Dear Roger Bolton,

 

I spent a long time living in Germany with no way of receiving BBC TV, but having to put up with SkyNews and CNN. I longed for the day when I would once again be able to watch good BBC "TV for grown-ups".

 

That day came when I moved back to Britain in 2002. But what did I find? That while I was gone the BBC had adopted the superficial, loud, dumb, ways of the commercial broadcasters.

 

What a terrible disappointment . . . !!

 

My disappointment quickly turned to anger. Why does everything have to be dumbed down, given jingles and bangles, and set to music? Commercial broadcasters do it, of course, because it improves their ratings and profits. They must know that it annoys and puts off the more discriminating, educated and cultured elements in society, but such people do not watch a lot of TV anyway. The people they want to attract and manipulate are the moronic masses (no offence intended) who spend hours and hours in front of the box.

 

The BBC obviously feels that it has to compete for ratings too, and thus for the attention of the masses, despite the fact that their services have been paid for (compulsorily) up front; although I suppose they could - and probably do - argue that the moronic masses pay the lion's share of the licence fee and consume most of the output.

 

Last Thursday’s Horizon programme is a particularly good (i.e. bad) example of what has gone wrong. The following contributions to the BBC’s science message board give excellent expression to the way I also feel, as well as some very credible suggestions as to the causes:

 

Horizon - a sad loss Michael Readman - 1st post - 30 Jan 2004 21:13
Before it began “putting the drama into science” this series was one that I have watched since it began in the seventies (?). My children grew up on it as one almost guaranteed place where complex issues were presented in a way that the general public (i.e. people like me) could gain an insight and interest in the real world of scientific discovery. Not every programme worked but the aim seemed to be a genuine desire to inform – “don’t worry if it sounds complex it will be explained” - and it usually was. These programmes raised my awareness of and made me think about, many varied fields of science and over the years my bookshelves have filled as I followed up many of the fascinating subjects that Horizon had introduced me to.

Today however, it seems that the cheap “tabloid” approach to science, which appears to have taken over at Horizon has little respect for the subjects it covers and even less respect for the viewing public - we are not all as dumb as you appear to think we are.

Loud, unceasing, pretentious music, weak scripts, droning voiceovers, rapid cutting between shots, endless misty mountains, arty camera shots, dreadful reconstructions and so on, give the impression that the producers are more concerned with their own “cleverness” than they are with their subject matter.

One example of many - talking heads use sentences, not sound bites and I already know they can a) walk, b) open doors, c) switch on lights, d) drive cars and all the many everyday things they are filmed doing !. However what I want, is to hear, and be able to hear, what these intelligent people have to say. I may not understand the whole thing but I want the chance to find out without someone assuming I can only do this with the “benefit” of their pompous production values.

Try putting the “science into Horizon” rather than “drama into science” and you may find that what you get out is a product to be proud of and one that people look out for. It would be very sad if the current approach means that there will be many people who will not be enthused and challenged by Horizon, as I and many others have been over the years. The “Horizon” programmes of the past really broadened my own horizons and I am forever grateful for that. It was what the BBC was all about as a public broadcaster.

I am genuinely sad at what I believe is being lost to the viewing public and licence payers who are getting cheap tacky handling of what could be fascinating subjects – last night’s programme being a prime example.

If this change is representative of today’s BBC, then the argument in favour of public broadcasting is seriously weakened for if the BBC feels it can only rise to the challenges it faces by going downhill, then it might as well become just another commercial channel.

---

re: Horizon - a sad loss Alan Pollock - 1st post - 31 Jan 2004 12:52
Thank goodness someone else thinks the same. I was appalled at this week's programme. The background crap, at too many times, completely drowned out the soft voice of the commentator. This is no reflection on the commentator, by the way, who coped remakably well with a very poorly scripted commentary.

The overloud background music (?) is too prevalent on so many programmes these days and often makes viewing an unpleasant chore, rather than a pleasure. 

---

re: Horizon - a sad loss norman defoe - 1st post - 31 Jan 2004 14:22
I agree wholeheartedly with the above correspondents regarding the 'overdesigning'of science and other factual programmes. I now refer to "Horizon-the Musical!" There are obviously now too many 'creative' people (too many Media Studies courses?) involved in producing a programme and wanting to put 'knobs'on. Horizon is not the only victim. BBC 2's Kristalnacht also suffered badly from running alongside an interesting musical performance or 'foreground' music and the breaking up of the frame into a number of smaller frames. Why, for heaven's sake? Do the makers think we might get bored with a straight-forward account? In the case of Kristalnacht I switched to the ceefax and simply listened to the sound commentary with no loss of meaning. I shall do the same with Horizon if I can be bothered to watch any more.
 

---

 

re: Horizon - a sad loss Andy Walker - 1st post - 31 Jan 2004 15:22
I couldn't agree more! This used to be an excellent programme, making significant science accessible to the layman in an intelligent and sometimes provoking fashion. 'Dumbing down' may be an overused descriptor, but it certainly applies here.

The points you make are all spot on, so I won't repeat them - just to express my sadness at the degradation of a once fine programme.

I do hope that these messages are read by people with influence in BBC Science 

---

re: Horizon - a sad loss SEF >:-) - 2353rd post - 31 Jan 2004 16:17
They may be read but that doesn't mean they will be accepted - just like the results of a more formal inquiry! There is also the "minor" problem that they would have to admit fault/blame, sack the overpaid under-educated incompetents involved (eg media graduates) and hire some intelligent, scientific and honest people instead. This is something which they are probably loathe to do because such people might immediately spot a lot more flaws in the way things are done by (mis)management.

Previously the BBC had high standards. More recently they seem to be chasing ratings by aiming for the lowest common denominator - very low and common in all the wrong ways.

---

 

Hopefully the shake up following the Hutton Report (which was rightly very critical of the BBC’s likewise fallen standards of political impartiality) and the replacement of the BBC’s top management will lead to a return to the very high standards that the corporation once embodied.

 

 

Yours sincerely