Queen's Diamond Jubilee Celebrations
OK, I now see wind at LCY at 1300 was 200/13. This surprises me because we live close by there and were out in the garden (until rained off), and the broken clouds, apparently 3,500 ft, were from the NNW; hadn't expected such a difference between levels.
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Yorks
Age: 64
Posts: 330
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
On board video
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: NOTTINGHAM
Posts: 758
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
REF My # 149 (Page 8)
Thought you might like to know that I have, today, sent a reminder to the BBC inquiring where their response to my complaint of 20 May 2012 might be. They are well outside their 10 day target and even well beyond the estimate in their holding response!
This will amuse (found on their complaints webpage):
Well, no wonder I've had to wait after that meaningful and well thought through response!
Yep, some viewers - 2400 at the last count and still rising!!!!
Laarf!
Foldie
This will amuse (found on their complaints webpage):
BBC Diamond Jubilee coverage
BBC logo
Complaint
We received complaints from some viewers about aspects of the BBC's Diamond Jubilee coverage.
BBC Response
We provided extensive coverage of the Diamond Jubilee through a wide range of television and radio programmes covering the many aspects of the celebrations, with a variety of tones and styles across the weekend for different audiences. Across the Jubilee period almost 70% of the nation tuned in to some of this programming.
We acknowledge that not every aspect of our coverage was to everyone's taste, but across all the hours of broadcasting we have received appreciations as well as complaints. It is worth noting that this was a live broadcasting event of unprecedented scale and complexity amidst weather conditions which turned out to be challenging for all involved.
We review all major events we broadcast and this weekend's coverage will be no exception. All the comments we have received will be part of the feedback we use when we come to look at how this weekend's programming could have been improved.
BBC logo
Complaint
We received complaints from some viewers about aspects of the BBC's Diamond Jubilee coverage.
BBC Response
We provided extensive coverage of the Diamond Jubilee through a wide range of television and radio programmes covering the many aspects of the celebrations, with a variety of tones and styles across the weekend for different audiences. Across the Jubilee period almost 70% of the nation tuned in to some of this programming.
We acknowledge that not every aspect of our coverage was to everyone's taste, but across all the hours of broadcasting we have received appreciations as well as complaints. It is worth noting that this was a live broadcasting event of unprecedented scale and complexity amidst weather conditions which turned out to be challenging for all involved.
We review all major events we broadcast and this weekend's coverage will be no exception. All the comments we have received will be part of the feedback we use when we come to look at how this weekend's programming could have been improved.
some viewers
Laarf!
Foldie
I have finally, about three weeks late, received the BBC response to my complaint about Eddie Butler's insulting thoughtlessness at the Military Muster. (Starts on page 4 of this thread).
The phrase 'flatulent, disingenuous sophistry' comes to mind, but when I've got a moment I hope to improve on that. Trouble is, if you want to follow a complaint up, you have to start a new one.
Why can't they just say 'Sorry, we/Eddie Butler screwed up, ' etc.........?
Have you had the same thing, Foldie?
I'm still hoping to get more from my more direct contacts with the Beeb on the broader subject of the poor standard of the flying bits of the Muster commentary. Not holding my breath, though.
airsound
Thanks for contacting us regarding BBC One’s ‘The Diamond Jubilee: Armed Forces Tribute’ broadcast on 19 May.
We apologise for the delay in replying. We realise that our correspondents appreciate a quick response and we’re sorry that you had to wait on this occasion.
We understand you believe Eddie Butler was dismissive of the RAF by stating, “The Duke of Edinburgh, of course a naval man, looking on as the RAF holds up proceedings” and you were unhappy with this.
Having reviewed this part of the coverage, what had actually happened was that the salute and anthem finished slightly earlier than planned, so the wait for the flypast was longer than expected. His remark wasn’t supposed to be dismissive of the RAF – he was simply trying to communicate to viewers at home why there was a delay and why the Queen and Guardsmen were waiting. It’s also worth noting that Fiona Bruce went on to say “With absolute precision, the RAF are making their way into the spot left for them here in the arena”. However we’re sorry if any offence was caused as it certainly wasn’t our intention.
Nevertheless, feedback like your own helps to inform our discussion and decision making regarding future output and your comments were made available to programme makers, channel controllers and senior management at the time of contact.
Please again accept our apologies for the unfortunate delay and thanks for taking the time to contact us.
We apologise for the delay in replying. We realise that our correspondents appreciate a quick response and we’re sorry that you had to wait on this occasion.
We understand you believe Eddie Butler was dismissive of the RAF by stating, “The Duke of Edinburgh, of course a naval man, looking on as the RAF holds up proceedings” and you were unhappy with this.
Having reviewed this part of the coverage, what had actually happened was that the salute and anthem finished slightly earlier than planned, so the wait for the flypast was longer than expected. His remark wasn’t supposed to be dismissive of the RAF – he was simply trying to communicate to viewers at home why there was a delay and why the Queen and Guardsmen were waiting. It’s also worth noting that Fiona Bruce went on to say “With absolute precision, the RAF are making their way into the spot left for them here in the arena”. However we’re sorry if any offence was caused as it certainly wasn’t our intention.
Nevertheless, feedback like your own helps to inform our discussion and decision making regarding future output and your comments were made available to programme makers, channel controllers and senior management at the time of contact.
Please again accept our apologies for the unfortunate delay and thanks for taking the time to contact us.
Why can't they just say 'Sorry, we/Eddie Butler screwed up, ' etc.........?
Have you had the same thing, Foldie?
I'm still hoping to get more from my more direct contacts with the Beeb on the broader subject of the poor standard of the flying bits of the Muster commentary. Not holding my breath, though.
airsound
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Torquay, England
Posts: 838
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think 'Doing' is a darn sight harder than sitting in an armchair criticising, and was the commentary perfect? not by any means but could it have been worse?
Are we expecting to hear specialist knowledge that will cater to those that insist or demand it? How many MILLIONS of viewers watched this spectacular event, how many of them enjoyed it compared to those that felt the need to give vent!
The Royal Air Force is the junior service that is well adept at 'Bringing up the rear!'
but how dare it hold up the proceedings 
Did it hold them up? I thought the whole day was brilliantly organised, the TV coverage excellent and it made me feel proud to be British or is that proud to be a whinging pom!!
Does it really matter and is that all we have to complain about? I have heard the Editor In Chief of that broadcast accept his broadcasters might have done better and quite rightly so, I would hate to think anyone does not strive to improve but could you, or could I have done better? Could any presenter have done better taking into account all the specialist knowledge they would need to describe those events that took place during the hours that broadcast went on for.
Well done to ALL our main channels for broadcasting this once in a lifetime occasion.
Are we expecting to hear specialist knowledge that will cater to those that insist or demand it? How many MILLIONS of viewers watched this spectacular event, how many of them enjoyed it compared to those that felt the need to give vent!
The Royal Air Force is the junior service that is well adept at 'Bringing up the rear!'
but how dare it hold up the proceedings Did it hold them up? I thought the whole day was brilliantly organised, the TV coverage excellent and it made me feel proud to be British or is that proud to be a whinging pom!!Does it really matter and is that all we have to complain about? I have heard the Editor In Chief of that broadcast accept his broadcasters might have done better and quite rightly so, I would hate to think anyone does not strive to improve but could you, or could I have done better? Could any presenter have done better taking into account all the specialist knowledge they would need to describe those events that took place during the hours that broadcast went on for.
Well done to ALL our main channels for broadcasting this once in a lifetime occasion.
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: NOTTINGHAM
Posts: 758
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
THE BBC SENT ME A REPLY!
Well Airsound, at least they are consistent:
glojo,
Forgive me but I think you are being disingenuous in your above post. Either that or you are not military or set your standards very low!
The BBC's coverage of the military tribute and the Thames flotilla has been criticised largely and thoroughly by a broad section of British society here, in the written media and on the BBC! The BBC alone received over 4500 complaints - an unprecedented figure in modern day visual media presentation. As I stated, in closing, in my complaint to the BBC (#149 on Page 8):
Unfortunately, the BBC in their response to me failed to take note of that point which was, in fact, the main point of my complaint.
We made the effort at Windsor, the sailors et al made the effort on the Thames and the BBC made no effort at either - they used to be the pride of British broadcasting worldwide; sadly no longer can that be stated.
Finally, you say:
I say - Frankly, YES! They used to employ experts and people who were prepared to put in the effort beforehand - not any more. Now you get some no brain who thinks that he/she is more important than the event and is prepared to cuff it on the day!
Foldie
Thanks for contacting us regarding ‘The Diamond Jubilee: Armed Forces Tribute’ from 19 May on BBC One.
I understand you were unhappy with the presentation and commentary of this programme as you felt it wasn’t of the high standard you’d expect for an event of this kind.
On the day the salute and anthem finished slightly earlier than planned, so the wait for the flypast ended up being longer than expected. Viewers would’ve heard the actual planes in the air, and while the Queen and Prince Phillip were waiting, those watching could hear Prince Phillip laugh with the other guards, and point towards the sky. This is what Eddie Butler referred to as he goes on to say “The Duke of Edinburgh, of course a naval man, looking on as the RAF holds up proceedings.”
Later on however, when the RAF regiment march into the quadrangle, Fiona Bruce does say “With absolute precision, the RAF are making their way into the spot left for them here in the arena.”
Eddie Butler’s comment was a light-hearted one, and Fiona’s would hopefully have assured viewers of this with her description of the RAF’s display. Eddie’s remark wasn’t supposed to be dismissive of the RAF, he was simply trying to communicate to viewers at home why there was a delay and why the Queen and Guardsmen were waiting.
I was sorry to read you were unhappy with other aspects of the day’s coverage, such as interviewing the children present about their drawings. While we try to provide a wide range of programmes across our television output that’ll be of interest to every section of our audience, there’ll inevitably be times, hopefully rare, when what’s on offer doesn’t meet your own particular interests.
Research shows us that in a typical week we do provide a substantial number of programmes which everyone can enjoy, but I’m sorry you’ve been disappointed with the coverage on offer this day.
To that end I’d like to assure you I've registered your complaint on our audience log. This is an internal report of audience feedback which we compile daily and is available for viewing by all our staff. This includes all programme makers and presenters, along with our senior management. It ensures that your points, along with all other comments we receive, are considered across the BBC.
Thanks again for taking the time to contact us.
I understand you were unhappy with the presentation and commentary of this programme as you felt it wasn’t of the high standard you’d expect for an event of this kind.
On the day the salute and anthem finished slightly earlier than planned, so the wait for the flypast ended up being longer than expected. Viewers would’ve heard the actual planes in the air, and while the Queen and Prince Phillip were waiting, those watching could hear Prince Phillip laugh with the other guards, and point towards the sky. This is what Eddie Butler referred to as he goes on to say “The Duke of Edinburgh, of course a naval man, looking on as the RAF holds up proceedings.”
Later on however, when the RAF regiment march into the quadrangle, Fiona Bruce does say “With absolute precision, the RAF are making their way into the spot left for them here in the arena.”
Eddie Butler’s comment was a light-hearted one, and Fiona’s would hopefully have assured viewers of this with her description of the RAF’s display. Eddie’s remark wasn’t supposed to be dismissive of the RAF, he was simply trying to communicate to viewers at home why there was a delay and why the Queen and Guardsmen were waiting.
I was sorry to read you were unhappy with other aspects of the day’s coverage, such as interviewing the children present about their drawings. While we try to provide a wide range of programmes across our television output that’ll be of interest to every section of our audience, there’ll inevitably be times, hopefully rare, when what’s on offer doesn’t meet your own particular interests.
Research shows us that in a typical week we do provide a substantial number of programmes which everyone can enjoy, but I’m sorry you’ve been disappointed with the coverage on offer this day.
To that end I’d like to assure you I've registered your complaint on our audience log. This is an internal report of audience feedback which we compile daily and is available for viewing by all our staff. This includes all programme makers and presenters, along with our senior management. It ensures that your points, along with all other comments we receive, are considered across the BBC.
Thanks again for taking the time to contact us.
Forgive me but I think you are being disingenuous in your above post. Either that or you are not military or set your standards very low!
The BBC's coverage of the military tribute and the Thames flotilla has been criticised largely and thoroughly by a broad section of British society here, in the written media and on the BBC! The BBC alone received over 4500 complaints - an unprecedented figure in modern day visual media presentation. As I stated, in closing, in my complaint to the BBC (#149 on Page 8):
The Armed Forces personnel on the ground and those in the air had rehearsed all week to ensure that this event went without a hitch. It was self-evident that the BBC producers and, sadly for those roped in to face the cameras or the microphones with a half-baked script, had not prepared themselves in like style! The event was a marvel of military precision - the BBC let the military and her Majesty down badly!
We made the effort at Windsor, the sailors et al made the effort on the Thames and the BBC made no effort at either - they used to be the pride of British broadcasting worldwide; sadly no longer can that be stated.
Finally, you say:
Are we expecting to hear specialist knowledge that will cater to those that insist or demand it?
Foldie
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Torquay, England
Posts: 838
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi Foldie,
You and I are clearly not going to agree on this topic.
That type of comment does not do you any favours and yes when I served in the military the ships were made of wood and the men made of steel. Horatio Nelson was still an able seaman and the Dead Sea had not even reported sick, but what does this have to do with the price of chips...
As long as I did my duty as best I could, and as long as I looked both smart and professional, plus my bosses were happy with my performance, then I could not care one fig what some civilian, or retired person thought. I was doing my best and what the 'audience' thought is down to them!
I looked at the celebration and formed my own opinions, the commentary was 'background noise'
Your choice of the words 'criticised largely' is again perhaps highlighting standards, and are you guilty of a slight exaggeration? We can all have opinions and IF there were 4500 complaints then so be it. I will down grade the audience figures and call them just 10million, it was over that but for ease of figures lets call it that.
Your large amount of criticism is what? Is it 0.045% of the audience? If not then blame my medicated brain for not performing but if it is then would I, as a producer be happy with that type of figure? Yes we can suggest others were upset and did not bother to complain but I could also suggest that well over 10 million viewers were happy with what they saw, we can only deal with the figures in front of us.
You can please some of the people some of the time,
but you are NEVER going to please all the people,
all of the time!
I to have rose tinted glasses and yes things may well have been better many Moons ago, but did we have continual coverage that lasted in excess of 5 - 6hrs? Did one specialist attempt to give detailed information on all the Armed Services for that length of time?? I think not.
We certainly never had the high definition cameras that could pick out the fine detail of a soldier's uniform and also give such great footage of the event. Instead we relied on our imagination to form an opinion of what was good, bad or indifferent. (Thinking back to one channel TV with just 405 lines).
Incidentally I channel flipped in an attempt to find the best coverage and YES I am VERY picky when it comes to military 'turn out'
Were you happy with the professionalism of your service and boo whoo to any commentator that might not have our specialist, detailed knowledge we might have regarding our own specific service.
You and I are clearly not going to agree on this topic.
Originally Posted by Foldie
Forgive me but I think you are being disingenuous in your above post. Either that or you are not military or set your standards very low!
As long as I did my duty as best I could, and as long as I looked both smart and professional, plus my bosses were happy with my performance, then I could not care one fig what some civilian, or retired person thought. I was doing my best and what the 'audience' thought is down to them!
I looked at the celebration and formed my own opinions, the commentary was 'background noise'
Originally Posted by Foldie
The BBC's coverage of the military tribute and the Thames flotilla has been criticised largely and thoroughly by a broad section of British society here, in the written media and on the BBC! The BBC alone received over 4500 complaints - an unprecedented figure in modern day visual media presentation. As I stated, in closing, in my complaint to the BBC (#149 on Page 8):
Your large amount of criticism is what? Is it 0.045% of the audience? If not then blame my medicated brain for not performing but if it is then would I, as a producer be happy with that type of figure? Yes we can suggest others were upset and did not bother to complain but I could also suggest that well over 10 million viewers were happy with what they saw, we can only deal with the figures in front of us.
You can please some of the people some of the time,
but you are NEVER going to please all the people,
all of the time!
Originally Posted by Foldie
Are we expecting to hear specialist knowledge that will cater to those that insist or demand it? I say - Frankly, YES! They used to employ experts and people who were prepared to put in the effort beforehand - not any more. Now you get some no brain who thinks that he/she is more important than the event and is prepared to cuff it on the day!
We certainly never had the high definition cameras that could pick out the fine detail of a soldier's uniform and also give such great footage of the event. Instead we relied on our imagination to form an opinion of what was good, bad or indifferent. (Thinking back to one channel TV with just 405 lines).
Incidentally I channel flipped in an attempt to find the best coverage and YES I am VERY picky when it comes to military 'turn out'
Were you happy with the professionalism of your service and boo whoo to any commentator that might not have our specialist, detailed knowledge we might have regarding our own specific service.
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: NOTTINGHAM
Posts: 758
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
glojo,
Valid points but my point is the standard has dropped considerably. The BBC has dumbed down to what they believe is the lowest common denominator in intellect and, most importantly, the commentators were unprepared for both events and had not done the necessary research (as commented by Claire Balding - the only worthy winner on the flotilla day) of appropriate facts before the event. Neither did they seem to have any contingency plan for when things went wrong or the forecast weather arrived!
I apologise if I offended, none intended.
Foldie
PS. 0.045% is irrelevant. 4500 complaints (the reported figure) over 2
programmes is previously unheard of (BBC admitted).
PPS. If it was OK for the majority, then why was the Director General of the BBC called before a Commons Select Committee (unprecedented) to explain himself?
Valid points but my point is the standard has dropped considerably. The BBC has dumbed down to what they believe is the lowest common denominator in intellect and, most importantly, the commentators were unprepared for both events and had not done the necessary research (as commented by Claire Balding - the only worthy winner on the flotilla day) of appropriate facts before the event. Neither did they seem to have any contingency plan for when things went wrong or the forecast weather arrived!
I apologise if I offended, none intended.
Foldie
PS. 0.045% is irrelevant. 4500 complaints (the reported figure) over 2
programmes is previously unheard of (BBC admitted).
PPS. If it was OK for the majority, then why was the Director General of the BBC called before a Commons Select Committee (unprecedented) to explain himself?
Last edited by foldingwings; 24th Jun 2012 at 06:42.
BBC COMPLAINTS
Having drilled down through the BBC's website to find the necessary link, I sent them a complaint on a totally different issue - moving the 6 o'clock news for some football match which didn't even involve any British team. With the plethora of digital channels now available, why must they bug.ger about with the flagship BBC1 news spot?
The same dismissive attitude in their response and no real attempt to address the core issue of my complaint:
Fine - but put the wretched kev-ball on BBC2/3/4 or whatever! Moving the 6 o'clock news from BBC1 to BBC2 doesn't work either - because local news can only be inserted into the BBC1 network and would be lost.
The BBC's coverage of the Diamond Jubilee events has, in the main, been pretty tawdry. Almost down to 'The One Show' level with overpaid, gushing self-licking lollipop presenters ignorant of the subject - and totally lacking any real gravitas.
The same dismissive attitude in their response and no real attempt to address the core issue of my complaint:
We recognise that there has been some disruption to the normal schedules, but we do try and keep our audience informed by publishing the schedules ten days before and keeping disruption to the minimum.
We remain committed to a wide range of programming to cater for those who do not like football or sport in general and we ensure that these are trailed throughout our channels and also online on bbc.co.uk.
We remain committed to a wide range of programming to cater for those who do not like football or sport in general and we ensure that these are trailed throughout our channels and also online on bbc.co.uk.
The BBC's coverage of the Diamond Jubilee events has, in the main, been pretty tawdry. Almost down to 'The One Show' level with overpaid, gushing self-licking lollipop presenters ignorant of the subject - and totally lacking any real gravitas.
Last edited by BEagle; 24th Jun 2012 at 06:58.
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Surrey
Posts: 371
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am with you, Foldie, and it was very noticeable that, as the row progressed over the Jubilee weekend, the BBC made the effort to improve. Huw Edwards' commentary on the flypast was very well prepared, to the extent that he named the captain of each aircraft as it flew over.
Ten years ago at the Golden Jubilee flypast IIRC, the household-name commentator could not even identify the aircraft. The protests then, and there were many, fell on seemingly unconcerned ears. Let us hope this time the row has been big enough to bring about a permanent change in the BBC's approach to commentaries, so that they always match the professionalism and effort of the people in the event.
Ten years ago at the Golden Jubilee flypast IIRC, the household-name commentator could not even identify the aircraft. The protests then, and there were many, fell on seemingly unconcerned ears. Let us hope this time the row has been big enough to bring about a permanent change in the BBC's approach to commentaries, so that they always match the professionalism and effort of the people in the event.
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Torquay, England
Posts: 838
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by foldie
PPS. If it was OK for the majority, then why was the Director General of the BBC called before a Commons Select Committee (unprecedented) to explain himself?
I actually watched this committee meeting although I must have missed the Director General's appearance. I did however see the Editor-in Chief of the Diamond Jubilee program make his 'excuses'.
If I was going to complain about anything, I would complain about his woeful performance. I accept it is not PC to criticise those that stammer, but this was not your average stammering, it was continual, hesitant repetition of a number of words. His points were obviously well scripted but completely lost with his wringing of hands and unprofessional bumbling.
I am a news addict although I tend to watch Sky News and Al Jazeera (interesting coverage of downed Turkish F4) rather than BBC whose standards have deteriorated beyond recognition. However ALL news stations regularly make HUGE gaffs which spread from plain propaganda or just simple inaccuracies that are laughably way off the mark.
Just a quickie regarding standards:
Several months ago I complained on this forum about the filthy state of a Sea King Search and Rescue aircraft that was involved in a public demonstration. Lots of abuse telling me how I was being 'picky' and maintainers had better things to do other than clean off built up efflux , or to me lots of soot!
That is all about standards that we have control over and who cares if a commentator calls it a Merlin or a Royal Navy aircraft.. The crew are representing their military service and what does it say when they turn up to perform in front of the public in a dirty aircraft that could have easily and quickly had a quick shampoo and shine!! It is all about personal or service standards. The Commander of an air base that talked to the World's media by the front gate of his air base minus hat and litter on the ground.. That is all about standards that are within our control and whilst I am on a roll... Royal Navy ships open to the public with rust streaks down their side or leaving harbour with sailors ambling about the deck with nothing to do but look like lost sheep!! Standards which we have control over ...
End of rant... and far better to complain rather than bottle up any frustration
Incidentally I don't think the Sky Presentation was any better, but I do feel both channels got across the pride, and joy the nation felt, plus the video coverage was excellent when we take into account the AWFUL weather conditions. I am NOT for one milli-second saying the commentary was perfect far from it. and your points are obviously valid, I just felt that for the length of time that commentator had to waffle, his mistakes were acceptable
Should they employ retired Royal Navy personnel to talk about Naval matters Army to talk about Army and Royal Air Force to talk about Royal Air Force and if so would they be talking to a very limited audience and possibly boring the significant majority? (polite question)
