- Stop and Look http://www.geocities.com/dreamst8me/
From: Wilba on 5 Dec 2009 03:33 Paul Heslop wrote: > Wilba wrote: >> Paul Heslop wrote: >> > Jim Bob wrote: >> >> >> >> As for Top Gear, sometimes it appears that they do seem to push the >> >> boundaries when it comes to causing disruption. That said, most of >> >> the >> >> time, I think it's all just an act for the show anyway. Who knows. >> > >> > It's all tongue in cheek but it has always struck me that much of what >> > they do is set up to look a lot worse than it really is. Obviously >> > when they play tricks on each other they are all well aware of what is >> > going on or the danger would be unacceptable and as far as I am >> > concerned most of what we see is scripted and played for laughs. >> >> I don't know how they get away with not wearing helmets when they are >> cutting up the track. (I understand why they wouldn't want to wear them >> while they are performing for the camera - that's not the point.) I >> wonder >> how they get away with setting such an irresponsible and unsafe example, >> and how they get away with it from an insurance and liability POV? I >> guess >> there's some lawyer's distinction between an activity that requires a >> helmet >> (e.g. "a speed event"), and what they get up to. > > The insurance thing is an interesting point though. Mind you even the > track runs are not completely honest in that they apparently only > shoot so much themselves and the rest is left to someone else, who > probably does wear a helmet. > > I just look at it as pure entertainment nowadays, like a bunch of kids > playing with their toys. Exactly, and that's refreshing. :- ) You know they did a local version here in Australia? Hideous!
From: mikeos on 5 Dec 2009 08:30
michael adams wrote: > "tony cooper" <tony_cooper213(a)earthlink.net> wrote in message > news:96iih5tk7kof1qohffkkvbpt93lrck6ns5(a)4ax.com... >> On Fri, 4 Dec 2009 17:30:55 -0000, "michael adams" >> <mjadams25(a)onetel.net.uk> wrote: >> >>> Over there you sit through 20 minutes of commmercials per hour, >> No we don't. The most recent figures are 15:48 minutes on broadcast >> and 14.55 on cable of non-fresh program. That's not all commercials, >> either. That includes the re-cap portion (where what went on last >> week is shown if applicable), news spots, and teaser material. The >> commercials must be limited to 12 minutes per hour. Strange. When we watch a US show on TV, most "hour long" shows, like SVU and CSI come out at around 40 minutes once the commercial breaks are stripped out. |