91Èȱ¬

I hope that things improve as you now even have managed to transfer Seb Coe into Danny Boyle on your photo
A BASIC mistake

It's to be hoped that the 91Èȱ¬ coverage steps up a notch after the appalling transmission that was the Diamond Jubilee.

Dear Roger,
Glad to see that your preparations for London 2012 and all its features are so well advanced. What are your plans when this summer's riots kick in?

Oh no, not again. Just how toe-curlingly embarrassing will it be this time?

Caption under the photo is incorrect - Danny Boyle is the second from the right.

After the 91Èȱ¬'s appalling coverage of the Jubilee, I'm dreading this. Frankly, I don't the 91Èȱ¬ can or should be trusted.
Post Jubilee, I feel the time has come for the license to be scraped and those that want to watch Fern Cotton and celebrity culture unfolding at historic events can pay for it. I can't image the queue would be that long.

Yawn
After the carcrash of the Flotilla - hopes have faded

Why don't people wait until after the Ceremony to decide whether they like it or not? No wonder he Aussies call us whingers!!

Are you going to follow your Jubilee approach, by having 1 film about Olympic logoed sick bags, and the second about those born on the day?

Surely they could have found a proper broadcaster to produce the films, rather than lower their standards to using the 91Èȱ¬

Please, please don't have John Barrowman in it...

Re car crash of 91Èȱ¬ pageant coverage.
Dare I mention that the 91Èȱ¬'s most feared competitor BskyB is generally rated to have given good coverage, so what's all this nonsense about Sky's monopoly of the media? Seems the monopoly is with the 91Èȱ¬ and look where that has got us......

I'm looking forward to the Olympic coverage and hope that any commentary will be well researched, well informed and well presented. Please remember that viewers do have a longer concentration span than the average goldfish. The recent unhappy precedent of the river pageant coverage must be put to one side.

The point here is that 91Èȱ¬ Drama are producing two films for use as part of the ceremony - (so Jubilee comparisons are irrelevant) - I know you some of you chaps are commited 91Èȱ¬/Olympics -sceptics but try and focus on the actual story...

Give the Beeb a break, covering something as tedious as a bunch of boats bobbing along a river at a snails pace, transporting a tourist attraction on her birthday when it's raining can't have been easy. I'd struggle to think of anything remotely relevant or interesting to say about it after ten minutes as well...

Dear Beeb, With all your power and influence - please don't let Sir Paul McCartney 'sing' more than one song at the end - Just tell him the programme has overrun on the telly time! :')

Are the 91Èȱ¬ showing the Olympics? It's not as if they've been giving it undue prominence and shoe-horning it into every news bulletin no matter how tenuous the association for the last couple of years. I mean, you don't see them banging on about the torch relay every day while other broadcasters largely ignore it do you? Oh, wait, hang on a minute...

"Isles of Wonder" why they did that?

Love a good laugh! Can't wait.

Let us just hope that the 91Èȱ¬'s coverage etc will be better than the rubbish they presented over the Diamond Jubilee celbrations

I can't believe the amount of negativity here. When did we turn into such a bunch of miserable whiners? I'm even doing it whining at the whiners. Come on Britain, get a grip! Where's the old spirit we used to have?

Come on. Look ahead to a feast of sport and a great celebration of the Olympic tradition. Onwards and upwards so to speak.

Re 15 - free to air??? Do you realise how sanctimonious you sound? Just to remind you that the 91Èȱ¬ is funded by a compulsory license fee (or tax). People expect quality when they have to pay for it and this is exacerbated, rather than diminished, when the payment is mandatory.

The sad negative people on here really make me sick....the Olympics are coming, the 91Èȱ¬ will do a great job and I for one feel really proud of our country. The rest of the world can never understand why the British are always putting themselves down so much !!

I agree free to air is meaningless particularly by applying DRM by the back door and encrypting the EPG to limit recording.

Last Olympics bbc coverage could be sumarized as too much talking heads and not enough action. I will be watching it on Eurosport.

I dare you to put Fern Cotton in the films.

I'm somewhat perturbed by My Mosey's interventions here. Frankly, trying to defend in any way the utter mess the 91Èȱ¬ made of the jubilee is staggering. I heard Mr Yentob on R4's Media Show trying to do the same.
Mr Mosey - please accept that you made a hash of it and the people that pay for it - ie: me, are not willing to accept this dross.
Can you reassure us that the 91Èȱ¬ output of the Olympics won't be, as I fear it will be,a politically correct, celebrity driven, unfocused, poorly researched, poorly presented mish mash.
Whats the story here? It's the Olympics - not the presenters. I couldn't give a monkeys about Ms Cotton or that laddy Jake Humfry - bring back Mr Dimbleby.
The world's eyes will be on us - don't muck it - again.

No doubt the 91Èȱ¬ will fill the coverage with 3rd rate personalities rather than treating it as a serious event. I've lost confidence in the 91Èȱ¬ coverage after the fiasco with the flotilla. I hope some other media organisation covers it in a serious way or the 91Èȱ¬ shows it on one of its 24 channels uninterrupted so I can watch it where it where hasn't been dumbed down.

English Countryside 2012. Where's the 600 new build homes and townie campsite?

Maybe I'm the only one but I'm really looking forward to the opening ceremony and from the details in this article I think it will really surprise people what Danny Boyle and his team have come up with. It was a good decision to get a film director involved from the outset as he should have a good sense of how to create something spectacular on this scale.
My only concern is having Paul McCartney sing. While that seemed appropriate for the Jubilee as it reflected the various acts that have been popular during the Queen's reign I think the Olympic ceremony should showcase Britain as it is now and looking forward. Not harking back to someone who was popular 50 years ago.

I am sure the the 91Èȱ¬ will give good coverage to the Olympics, including the opening and closing ceremonies. But, as the puerile coverage of some aspects of the Diamond Jubilee showed, the 91Èȱ¬ have become complacent, maybe arrogant, not only with its poor coverage of the Jubilee, but its apparent reluctance to accept it made a right mess of it, despite large numbers of complainants. Mr Mosey, don't swamp your coverage with 'D' list celebrities, who know little, and offer even less to the event. Drop the arrogance with your, 'The 91Èȱ¬ knows best' listen to the public for once.

The 91Èȱ¬ has lost its way in terms of TV presentation. The sound recording in studio settings is particularly sloppy of late. Besides this, the Olympic Opening ceremony is yet another misrepresentative, idealised and wholly ridiculous view of what the UK is actually like today, it beggars believe anyone would recognise the theme it conveys. An utter waste of licence payers money too, just like the £180,000,000 squandered on FA television rights.

Those who attack the 91Èȱ¬ have the right to their view but I don't understand why some want to "have a go" all the time. The press generally are looking for constant trouble with the Olympics but unfortunately for them the venues have been built on time, over 6 million tickets have been sold and Team GB might win a few medals. Too many good news stories for some?

Archimedes Screwed - I'm not sure why you're describing the content of the opening cermony as a waste of licence payers money.
It's being paid for by LOCOG.
The 91Èȱ¬ role is to broadcast it to its audience and to produce two films, for which it is presumably being paid by LOCOG.

Oh dear. There is growing confusion here. For those of us without tickets to Olympic events we shall be relying on good TV coverage to enjoy world class sports. Mr Mosey quite rightly defends some excellent Olympic coverage from the past. That was then.
Expectations are high and the ways in which the Jubilee pageant was presented trivialised something watched by millions; possibly the same millions who will be watching the Olympics on TV.
I am looking forward to informed and insightful presentation of a major event. As the 91Èȱ¬ announced their presenters on 2nd December last year I am assuming that they will all be busy making sure that viewers get good value for their (licence) money. In addition I hope that the broadcasting dimension of the Olympics will be something that will augment the high standards of the ways in which we present the 2012 Summer Olympic Games to the world.

Generally the 91Èȱ¬ does a brilliant job and, ignoring the monopoly etc, we really should be grateful (have you watched TV in other countries?). The problem is that we have become used to such high standards. I was totally baffled by the 91Èȱ¬'s failures during the Jubilee weekend, especially the River Pageant, but also the Concert as well (who's idea was it to run the credits over the end of the firework display?). It would be a big help if the 91Èȱ¬ would simply apologise for a massive error of judgement by the management, and not try to pass this off onto the hapless studio presenters. Hopefully everything will return to the customary superlatives for all future major events...

So, 4 or 5 weeks to the Lympics and the 91Èȱ¬ Director is spending his afternoon blogging. I hope, for your sake, your time is well spent. If, as you claim, it will be world class production values and professionally presented by knowledgeable people, I will be the first to congratulate you Mr Mosey. Until then, I reserve judgement.

the 91Èȱ¬ isn,t putting on the opening ceremony only transmitting to the world.
Its going to take place enough of this whining get used to it and embrace it.You might be surprised

Hi Roger,
I commented on a few blogs back in March asking about whether the 91Èȱ¬ were going to waive the licence fee for Olympics events in local communities - I'm still chasing the answer and wonder if you've got any further.

We are looking to put on events to gather the local community to watch the opening and closing ceremonies and have a community fun day on Super Saturday with the Olympics being screen in the background. We want these to be free events and ideally would like to not have to organise a licence just for these events.

I know last year the licence fee was waived for the royal wedding to encourage community groups to gather and celebrate a major occasion in British history - the main Olympics events would seem to me to fall into the same category of historic moments for our nation.

I'd be grateful if you could get back to me on this as we are fast approaching the opening ceremony!

free to air for tens of millions of viewers.
---
Please dont patronise us. ITV and Sky News are every bit as free to air as the 91Èȱ¬, but they didnt turn the national celebration of the Jubilee into a world wide joke.

The least the 91Èȱ¬ could do is show some humility following recent events, given you dont have the guts to apologise

If there is someone else I ought to be asking this question please feel free to point me in their direction...
Thanks

Dan

Not too surprised the Jubilee coverage has shaken peoples faith in the 91Èȱ¬'s ability to cover the ceremonies. I'm sure it'll all be fine in the end but you only have one chance to get this right so must take note of the feedback from previous ceremonies and the events last weekend and allow the pictures to tell the stories, instructing all commentators to keep their input to an absolute minimum. The general feelings about Huw Edwards after Beijing and Delhi have been ignored so if you're not changing the personnel, you have to at least instruct them not to ruin the event.

It's no good the 91Èȱ¬ just passing off complaints by pointing out people can watch without commentary on the red button as the vast majority will watch it on 91Èȱ¬1 and actually want some input from commentators, but at the appropriate points, not a continuos running commentary.


As for the ceremony - I wish they'd kept today's announcement under wraps really. It's frustrating as I really do want to know what it'll include, what the cauldron will look like and how it will be lit - but know full well that the more I know the less I'll enjoy it on the night.

P.S. And on the "celebrity driven" topic I've read an interview today about the 91Èȱ¬ signing up Davina McCall as a presenter for the Olympics and her saying how she'll have to bluff her way through some pieces about cycling. Now I'm assuming her role is in some kind of build-up programme and not within the games itself, but after jubilee sick bags I think such things need clarifying.

P.S. A Twitter amnesty for the fortnight would be great too.

I just checked the link you posted and seemed to get through to the One Show.

On my final posting here, I'm looking forward to the Olympics. It really ought to be a wonderful spectacle and has the potential to wonders for the UK.
However, from the 91Èȱ¬'s point of view, you have a huge responsibility. Someone suggested that the 91Èȱ¬ isn't putting on the opening/closing ceremonies and of course that perfectly correct.
Neither did they put on the River Pageant, but the general consensus is that they made a mighty mess of it. I sincerely hope that lessons have been learned. It seems that I'm not alone in being fed up of celebrity culture. The Olympics have nothing to do with this and therefore so called or self styled celebs have no place in presenting the Olympics. I'm sorry to see, however, that the One Show non entities have been lined up already. Oh Dear.
It's my opinion that if the 91Èȱ¬ haven't learned from past errors - rather mistakes - the British public won't forgive them on this occasion. If the 91Èȱ¬ keeps making the same mistakes, something has to change - fundamentally.
It's my opinion that the 91Èȱ¬ are constantly pandering to the lowest common denominator and seems to take pride in dumbing down wonderful opportunities. At the Olympics, the 91Èȱ¬ will be drinking from the last chance saloon.

I look forward to the opening ceremony and the 91Èȱ¬'s coverage of it. The 91Èȱ¬ can cover big sports events exceptionally well, and the presenters and commentators of Olympic sport - such as Jill Douglas, John Inverdale and Steve Cram - are first class and provide real insight.

I do have concerns however that the interests of genuine Olympics sports fans will be secondary to making the coverage (supposedly) appeal to the broadest audience possible - and in effect be presented in a fashion that revolves around lightweight features, social media interaction and the continual reporting on how the nation is watching The Games.

The big British sports (e.g. athletics, cycling, rowing etc) should be covered with the same attention to analysis and informed discussion from an expert team as is the norm with football. As can be demonstrated from the response to this blog, there are a great number of people (probably the majority of viewers for The Games) who want the sport to be covered in serious manner.

I appreciate this is a unique event and the need to cater for a wide range of 91Èȱ¬ viewers, but what can you say Roger to re-assure sports fans that the 91Èȱ¬ coverage will deliver informed discussion and analysis of the sport (& Britain's success!) at the heart of its coverage - second only to the live action?

I know it's only red button but it's well known the 5 Live alternative commentary is fairly popular - but I doubt anyone wants Moyles in the corner of their screen. It's another example of television unnecessary attaching a celebrity to an event which just doesn't need it.

49. I think the popularity of the Chris Moyles commentaries would prove you wrong. As was shown at the World Cup, there was a huge audience in terms of viewers/listeners.

On your second point, it DOES need it, as the normal 91Èȱ¬ commentators are nigh on unbearable.

Hi - re the opening ceremony. Still taking in the fact that our contribution to Olympic history is an opening ceremony consisting of grass! Brilliant, inspired. Is it later going to be entered for the Turner prize?

Sorry to be a tad cynical but I've just seen on TV that we may also be blessed with a rendition from the Sex Pistols. I am moved beyond words....

If I have to watch grass grow for an hour listening to them squawking away in the background I shall simply turn the set off and change nationality.

Thank goodness that no one has suggested Morris dancers!

I hope that the communications companies are taking note of the blackouts on the webcam.
I live in North Durham, near Consett. The webcam was out in all the North Durham areas, until you got to Durham.
Today I have been trying to watch the North Yorkshire cam, and missed the whole of North Yorkshire, through the Moors. It's not to do with how many other people are using their mobiles, as the torch was on the train and the torchcam was on the bus. It's been out for most of Scarborough, too. What it means is that the North East does not count as far as the mobile phone companies are concerned.