NEWS ABOUT THE NEWS
Is it only me, who is irritated by the trend in which television newsreaders tell you what they are going to read about in the news, instead of just reading it?
When I lived in New York in 1980-81, I used to get intensely irritated by having films interrupted for advert breaks (something which, until that point, never happened in the U.K.). Particularly when such interruptions were of the "five die in fire in the Bronx, more at 10" kind. I reluctantly accepted that American TV trends often crept their way into European programmes x years later; and that has duly happened. Many TV news stations nowadays have dual anchors, where the interplay between the two is supposed to add spice. There is now also that intensely irritating banter between the anchors and the reporter out at the scene, where they do this "over to you, Brian", "back to you, Ted", "thanks Brian" routine. But although Denmark's state-owned but commercial TV2 succumbed to all that sort of thing long ago, DR1 seemed mercifully old-fashioned, with a single anchor talking to the camera, and relatively few Brian and Ted phrases.
Until now. DR1 have a daily programme called the "Evening Show", from 6.00-6.30pm and 7.00-7.30pm, the two halves sandwiching the early evening news from 6.30-7.00pm. At 6.28pm or thereabouts, the co-anchors on the Evening Show cut to the newsdesk in order to ask the newsreader what is going to be on the news that evening. This drives me nuts, not least because two minutes later, after returning to the Evening Show for a wrap-up, the news starts in traditional fashion, with headlines. The effect is that we get news about news, then headlines, and only then the news itself.
Call me an old fogey, but what was wrong with the old system?
Walter Blotscher
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I enjoy these old fogey blog entries. I was as a social obligation at a lunch at the Royal Cinque Ports Gold Club last Sunday. I was delighted to listen to a fogey harrangue the new Captain about the quality of the treacle pudding and, outrage, that the custard had run out. The new Captains vice duly replied that he had noted the complaint and would take it up with the caterers.
ReplyDeleteThe BBC news programmes in Britain also have this irritating habit, telling you what is going to happen or - even worse - what might happen. And then producing a 'talking head' to discuss what might happen. This is NOT news.
ReplyDeleteA further irritation is the inevitable trailer during the credits of every programme (not limited to the BBC, I might add). The screen will be squeezed to show a preview of what is coming next (spoiling your ability to read the credits of the programme you have just watched), allied with an unwanted voice-over which ruins the end-of-programme music. Apart from everything else this is such an insult to the programme makers, more or less saying that their rounding off is worthless.
I have noticed that, following the American practice of sensational news, the British news services will always try to find 'linked' news. Thus, if there is a bad fire in London, the news people will look around the world to find two more fire stories. Or flood, or earthquake. If they can find three such instances, what joy!
ReplyDeleteRecently, there was a bad air crash in Northern Ireland. 'Luckily' there was also a crash somewhere else in Europe, but where to find the third? Thank goodness, a light aircraft had managed to force land at a midlands airport - something that would not otherwise get anywhere near the national news.
Hi All,
ReplyDeleteIt seems that I am not the only one so irritated.
On treacle pudding, Michael, I am with the fogey. There has to be custard.
Regards,
Walter
There was custard but it apparently ran out. His rant did put me off ever wanting to be a member. But these events, like most I go to these days are good practice in being a bland conversationist.
ReplyDeleteI think these comments largely refer to television news: I do not like or watch television. How fogey is that!