I'm fascinated by the subject matter, but the presentation was so bad that I had to switch off after 25 minutes. The simpering gushing blather of Kate Humble made this unwatchable. The travelogue was fine, the content fascinating, the pictures wonderful, and Kate H is great when she's doing voiceover. But when she gets into the act, projecting herself to the forefront of events, it's stomach churning.
It's not Blue Peter, it's not CBeebies, it's a programme for allegedly intelligent viewers on the BBC's alternative prime channel. From treading the pepper, to cheering the snake boats, to drinking tea made with Ayurvedic medicines, it's quite nauseating. I nearly switched off after 15 minutes, and after 25, couldn't stand it any more. What a shame that the BBC has made an infantile mess of a fascinating subject, instead of treating its viewers like adults. Maybe episodes 2 and 3 will be better, but I don't hold out much hope. I'm sorry but this gets my "BBC at its worst" vote.
While available on BBC iPlayer, it's here
17 February 2011
10 February 2011
BBC: George VI: The Reluctant King
As the Academy Awards approach, and The King's Speech is thought likely to do quite well, the BBC broadcast a very timely re-showing of the 1999 documentary George VI: The Reluctant King. It was amazing, inspiring stuff and a great story. The story was supported by a tremendous array of contributors (some no longer with us), many of whom participated in the actual events. Only one key witness was missing, and I hope that she didn't find the interpretation of her father's story too inaccurate or distressing.
For me: I thoroughly enjoyed it, BBC at its best. Sadly it doesn't appear to be available on BBC iPlayer, but it's worth keeping an eye open for another showing.
For me: I thoroughly enjoyed it, BBC at its best. Sadly it doesn't appear to be available on BBC iPlayer, but it's worth keeping an eye open for another showing.
19 January 2011
Public Accounts Committee turns on PFI
At last, some reality in Westminster about Labour's con trick, the Private Finance Initiative (PFI). The Spectator is reporting that the Public Accounts Committee has recognised the spectacular waste of money and the inequity of the deals (article here).
I blogged about this in May 'Please can we restore the meaning of investment'...
"The Tories flirted with Public-Private Partnership (PPP), an early version of PFI in the mid 1990s. They rapidly worked out that it was too dangerous. Brown grabbed it with both hands to run up another £500 billion of future debt while turning much of the normal capital investment into bribes for voters or jobs for the boys (and girls), especially in marginal and safe Labour seats. We will be paying for this man's lies, recklessness and dishonesty for the next thirty years."
Please don't let's forget that this was one of Gordon Brown's crimes, and that the idiot Milliband denies responsibility for them - and would repeat them.
I blogged about this in May 'Please can we restore the meaning of investment'...
"The Tories flirted with Public-Private Partnership (PPP), an early version of PFI in the mid 1990s. They rapidly worked out that it was too dangerous. Brown grabbed it with both hands to run up another £500 billion of future debt while turning much of the normal capital investment into bribes for voters or jobs for the boys (and girls), especially in marginal and safe Labour seats. We will be paying for this man's lies, recklessness and dishonesty for the next thirty years."
Please don't let's forget that this was one of Gordon Brown's crimes, and that the idiot Milliband denies responsibility for them - and would repeat them.
12 December 2010
University funding - BBC coverage
What really bugs me about the last few weeks' coverage of the student fees issue on the BBC has been its concentration on the Liberal Democrats' agonies: which way to vote, whether Dr Cable would vote for the policy he himself was introducing, would the Parliamentary party split two, three or four ways? Questions over Nick Clegg's personal credibility and ability to hold the party together are all very well, but compromises are the stuff of coalition. Does it make any sense to roast the LibDems for a pre-election promise that clearly didn't convince enough of the electorate to put them into overall control? No.
The much bigger issue that's been obscured by the soap opera focus on the LibDems is the change in university funding. Though there's been no White Paper, precious little news coverage and not much debate or comment in the press, a huge shift is taking place in the central Government funding of higher education, reducing the annual budget from £7.1 billion to £4.2 billion in 2014-15. With the ring-fencing of funding for the teaching of science, technology, engineering and maths subjects, other subjects will have little or no public funding.
Very quickly, we could end up with 'universities' that are nothing of the sort, with very little teaching of non-technical subjects. Change of this scale should be debated properly before being enacted. The BBC could and should make a better contribution to the understanding of this issue.
The much bigger issue that's been obscured by the soap opera focus on the LibDems is the change in university funding. Though there's been no White Paper, precious little news coverage and not much debate or comment in the press, a huge shift is taking place in the central Government funding of higher education, reducing the annual budget from £7.1 billion to £4.2 billion in 2014-15. With the ring-fencing of funding for the teaching of science, technology, engineering and maths subjects, other subjects will have little or no public funding.
Very quickly, we could end up with 'universities' that are nothing of the sort, with very little teaching of non-technical subjects. Change of this scale should be debated properly before being enacted. The BBC could and should make a better contribution to the understanding of this issue.
28 November 2010
Bloody hell
Why is it so difficult, even in the age of Google, to find the answer to a simple question such as when I can get blood taken for an NHS blood test ordered by my GP? Last time, he told me to go to Frimley Park Hospital, on my way to work, so as not to lose half a day's productivity. Frimley Park reluctantly took the sample, saying I should really have been directed to the new Aldershot Centre for Health.
Now it's time to go again. The Aldershot Centre for Health looks excellent, judging by the pictures on the web. It's apparently the largest primary health centre in the UK, according to its nice little brochure that also identifies what floor has what service. But nowhere can I find the opening hours for the phlebotomy/pathology (blood test) service. The NHS Hampshire web site has a search facility but searches like 'blood test', 'blood test hours', 'blood test opening', 'pathology', and so on either take you to a list of policy documents, screening information, or the 'What's on site at Aldershot Centre for Health' page - which doesn't give any hours (and also lacks a map). This really could and should be improved.
Now it's time to go again. The Aldershot Centre for Health looks excellent, judging by the pictures on the web. It's apparently the largest primary health centre in the UK, according to its nice little brochure that also identifies what floor has what service. But nowhere can I find the opening hours for the phlebotomy/pathology (blood test) service. The NHS Hampshire web site has a search facility but searches like 'blood test', 'blood test hours', 'blood test opening', 'pathology', and so on either take you to a list of policy documents, screening information, or the 'What's on site at Aldershot Centre for Health' page - which doesn't give any hours (and also lacks a map). This really could and should be improved.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)