Radio and TV Presenters

lightallan

I am as much amused and liable to Laugh out Loud when this sort of thing happens, but, the situation that annoys me most, is the asking of a question, and the constant interruptions before the question is allowed to be answered.

Are other people affected in this way?

With respect I don’t understand your post.

Elderly Person what do you mean by “doing a noddy” ?

Noddy shots are commonly used in one-camera recording to show the interviewer listening and reacting to the subject. The usual routine is to shoot the subject for the entire interview, then shoot some noddies of the interviewer once the interview is finished. later splicing them so at the screen alternates between interviewer and subject.

In particular to hide the fact that they have edited a bit out, as the missing bit is not obvious in the sound, but would be in the picture, which would jump a bit and the joining up of two bits would be obvious.

The original Channel 4 Friday Alternative news programme demonstrated it by something like filming a well-known politician entering a building going up some steps (the camera and the journalist both at the top of the steps) then after he had gone, the cameraperson goes to the bottom of the steps and films the journalist, stood at the top of the steps, saying something like "Here comes Mr. X" or "Good morning Mr. X".

Then when it appears on the television news it looks like the journalist said it at the time and may look like the politician did not respond when "Good morning" had been said to him even though it hadn't.

And I have left. We are all different in our likes and dislikes. Jane Garvey is sadly missed and her replacement has a voice that I fined very unattractive.

I may have asked how do you feel now that this memorial has finally been in place and after such a long time do you know of improvements that have been made?

Thank you silverbridge and elderly person. You learn something new every day !

Oh that's marvelous!

Sorry I forgot responses show up differently here than on other websites I use - I was responding to Nona4ever's 'how was the play, Mrs. Lincoln?' I'd not thought of that in ages and it made me laugh out loud but my thanks look a bit odd stuck down here!

Lucca

Thank you silverbridge and elderly person. You learn something new every day !

If you get the chance, go to some recordings of TV or radio programmes where a live audience is present. Tickets are usually free. It’s a fascinating as well as an entertaining experience.

ITV lunch time annoys me,
News reader says I have XXX XXX person with me,
so what do you think about YYY YYY,
news reader then gets message in ear piece
"WRAP UP THE INTERVIEW"
person being interviewed speaks a few words and then gets told we have run out of time.
Watch the ITV lunch time news and you'll see what I mean.

The worst example I remember was when there was a scientific news conference that was going to reveal whether remains that had been found were those of King Richard III.

Both Sky News and BBC TV were showing it.

It was fascinating.

Suddenly, whichever one I was watching switched from it to go to a reporter in the street outside a court who tells us that some politician has changed his plea.

I switched to the other channel.

Shortly thereafter they did the similar cut to a reporter in the street outside the court.

"Remind us of the case please"

So off they went on and on about it.

They both have a rolling headlines strip at the bottom of the page, they could have just used that.

They could have just put a panel on the screen.

But oh no!

I just wonder how many people enthralled and fascinated by the news conference were delighted that the news of a change of plea in that case were given such high priority and that details of the case were promptly recounted.

I wonder who makes the decision to make such a change in the middle of a news conference like that.

Would that switch have been made if something about sport had been on at the time?

I have just looked on YouTube and it is there - the proper thing from the University of Leicester.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=91R-LkW2x3s

I have just watched that video and it is excellent.

Thank you for posting the link to the video, EP.

Coincidentally, I have just finished reading Josephine Tey's The Daughter of Time therefore watching this could not be more timely.

The genealogy and genetic (DNA) research is particularly fascinating for me. Just think how close reseachers came not to having this evidence and the female line was dying out.

The wound analysis was saddening - the evidence of post-mortem humilation wounds was shocking.

Such brutal and treacherous times. A story of deception and ambition which changed the course of history. The scheming Henry VII and the dishonest men who helped him discredit Richard III.

Thank you for posting the link to the video, EP.

Coincidentally, I have just finished reading Josephine Tey's The Daughter of Time therefore watching this could not be more timely.

The genealogy and genetic (DNA) research is particularly fascinating for me. Just think how close reseachers came not to having this evidence and the female line was dying out.

The wound analysis was saddening - the evidence of post-mortem humilation wounds was shocking.

Such brutal and treacherous times. A story of deception and ambition which changed the course of history. The scheming Henry VII and the dishonest men who helped him discredit Richard III.

I don't know why this has posted twice!

If you watch that fascinating video, just imagine it suddenly being interrupted to go to a man in a street talking about something else that could have waited until it had finished.

Silverbridge

I don't know why this has posted twice!

Better twice than not at all!

On the other hand, there was the time sports fans were livid because coverage of the world snooker final was interrupted to report on what was happening at the siege of the Iranian Embassy in 1980.

As infoman says above, time and timing can be very frustrating for the viewer who'd like to hear a little more than a 30-second soundbite allow. On the other hand, I'm rarely disappointed when they cut off ministers and other politicians. It means, I can stop shouting: Answer the question! at the TV or radio.

I remember an episode of Tony Hancock's show on television where he was purportedly at home and put the television on and there was a movie of cowboys and indians and the picture seen by we the viewers was of the movie with indians throwing tomahawks, then suddenly the sound went off and there was a picture of Mr Hancock sitting in his armchair looking shocked. Then there was next a view of the television set - clearly a specially made theatrical prop - showing a jagged hole in the middle of the screen with part of a tomato sauce bottle or similar sticking out, with the implication that Mr Hancock had got immersed in what he was watching and had joined in. I just now tried to find it on YouTube, but alas, as yet, not found.

A bit more drastic than shouting Answer the question.

Or than me getting to my feet while watching Questions to The Prime Minister in order to try to catch the eye of Mr Speaker.

I think the presenters are trying to get the interviewee to burst into tears. Presenters and Journalists obviously like emotional outbursts, it makes them feel like they've done a good job.

When my daughter left her husband’s inquest she gave a prepared statement to the TV cameras that had gathered outside the coroner’s court. Afterwards as she tried to walk away she was literally surrounded by reporters shoving each other to stick their cameras in her face. Some of them were actually walking backwards to get her full face shot. My pacifist husband came close to punching one of them who was absolutely vile and would not stop filming and shouting the most insensitive questions at her.

Having experienced first hand the unsavoury, lying and underhand tactics of the press I now don’t believe a word of anything reported until or unless there is some sort of verification. And even then I ask myself, why is this a story now, how was the information obtained, who will the story hurt/benefit?

A former neighbour of mine used to work for the local TV station and told me when leaving to film about an accident or violent crime his editor always said "only bring back bad news" He said if he could film the victim or victim's relative crying he would be congratulated on his "good work"