BBC coverage to be given the "Olympics treatment"

[abdoujaparov]

Murdoch is an awful man - but in this case The Devil Does Have All the Best Tunes.

[thesecretingredientiscrime]

Well yes, but unfortunately that seems to be all of them.

They were a 10% partner in Rome, though pulled out when the Daily Mail claimed it was unnecessarily prurient and anachronistic - heaven forbid. What else are they doing with HBO? No matter what, they should be making series like The Wire or Game of Thrones, not just providing the catering.

[Gnomicide]

If you want to defend them carry on, personally I think they should be investigated.

[tijuana_man]

Three words sum up all that is wrong with the BBC these days: Stacey Fucking Dooley*.

There is still a lot of good in the BBC though.

I just don't get the appeal of watching Glastonbury on TV, it doesn't capture one ounce of what it's about for me. But we each enjoy it for different reasons I guess.

*Savile aside.

[Ed209]

Well, I'm a licence fee payer and I think that the BBC is a steaming pile of ordure. I find nothing to watch on BBC tv and believe they could do far more with less; concentrating effort and budget into three or four channels instead of producing a dozen awful ones. Their radio is utterly fucking infuriating. The presenters, unnecessary at the best of times seem to be chosen, with just a couple of exceptions, for their dim-witted banality and love of their own voices. It annoys me that so-called music stations, such as Radio 2 and Radio 6, will fill the schedules with anything but music and I find it ironic that the best popular music show is on Radio 3, namely Late Junction; though a big "shout out" (dontch just hate that?) for Freak Zone on 6.

For how to do radio they should listen to Soma FM. For how to do tv drama they need to hand the keys over to HBO. As for comedy - they peeked in 1976 and it's been down hill all the way since.

[James Bolivar]

The BBC is something that is respected around the world and should be cherished. The BBC has to try and cater to everyone, and on the whole it does an excellent job.

It might just be a problem you have with media in general, because very few do it better, or even on a par with the BBC.

Try living in pretty much any other country in the world. In comparison to their catastrophes the quality of our television and radio is golden. We're lucky to have it.

[efcfanwirral]

All this talk of DVD box sets- I wish they actually WOULD bring out a Glasto one because I know I like to relive some Glasto memories every now and then after a few drinks in the bleak mid winter.

Guessing there's license issues with the music or the profit they make being small due to having to pay the artists otherwise they'd have done it by now as the casual festival goers will likely want a souvenir and some of us will just want it for collector/memory point of view.

Technically, these Glasto moments on YouTube probably shouldn't be on there, and I'd expect one day all music you haven't paid for (including these bbc vids on YouTube, which in turn will likely not be provided for us to pay for) will not be there - they seem to be clamping down on copyright stuff and I can't see that stopping.

[efcfanwirral]

And further to that - I'd definitely pay to get that blur gig from 09 in glorious HD...

[neilloggie]

Considering the BBC took 274 members of staff to Glastonbury in 2011 the TV coverage is always pretty poor,with far too many of the same bits being repeated. For the Olympics they had 765 staff so if they need more staff to cover Glastonbury to a higher standard,would it really be the best way to spend the license fee?

[Ed209]

I thank my lucky stars every day for the privilege of being able to pay for something I don't use and don't watch.

American TV is OK - certainly the cable networks are fine, the broadcasters have way too many ads.

Edited February 1, 2013 by Ed209

[Chimps in Balaclavas]

If you're going to cover the festival, do it properly!

More people on the ground discreetly mingling with the punters, listening to their stories, digging out hidden gems... rather than concentrating soley on the music.

I know they do cover snippets of what goes on away from the music, but not enough i.m.o.

That's partly why I prefered the CH4 coverage, they seemed more mingley than the BBC, which gave you more of an impression as to what the festival was all about.

Actually, looking at Wikipedia, CH4 only covered the festival for a few years so I could be talking absolute bollocks, as my memory is slightly hazy of the festival back then (I didn't go myself for the first time until a few years later).

I've still got a feeling that I prefered the old coverage though for that reason.

[Bathimp]

Will they be broadcasting in 3D like the Olympics?

Hopefully this will reduce demand for tickets longer term for the half-hearted and day trippers who dont stay overnight at the festival etc.

I would be happy to be able to relive a full set without editing and Fearne Cotton etc, interrupting all the time

[abdoujaparov]

If you're going to cover the festival, do it properly!

More people on the ground discreetly mingling with the punters, listening to their stories, digging out hidden gems... rather than concentrating soley on the music.

[Morse Code]

The BBC's Olympics coverage was fucking brilliant from start to finish and I expect this year's Glastonbury coverage will be too.

End of post!

[Morse Code]

No, no, no, no, no...

I dont want cameras stuck in my face all round the festival. They can fuck off with their TV coverage and leave us alone

[fatyeti24]

No, no, no, no, no...

I dont want cameras stuck in my face all round the festival. They can fuck off with their TV coverage and leave us alone

[Chimps in Balaclavas]

No, no, no, no, no...

I dont want cameras stuck in my face all round the festival. They can fuck off with their TV coverage and leave us alone

Edited February 1, 2013 by DAVA

[Guest]

BBC 4 has some great stuff which wouldn't get a chance elsewhere, especially music programming.

[CaledonianGonzo]

Already this year the BBC has shown some amazing stuff - Africa is phenomenal, BBC4's Storyveille showed the incredible The House I Live In, Jonathan Meades' new programme, Charlie Brooker, etc.

[Mardy]

The BBC is fucking great, loads of good stuff on there.

Of course, not everything that it broadcasts is right for me and there's plenty I don't like. But that's not the point, that's not how it works. Complaining about paying for it all, even when there's some of it I don't like is ridiculous.

it would be like going to Glastonbury and saying that because I don't watch many acts on the Pyramid stage or in the Avalon tent I want a cheaper ticket. The diversity of it is its strength.

Edited due to a rogue apostrophe on the loose

Edited February 1, 2013 by Mardy

[CaledonianGonzo]

Most people who've spent a long time abroad and had to put up with non-BBC national broadcasting corporations usually come to realise that it genuinely is the best on the planet.

[The Nal]

Most people who've spent a long time abroad and had to put up with non-BBC national broadcasting corporations usually come to realise that it genuinely is the best on the planet.

[thesecretingredientiscrime]

I don't think the BBC coverage of Glastonbury is meant to be enticing people to go or get a feel of the site (and rightly so, we should introduce a fight club esque rule), its purely to present a decent array of music across the spectrum.

[James Bolivar]

The BBC is fucking great, loads of good stuff on there.

Of course, not everything that it broadcasts is right for me and there's plenty I don't like. But that's not the point, that's not how it works. Complaining about paying for it all, even when there's some of it I don't like is ridiculous.

it would be like going to Glastonbury and saying that because I don't watch many acts on the Pyramid stage or in the Avalon tent I want a cheaper ticket. The diversity of it is its strength.

Edited due to a rogue apostrophe on the loose

Edited February 1, 2013 by James Bolivar

[eFestivals]

none of it is for me and yet I'm still forced to pay; that seems a tad unfair.

ahhh, the wonderful idea that national services are only justified if each contributor is getting everything back that they put in ... the very idea that has dropped this country in the shit, that is causing disabled people to have their benefits cut and to be forced into work without doctors assessing their ability to work, that makes fair taxation impossible, which makes changing this fucked up world into anything better impossible.

Yeah, lets go with that idea some more. It's bound to sort everything out eventually.