Online  permalink

Points of View Message Board Blog Post 5

This discussion has been closed.

Messages: 551 - 600 of 1436
  • Message 551

    , in reply to message 550.

    Posted by niclaramartin (U1621265) on Thursday, 5th February 2009

    Nick

    Have you given any more thought to the question of closing the Radio board? Think Geoff (in particular) put forward some good arguments for retention until you can look into the matter in more depth.

    Please don't link me to a blog,smiley - doh or I may start just linking you to my questions/opinions instead of phrasing them with words.smiley - smiley smiley - laugh

    A simple, "I may have to rethink the Radio board closure", or "I am still thinking of closing the Radio board". smiley - ok

    Thank you
    niclaramartin

    P.S. Are you practicing your Quote function exercises? Once you've mastered that, we can move on to "Over-use of linking, and the detrimental effects on your credibility as a communicator (Volume 2)". Open University 1972. The first part of the lesson is finding the link to it. smiley - ok

    Report message1

  • Message 552

    , in reply to message 551.

    Posted by cricket-Angel Tucker (U3382697) on Thursday, 5th February 2009

    Do we need tags?? smiley - laugh

    Report message2

  • Message 553

    , in reply to message 552.

    Posted by niclaramartin (U1621265) on Thursday, 5th February 2009

    NIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIICK

    May we have more smileys, on our IMPROVED messageboards?

    cricket

    smiley - winkeye

    Report message3

  • Message 554

    , in reply to message 529.

    Posted by Bruce the Barbarian (U3520602) on Thursday, 5th February 2009

    Nick, please could you clarify for me if the PoV message board is to remain, or is it going too? 
    OK, thanks for replying but the emphasis was on 'clarify'.


    No one has said the POV board is going Bruce. 
    And no one has said it *isn't* going, have they? smiley - erm
    I have read the contents of the link in it's entirety and still remain unconvinced of any surety of the PoV board remaining.

    Report message4

  • Message 555

    , in reply to message 554.

    Posted by LoudGeoffW (U11943874) on Thursday, 5th February 2009

    Bruce, I think that the summary of that meeting implied that the POV board would remain, but potentially only linked to TV forums. Everything else looks decidedly as if it's hanging by a thread, without any suitable replacement even being discussed.



    Report message5

  • Message 556

    , in reply to message 554.

    Posted by OfficerDibble (U1158251) on Thursday, 5th February 2009

    That was my point too Bruce.

    Do you remember the Yes and No game on "Take your Pick"?

    Michael Miles: "Will the Radio board be closed?"
    Contestant: "No one has said that the POV boards will close."
    Michael Miles: "Will the Radio board be closed?"
    Contestant: "I have not discussed the closure of all the POV boards."
    Michael Miles: "Will any of the POV boards be closed?"
    Contestant: "In my blog I said a decision has not been made."
    Michael Miles: "Have you discussed the option of the Radio board being closed?"
    Contestant: "Clearly, I can't make any guarantees about what may happen in the future."
    Michael Miles: "Will the Radio board be closed?"
    Contestant: "We have a plan for an enhanced communication channel for Radio.
    Michael Miles: "But will the Radio board be closed?"
    Contestant: "We have a plan for improvements to Blogs and Messageboards."
    Michael Miles: "Will the Radio board be closed?"
    Contestant: "I did not say betamax."

    Report message6

  • Message 557

    , in reply to message 556.

    Posted by cricket-Angel Tucker (U3382697) on Thursday, 5th February 2009

    smiley - laugh

    Fab!

    Reminds me of a Paxman interview.

    Report message7

  • Message 558

    , in reply to message 556.

    Posted by Nick Reynolds (U11648404) on Thursday, 5th February 2009

    Let me try and be absolutely clear.

    "Will the Radio board be closed?"

    The clearest answer I can give at this point is "I don't know".

    I haven't given this any more thought because I am waiting to see if the suggestions about the POV boards being run by television are taken up.

    If they are, then I and my colleagues will start thinking about the radio board.

  • Message 559

    , in reply to message 558.

    Posted by Professor Techno (U3287342) on Thursday, 5th February 2009

    Nick when is Tom going to make an appearence

    Report message9

  • Message 560

    , in reply to message 558.

    Posted by Smilie Minogue (U8747614) on Thursday, 5th February 2009

    Thanks Nick. smiley - smiley

    Report message10

  • Message 561

    , in reply to message 558.

    Posted by Nick Reynolds (U11648404) on Thursday, 5th February 2009

    As for the question of trailing the messageboard, maybe Jeremy needs to give two urls out, one for the programme page and one for the message board.

    This is a glitch in our navigation. As I recall I did ask whether we could get a link to the message board from the programme page, but there was a problem with this. I'll have another go.

  • Message 562

    , in reply to message 560.

    Posted by niclaramartin (U1621265) on Thursday, 5th February 2009

    Nick Message 558

    Thank you. THAT is the sort of reply we are looking for. smiley - ok

    Report message12

  • Message 563

    , in reply to message 561.

    Posted by niclaramartin (U1621265) on Thursday, 5th February 2009

    Nick

    Message 561

    smiley - ok

    Suppose you are still going to keep the 3 minute rule though. Drat.

    Report message13

  • Message 564

    , in reply to message 563.

    Posted by niclaramartin (U1621265) on Thursday, 5th February 2009

    Nick

    What's keeping Tom from coming back to HIS thread and feeding back outcomes from HIS meeting/project?

    We are really keen to get some of the functions we suggested, adopted. Like the Search facility, Quote function smiley - winkeye, seeing more than one posting as you "Reply to comment", the 3 minute rule going.....

    So, it would be interesting to hear (SOON) if any of them CAN be implemented.

    Report message14

  • Message 565

    , in reply to message 561.

    Posted by jTemplar (U13714316) on Friday, 6th February 2009

    As for the long-running question of properly trailing the messageboard from the Points Of View TV programme, asking Jeremy to give out two URLs, one for the programme page and one for the message board, as suggested by Nick, is not a sensible idea and would contrary to all BBC guidelines.

    A well organised web presence for the programme, along the lines of Watchdog, with follow-ups about previously mentioned items on the show, (perhaps as blog entries), an archive, presenter profiles, (past and present), history of the show, as well as links to previous shows and a big obvious link to this messageboard, would be most welcome.

    A similarly well organised web presence for the Feedback radio programme, along the lines described above linking to the Radio section of this messageboard would also be great.

    This messageboard, (perhaps we could come-up with a name different from feedback or POV), would become the hub for generating and responding to viewer comments about all aspects of the BBC.

    john

    Report message15

  • Message 566

    , in reply to message 565.

    Posted by niclaramartin (U1621265) on Friday, 6th February 2009

    Nick

    I am really sorry to dump this on you, BUT, Tom really is showing us, the attitude adopted by too many blog authors.

    He has come onto the messageboards and asked us for ideas/suggestions of what we want, in the way of improvements, in his Comments Wish List Thread. What he has then effectively done is what a great many blog authors do. Leave you hanging by not coming back, or writing a follow-up blog/thread.

    It's rare enough for us to be asked to do anything constructive by BBC staff, but when THAT staff member, then doesn't even bother to feedback, it leaves you wondering - WHAT WAS THE POINT?

    As it does not appear that Tom is coming back (after two nudges from you), is there any way that YOU can tell us, what suggestions we came up with, were viewed favourably, at your meeting?

    It would be better if Tom would answer these questions, and I'm sorry to add to your work-load, but, this is now over TWO months since we have heard from Tom.

    Thank you smiley - ok
    niclaramartin

    Report message16

  • Message 567

    , in reply to message 565.

    Posted by niclaramartin (U1621265) on Friday, 6th February 2009

    John

    If BBC would put ALL their links to Blog Network/Messageboards/Programmes on ONE page, then NEW, (and some of the resident posters) would be able to see ALL that BBC has to offer in the way of commenting.

    You'd simply need, "Blog area", "Messageboard area", "Twitter links", "Programmes"....... and then, links from THOSE headings to the area YOU want to talk in. The situation of having Messageboards in ONE area, Blogs in a different area, and Twitter linked from within the blog area is just far to convoluted, AND does not show the poster/viewer the FULL range which BBC has, AT A GLANCE.

    Report message17

  • Message 568

    , in reply to message 566.

    Posted by Mozo (U10059077) on Friday, 6th February 2009

    niclaramartin

    That's basically what Jem did to us on the 6Music boards a few months ago. Frustrating innit?

    You'll probably get him popping up in a little while, when someone tells him he's being mentioned a lot and put in a bad light. He'll make a few friendly comments and a few conciliatory noises, even a begrudging apology. Then he’ll say he can’t go into detail now because he’s just on the way out of the office/going into a meeting/about to make a lasagne. After which he'll disappear for another 3 months or so.

    Its all about fire fighting. Keep us damped down long enough for them to decide what the ultimate solution will be.

    Now where have I heard that before?

    Think yourself lucky that Nick actually bothers to post on here at all, albeit sporadically and in code. Only time we get a visitation on the George Lamb thread over at 6MMB (which is just approaching 10,000 messages) is when a station controller resigns, and then that’s only to put us all on pre-mod for no discernable reason.

    Do I sound bitter?

    Report message18

  • Message 569

    , in reply to message 568.

    Posted by niclaramartin (U1621265) on Friday, 6th February 2009

    Mozo

    I think your posting shows Nick very clearly, just WHY he has had such a hard time. EVERY time a member of BBC staff comes on a board, they CLOSE it. Which, is why, if you are NOT planning to CLOSE the POV messageboards, Nick, you will be a one-off. We have ALL had boards we used to frequent, which are now defunct. The Scottish messageboards were an absolute credit to BBC. There was REAL debate/discussion ranging from television, to religion to politics to everyday life. They effectively took away the hosts and left the boards to implode, and then said, "CLOSED". Not our fault - BBC's, for lack of input. I loved the Travel messageboard - again lots of great informatin/advice (Closed almost overnight), and I could go on (as every other poster can about defunct messageboards). OK, BBC are right that there are other boards on the internet where we can post to, (and the Travel Board was probably one which COULD have been closed for that reason) but to be perfectly honest, the Scottish boards, received input from America, New Zealand, The Pacific Islands, Canada, Holland, Wales, England etc.(and unfortunately some eejits from Ireland intent on decrying the English for everything). BBC's name was the draw to THOSE Scottish boards. People from outwith UK, know the name BBC, and simply came onto the BBC website, and THEN chose where they wanted to talk. By closing the Scottish boards they left a lot of foreign posters without their link (quite literally with the Americans/Canadians/New Zealanders) to contact with their forebears' country/region of birth. (Who Do You Think You Are?, or other programmes using First/Second World War, History/Emigration etc could have found so much information on those boards). And YET, the Archers have SEVEN boards...

    www.bbc.co.uk/dna/mb...

    BECAUSE it is well-hosted. Just make sure the other boards are as well-hosted. It's the making or breaking of a messageboard.

    Report message19

  • Message 570

    , in reply to message 569.

    Posted by Curmy (U10228939) on Friday, 6th February 2009

    Your final sentence is spot on Niclara smiley - ok

    Mozo, your post fills me with despair about the future of these MBs !

    Report message20

  • Message 571

    , in reply to message 570.

    Posted by Mozo (U10059077) on Friday, 6th February 2009

    Sorry to bring despondency but I think its the way things are going. The BBC say they want feedback but they want it on their terms. That would be fair enough for a commercial operation but considering they are publicly funded, I think they should be more concerned with what we, the listeners, viewers, contributors want.

    I've got my own views about what’s afoot in the BBC and its all part of the general race towards a mass audience, more driven by the need for the BBC staff to enhance their own CVs than by what's good for the BBC.

    Personally I think if they want to chase commercial ideals they should be made to find their funding commercially. I'm all for public service broadcasting and up to a year or so ago fully supported the licence fee. But recent events across the corporation show that they really don't have the respect for their unique funding structure that they once had. There have been some recent alternative proposals such as a semi-subscription service and something along the lines of the way National Trust is funded. I think there will be some changes in the future, especially in the current climate and moreover after the recent multiple failures of BBC management to exert anything akin to editorial prudence over their own output.

    In essence they are caught in the whirlwind of new media and the opportunities for interactivity that they present. Rather than see that as a virtue and something to be encouraged and supported, they see it as a problem. Hence all the flurry of meetings and various execs running around looking for solutions to us all having the impudence to want to express ourselves on what they see as THEIR network. Whilst in the background they nurture mediocrity and waste money and airtime on stuff that the audience don't want and could get in abundance elsewhere if they did.

    I think the only way to fight them is by getting organised, but then we all have lives to lead outside as well don’t we? Unfortunately though the cavalier attitude of the BBC relies on fragmenting dissent. Hence the move away from message boards.

    Anyway, must get down off this high horse for a bit, I'm getting vertigo.

    Report message21

  • Message 572

    , in reply to message 571.

    Posted by niclaramartin (U1621265) on Friday, 6th February 2009

    Mozo

    smiley - ok

    Report message22

  • Message 573

    , in reply to message 572.

    Posted by LoudGeoffW (U11943874) on Friday, 6th February 2009

    This seems somewhat pertinent in the light of Mozo's concerns about the BBC behaving as it was a private company, rather than a publicly funded corporation:

    www.theregister.co.u...

    Report message23

  • Message 574

    , in reply to message 573.

    Posted by Mozo (U10059077) on Friday, 6th February 2009

    They seem to use that 'BBC Worldwide' moniker a lot don't they? Why exactly does the BBC have a 'commercial arm'? Seems like a bit of a catchall to me. They also used it last year as part of the plan to sell access to the John Peel sessions and video online didn't they?

    I thought it was originally set up just to sell odd bits of spinoff from BBC programmes, such as Dr Who calendars and the like. They seem to be using it these days for anything that gets them out of their charter responsibilities. Its all very creative accounting isn’t it?

    Maybe this is an example of BBC 'Black ops'.

    Report message24

  • Message 575

    , in reply to message 569.

    Posted by Seurat (U1158192) on Friday, 6th February 2009

    Message posted by niclaramartin
    ...EVERY time a member of BBC staff comes on a board, they CLOSE it. Which, is why, if you are NOT planning to CLOSE the POV messageboards, Nick, you will be a one-off. We have ALL had boards we used to frequent, which are now defunct... 

    Indeed. A little homework on the long and ignoble history of the BBC's involvement with messageboards would have been instructive.
    Perhaps Nick can find some old-timer at the Beeb who could fill him in on the last days of such boards as:

    The Great Debate, The 'Old' Points of View, Drama
    The 'Old' 606, Dr Who, Cult, Weather, Science and Nature, Points Askew etc

    Pay close attention to any appearances from Hosts arriving with bold claims of improvements, just before the plug was pulled, to understand why such claims now make us so (rightly) nervous.

    A quick glance at the Bonekickers debacle would also have given a better understanding of posters' suspicions of the 'powers that be'.

    Report message25

  • Message 576

    , in reply to message 575.

    Posted by Mozo (U10059077) on Friday, 6th February 2009

    Didn't a certain someone also remove the Radio 2 feedback boards in their entirety in a fit of pique over dissent being expressed about the choice of a new celeb DJ?

    Report message26

  • Message 577

    , in reply to message 576.

    Posted by Helen May (U1633128) on Friday, 6th February 2009

    It was the removal of my OP on a thread announcing said celeb DJ had got the Drivetime slot that started all the censorship cries on that board.

    It was only after my complaint was aired on Feedback and the denial that it was censorship that got it reinstated. Well what else could they do?

    H

    Report message27

  • Message 578

    , in reply to message 577.

    Posted by Professor Techno (U3287342) on Friday, 6th February 2009

    Looking back at the old 5live station board and this partiular thread www.bbc.co.uk/dna/mb... reminds me how things have remained almost the same in terms of BBC hosts lack of respect for MESSAGEBOARDERS.

    I think it is inevitable that in the near future we will have a host starting a thread saying:

    Just to confirm:

    The Radio topic will be closing today at 12 noon.

    Thanks,

    POV Hosts

    As was the case with the 5live boards- we are on borrowed time so we might as well make the most of it!!

    Report message28

  • Message 579

    , in reply to message 578.

    Posted by Nick Reynolds (U11648404) on Friday, 6th February 2009

    One thing I can promise.

    If any changes are made to the POV boards you will be told about them in advance by a named person (e.g. me), with an explanation of why they are happening.

  • Message 580

    , in reply to message 579.

    Posted by Professor Techno (U3287342) on Friday, 6th February 2009

    Nick have you managed to track down Tom i know you must have enough work on but Toms continued absence is really sending out the wrong message.

    Report message30

  • Message 581

    , in reply to message 580.

    Posted by Curmy (U10228939) on Friday, 6th February 2009

    I posted on that thread Prof Techno and several people on there post on

    the alternative radio 5 board which was set up.

    How nice it was of the Hosts to decide at the last minute that they'd close at midday smiley - yikes

    Report message31

  • Message 582

    , in reply to message 581.

    Posted by Professor Techno (U3287342) on Friday, 6th February 2009

    How nice it was of the Hosts to decide at the last minute that they'd close at midday  

    Well at least Nick is going to give us some notice maybe a couple days before!! Well thats a postive i suppose

    Report message32

  • Message 583

    , in reply to message 580.

    Posted by Mozo (U10059077) on Friday, 6th February 2009

    One thing I can promise.

    If any changes are made to the POV boards you will be told about them in advance by a named person (e.g. me), with an explanation of why they are happening 


    Oh good, so you won't arbitrarily remove my right to free speech on a publicly funded service, that I partly pay for, without telling me you're going to do it first.

    I AM glad.

    Democracy is ensured, the world is safe, we can all sleep happier in our little hovels, held rapt by the gentle warmth of BBC benevolence as it radiates upon us like the re-assuring glow from that old valve radio set in the parlour.

    ..and is there still honey for tea?

    Report message33

  • Message 584

    , in reply to message 583.

    Posted by Curmy (U10228939) on Friday, 6th February 2009

    Oh dear Prof and Mozo, this thread has made us all very cynical (not

    surprising I suppose) smiley - yikes

    Report message34

  • Message 585

    , in reply to message 583.

    Posted by niclaramartin (U1621265) on Friday, 6th February 2009

    The silver-haired figure, struggled to rise from her chair, and walked slowly across the room. She drew back the curtain, and silently watched as the world passed her window. Her world. Little Johnny riding his bike, Mrs Brown wearily making her way back from shopping in town, laden with goodies for her dog, and little fare for herself. She raised her head, as she always did, when passing Flora's house, and nodded an acknowledgement, then trudged onward. Mrs Glossip and the twins appeared, on their return from nursery. Unlike Mrs Brown, they were overly animated. Giggling and squealing as they talked about what they had been doing.

    And, then there was..... peace. Stillness. No-one. The street was empty, and Flora wearily made her way back across the room, shuffling as she went. She returned to her chair, holding firmly onto the arms, as she lowered herself gently, down. Flump. The air escaped from the seat of the chair as her bottom made contact. THEN, in one sudden and emphatic action, she moved into position, reached for her glasses, and, two clicks later, a smile creased her face, which spread and spread. A giggle, then a laugh and then a guffaw exploded from her mouth. "Mother Hen" was online, and her posting about Still Game, was informative and witty. Flora (or Clootie Dumplin') to give her her board nickname, tap, tap, tapped back a response. "Bletherskite" entered the dialogue, and before they knew it, there was a flurry of postings, reminiscing about previous Still Games, and how it reflected something which had happened in their lives.

    Flora was bright eyed and excited. Her brain was fumbling and searching for more information to add to the thread.

    An hour, or two later (she had lost track of time), Flora switched off the computer and returned to the still, quietness of her room, and her lonely world.

    But, she always had tomorrow to look forward to, and the lively discussion about "Quantum Physics". Yes, life was good, even if you were housebound. Her "friends" from the board, visited her most days, even as those who passed her window, continued to pass.

    Report message35

  • Message 586

    , in reply to message 585.

    Posted by niclaramartin (U1621265) on Friday, 6th February 2009

    In other words Nick, lots of silver surfers get a lot out of messageboards. And, the rate BBC are closing theirs is leaving these people with two options. Find less reputable boards, or give up messageboarding.

    DO NOT LINK ME TO A BLOG..... smiley - laugh

    BBC messageboards DO provide a service to the public, in a way which Blogs could NEVER achieve.

    Report message36

  • Message 587

    , in reply to message 586.

    Posted by Curmy (U10228939) on Saturday, 7th February 2009

    You're so right Niclara,smiley - ok lots of older people use message boards, and when the weather's like this especially, they're vital to them .

    Report message37

  • Message 588

    , in reply to message 587.

    Posted by cricket-Angel Tucker (U3382697) on Saturday, 7th February 2009

    I think that's the best thing about messageboards.

    All sorts of people use them - all ages, professions and backgrounds. We can all start and contribute to threads, rather than following a conversation started by a BBC emplyee.

    Thanks for the useful replies, btw, Nick smiley - ok

    Report message38

  • Message 589

    , in reply to message 588.

    Posted by Curmy (U10228939) on Saturday, 7th February 2009

    You're so right Cricket, think how much money the Beeb is saving the NHS by having the POV boards, they're the only thing that keep some of us sane ! (except when Nick starts mucking about with them) smiley - yikes

    Report message39

  • Message 590

    , in reply to message 589.

    Posted by Mozo (U10059077) on Saturday, 7th February 2009

    You'll be suggesting the BBC is a public service next!

    ...oh hang on..

    Report message40

  • Message 591

    , in reply to message 589.

    Posted by niclaramartin (U1621265) on Saturday, 7th February 2009

    A long document, but worth reading.

    www.bbc.co.uk/bbctru...

    To provide the BBC Trust with independent audience insight into how well bbc.co.uk meets the terms of the existing Service Licence. 

    independent audience insight  

    General Public opinions of BBC.

    The Service Licence states that bbc.co.uk ‘should act as a starting point on the internet from which users can develop their use of the medium and provide a trusted guide to the wider internet.’ 

    In other words BBC are expected to link out of their site (commercial sites felt BBC had an ufair advantage). This explains Nick's obsession with linking. smiley - doh

    Finally, the research aims to give the Trust a sense of if, and how, users feel the site strengthens their relationship with the BBC. We look at which particular elements of the service make them feel this way, looking particularly at how provision of opportunities to input and offer feedback affects these perceptions. 

    MESSAGE BOARDS!!!!!!!!!

    Usability
    In terms of usability, users claim the site is easy to use. However, they rarely stray from familiar areas and are consequently amazed by the wealth of
    information available on then site. The size of the site stops people from exploring it fully – it does not do a good job of showing its true value to the licence fee payer. 


    Messageboarders unable to find your blogs Nick....and then, having found them, preferring to return to the messageboards. I don't think you have converted many messageboarders to bloggers, Nick.

    THIS BIT IS IMPORTANT. IT REFLECTS WHAT THE GENERAL PUBLIC IN THE SURVEY FEEL.

    The role of participation in sustaining citizenship
    It is clear that the main method of participating on the BBC website is through messageboards such as ‘Have Your Say’.
    While awareness and usage of the messageboards seemed low when we conducted the research, there was an expectation that the BBC site does provide places for comment. This was seen as a mostly positive feature of the website even by those who do not participate in the debates and was perceived by some to deliver value for the licence fee. In this regard the messageboards have symbolic value in making the BBC more accountable to the licence fee payer.
    Although for many the messageboards are not places for truly free comment as they are strictly moderated, they are seen as adding to the citizenship purpose by allowing people the opportunity to comment on topical issues and thus engage with them. The opportunity to engage is seen as a positive even if the nature of that engagement may be criticised for not being of the same intellectual calibre as the ‘real’ journalism which populates the news and politics sections of the site. 


    Fundamentally BBC is seen as leading and creating the news agenda, not allowing the public to do it for them. It is for this reason that the BBC is seen as a provider of impartial, high quality news – for these people asking ‘citizen journalists’ to contribute dilutes the brand values which set the BBC apart from other news providers.
    For others the BBC is paying lip service to a wider shift in society where the public are asked to involve themselves in the creation of content and the media more widely. With the strong editorial controls imposed on UGC by the BBC the attempt is perceived to be half-hearted and, in some cases, meaningless. For these people the BBC has to be seen to be involving the audience while not really giving them the freedom which the shift to ‘citizen journalism’ implies.
    But messageboards are different
    While bbc.co.uk is not associated with stimulating creativity in terms of soliciting audiovisual content, it is highly praised for allowing the opportunity to comment in textual form, and on myriad subjects. In this regard the site can be said to stimulate creativity.
    “People now have a chance to put their opinion across, there’s no way ten years ago you would have had Joe Bloggs saying ‘I think Gareth Jenkins is an idiot’ and it is their right to do so.” 


    While the BBC’s messageboards provide the opportunity to discuss such matters it is not necessarily incumbent upon bbc.co.uk to represent these communities. There are many other places on the internet where like-minded individuals have set up their own forums for congregation and discussion. This effort does not need to be duplicated. 

    HOWEVER, POV Messageboards are about BBC. WHY should messageboarders be sent elsewhere to discuss BBC (as Jem suggested smiley - doh) If people cannot discuss BBC content/technology ON BBC's own website, then, why would we be allowed to discuss the myriad of triviality which appears in a lot of blogs and Twitters.

    OK that's enough for one posting, but plenty to mull over.

    The general public surveyed above, feel that BBC SHOULD be allowing the viewers/listeners their OWN voice. It is important that the general public are allowed to voice THEIR concerns. Blogs do not allow THIS. You can only respond to what the blog author writes, and NOT, instigate a conversation regarding YOUR opinion.

    Report message41

  • Message 592

    , in reply to message 591.

    Posted by Curmy (U10228939) on Saturday, 7th February 2009

    Extremely interesting Niclara, even more reason to keep the POV M.B.s !

    Report message42

  • Message 593

    , in reply to message 592.

    Posted by Nick Reynolds (U11648404) on Saturday, 7th February 2009

    "Blogs do not allow THIS."

    That's not strictly true. Blogs like the PM one have open threads where people can make comments on anything concerned with the programme.

    I'm not obsessed with linking because of the Trust report. I'm obsessed with it because it seems to me to be the most basic and most important way that the Internet works.

  • Message 594

    , in reply to message 593.

    Posted by Mozo (U10059077) on Saturday, 7th February 2009

    Nick - So why couldn't I post a comment about the weather article from Tuesday Night on Thursday?

    To me the whole BBC blog format screams CONTROL! CONTROL! CONTROL! Talk about what we think you should be talking about and maybe, just maybe, occasionally we'll let you go off at a tangent, but that's up to us.

    I note your comment about linking being the "the most basic and most important way that the Internet works" and I'd agree. But links are really just a way of extending topics of interest aren't they. You start in one place and follow progressive links to eventually end up somewhere completely different. THAT’S what WWW is really about.

    That's also similar to the way MB threads work. They are organic and self seeding. That's as long as you don’t get heavy handed moderation for being 'off topic' and if you’re allowed to start your own thread on a theme perhaps inspired by others.

    For many perfect examples of this see the Gideon Coe boards on 6Music. The place is alive with stuff, some interesting and some mundane, but its all UGC and its often a starting point for Gideon's shows. That's the kind of interaction and feedback that's going to be strangled if you switch everything to blogs.

    I couldn't see Gid writing a blog anyway so that'd be about a third of his programme content binned off for a start!

    Report message44

  • Message 595

    , in reply to message 594.

    Posted by Mozo (U10059077) on Saturday, 7th February 2009

    The weather article I referred to above was on the PM blog BTW (just in case you didn't read my original post on Thursday)

    Report message45

  • Message 596

    , in reply to message 595.

    Posted by Curmy (U10228939) on Saturday, 7th February 2009

    Oh no Mozo, writing about a weather event 2 days later definitely isn't allowed on a blog smiley - yikes

    Report message46

  • Message 597

    , in reply to message 596.

    Posted by OfficerDibble (U1158251) on Saturday, 7th February 2009

    500+ posts here, 1000 odd on the other threads and blogs - 98% inconsequental, eliciting nothing certain to rely on, and we are no further on than we were in November.

    Report message47

  • Message 598

    , in reply to message 593.

    Posted by niclaramartin (U1621265) on Sunday, 8th February 2009

    "Blogs do not allow THIS."

    That's not strictly true. Blogs like the PM one have open threads where people can make comments on anything concerned with the programme. 


    THE programme. Note, Nick, we are thrown crumbs where it is chosen which area/programmes WE may start threads.

    In this regard the messageboards have symbolic value in making the BBC more accountable to the licence fee payer. 

    The WHOLE point of messageboards is that THE GENERAL PUBLIC start ALL threads on ANY topic THEY choose. NOT, like blogs AT ALL. Blogs in the main, are started by BBC employees (as authors) and commented to by the GENERAL PUBLIC. SOME programmes/areas in the blog network have open threads, BUT, that is far from the norm. To do away with messageboards (BBC ones), on the BBC site, would be seen as an embarrassing "tail between the legs" attitude to robust commenting from the General Public. No matter how it is dressed up, it WOULD be perceived as a form of censorship.

    Of course, there is the fact that if blogs ARE written by BBC staff, then BBC can tick the box which says that they are not stepping on the toes of commercial sites, by duplicating what is available elsewhere on WWW. Messageboards DON'T fall into that category, as BBC, (running a wee bit scared) trying to make sure that they don't run contrary to the Graf Report, of NOT providing a service which is available elsewhere, seem to be taking the attitude (Jem certainly is) that messageboarders can go to Digital Spy or other messageboard sites to discuss BBC. BUT, as I say, if you CAN'T have messageboards ON BBC site, discussing matters relating to BBC, that seems a strange contradiction. It also explains the restrictions on talking about other channels output on BBC messageboards. (itv.com/hallmark/channel 4 have their own sites). THEY obviously feel that THEIR viewers are entitled to voice THEIR opinions on messageboards. IF we are ONLY talking about BBC output, then BBC may feel that they have room to manoeuvre, and say they are providing THE definitive messageboards to discuss matters BBC.

    Anyway, off to watch my "Gary Mullen and the Works" DVD I got last night at their concert.

    www.youtube.com/watc...

    For the uninitiated.

    Report message48

  • Message 599

    , in reply to message 597.

    Posted by Lawrence Jones (U4805414) on Sunday, 8th February 2009

    Message 597

    500+ posts here, 1000 odd on the other threads and blogs - 98% inconsequental, eliciting nothing certain to rely on, and we are no further on than we were in November. 

    BBC management has made up its mind – so the sensible arguments of MB proponents are ignored. There’s no reason why the workings of Radio 4 – or a discussion about The Reith Lectures - couldn’t have been conducted on the R4 MBs or R4 Newsletter (see: www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/... ).

    Report message49

  • Message 600

    , in reply to message 599.

    Posted by Curmy (U10228939) on Sunday, 8th February 2009

    How many replies has Mark Damazer had on his 2 blogs ? precisely 1 smiley - yikes

    I think that proves our point.

    Report message50

Back to top

About this Board

The Points of View team invite you to discuss BBC Television programmes.

Add basic Smileys or extra Smileys to your posts.

Questions? Check the BBC FAQ for answers first!

Go to: BBC News Have your say to discuss topics in the news

Make a complaint? Go to the BBC complaints website.

BBC News: Off-topic for this board, so contact them directly with your feedback: Contact BBC News

or register to take part in a discussion.



Mon-Sat: 0900-2300
Sun: 1000-2300

This messageboard is reactively moderated.

Find out more about this board's House Rules

Search this Board

Recent Discussions

BBC © 2014 The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.

This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.