Sky Arts 2

[LHC]

And there was me thinking that it was devoted to the BBC generally and BBC Radio Three specifically.

Does Sky 2 have any message boards, I wonder?

And if so, do they allow substantial praise of the BBC's output?

No, I thought not

Skyarts doesn't have messageboards (but then neither does the BBC anymore), However, if you look at the skyarts website, there are sections for comments on the schedules etc. These seem to be largely unmoderated as many include complaints about repeats along with praise for the programmes shown.

And yes, I have seen praise for BBC programming in the comments on the Skyarts website

[Mr Pee]

Oh no, if you want depressing cynicism, try this:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/video/2009/aug/28/edinburghtvfestival-jamesmurdoch

Stare straight into the headlights, lickle bunny - it'll be faster that way!

Thank you for that, Amateur. I thought he raised some interesting points. Or perhaps you think a state broadcaster should be immune from criticism and comment?

I'm sure Colonel Gaddafi would agree......

[Panjandrum]

I hardly think that the BBC deserves to be treated with any extra degree of respect, given their disgraceful decision to close the R3 messageboards last year. That told us everything we need to know about the contempt with which BBC managment treats public opinion. Personally, I think a thread devoted to classical music programmes provided by another broadcaster is valid on these boards. If nothing else, it allows bored-ers to see how poor the BBC's programming of classical music is these days.

As Sky subscribers know, for no additional cost, we get some extremely fine arts programmes essentally as a no-cost extra to the core subscription. I think it is extremely valid to keep on making this point and to highlight forthcoming broadcasts to the membership as a whole.

Btw, when the old canard about how these boards are not here to promote Sky is raised again, you can be safe in the knowledge that the point about the superiority of the programming on Sky has been conceded.

[amateur51]

I hardly think that the BBC deserves to be treated with any extra degree of respect, given their disgraceful decision to close the R3 messageboards last year. That told us everything we need to know about the contempt with which BBC managment treats public opinion. Personally, I think a thread devoted to classical music programmes provided by another broadcaster is valid on these boards. If nothing else, it allows bored-ers to see how poor the BBC's programming of classical music is these days.

As Sky subscribers know, for no additional cost, we get some extremely fine arts programmes essentally as a no-cost extra to the core subscription. I think it is extremely valid to keep on making this point and to highlight forthcoming broadcasts to the membership as a whole.

Btw, when the old canard about how these boards are not here to promote Sky is raised again, you can be safe in the knowledge that the point about the superiority of the programming on Sky has been conceded.

The clue lies in the name of this forum, Panjandrum

[Mr Pee]

The clue lies in the name of this forum, Panjandrum

Good grief. It really is like banging your head against a brick wall with some people.

How can I explain in words of one syllable?

Take a look around the forums, Amateur. If you can honestly tell me that every thread relates to Radio3, or even the BBC, then I'll go and boil my head.

Just from memory, we've recently had a thread discussing the new season at the ROH. NOT RADIO3.

What was your last concert? NOT RADIO3.

Stormy Weather. NOT RADIO3. (In fact, not even related to music.)

Nuclear Power. Likewise.

The AV referendum. Likewise.

The list goes on.

And yet here we have a thread discussing CLASSICAL MUSIC- and you say it shouldn't be here.



(I've highlighted the imprtant words in the message in the hope that you might begin to understand....although I'm not holding out much hope.....)

[Panjandrum]

I must admit I hadn't appreciated that these boards were funded by the BBC. I must have missed that one. :duh:

Oh, and amateur, you had better stop posting to this thread or you'll be contradicting your own so dear principles about sticking to BBC matters. We wouldn't want that now would we? :howls of laughter:

If I were you I would leave it to FF to discipline Mr Pee and me, and close this thread. In fact, why don't you send her a PM to do so? : peals of laughter rising to a crescendo:

[amateur51]

Nice to see that Mr Pee is making good use of his new crayons ...

My point, which you consistently avoid, Mr Pee, is that Sky is a lazy non-creative broadcaster that costs way more than the BBC, and is allied to a distinctly creepy news provider both in the broadcast & print media.

For you to rattle on about it as tho it were merely a glamorous competitor to BBC is naive in the extreme. It's part of a more sinister attempt to gain control over more & more areas of our lives with scant regard for the quality of the content. Have you watched any Australian or American television recently?

[amateur51]

: peals of laughter rising to a crescendo:

You were speaking of canards only recently, Panjandrum ... a basic schoolboy error there .... a crescendo rises to a climax

Don't they teach you nuffin' on Sky Arts 2?

[Mr Pee]

My point, which you consistently avoid, Mr Pee, is that Sky is a lazy non-creative broadcaster that costs way more than the BBC, and is allied to a distinctly creepy news provider both in the broadcast & print media.

Well, as somebody who actually watches- ooh, I do like these new crayons- Sky, I think I'm probably in a better position to comment on its programming than your good self. Lazy and non-creative? I will beg to differ, and I'd also suggest that precisely the same criticizm could be directed at the BBC- indeed, I think it is far more relevant to the BBC than it is to Sky.

As for your comment about the news agenda, I'm really not sure what's "creepy" about it. And besides, the initial point of this thread was a discussion of the superb classical music on Sky Arts 2, not a discussion of News International.

Little did I realise when I started the thread out of genuine enthusiasm for all the great Arts programming I suddenly had access to, that it would be hijacked by Dave Spart.

[amateur51]

Little did I realise

Aaaaah the Pee family motto?!

[Ventilhorn]

Nice to see that Mr Pee is making good use of his new crayons ...

My point, which you consistently avoid, Mr Pee, is that Sky is a lazy non-creative broadcaster that costs way more than the BBC, and is allied to a distinctly creepy news provider both in the broadcast & print media.

For you to rattle on about it as tho it were merely a glamorous competitor to BBC is naive in the extreme. It's part of a more sinister attempt to gain control over more & more areas of our lives with scant regard for the quality of the content. Have you watched any Australian or American television recently?

Handbags at dawn!

AM51: I think you have already made out your argument and your political opinions are getting in the way of common sense.
If you were to shun everything on political grounds, you would have a very empty larder. Tycoons are here to stay, so take what you can from them.

Mr Pee: In you first post, you alerted members to the possibilities of viewing good classical music on another channel. Do you need to say any more?

Anyone with a satelite dish can access several continental broadcasters of good classical music (and good jazz) without even being a Sky subscriber. Why not just leave it there?

I have always maintained that I am neither for nor against apathy, but now I'm not so sure!

[Mr Pee]

That's fair enough Ventilhorn- as I've said many times on this thread, I started it purely out of enthusiasm for the output of the Sky Arts Channels. We're all supposed to be music lovers here, so it does rather get on my wick that certain people seem to blind themselves to what is a great feast of music related programming based solely upon some sort of student common room knee-jerk reaction-especially when they have never actually watched the channel in question.


Last week, for example, there was a one hour long interview with Andre Previn. Absolutely fascinating. When was the last time the BBC devoted an hour of peak- time television to an interview with a classical musician?

Forthcoming in the next few weeks are similar interviews with Julian Lloyd Webber, Leif Ove Andsnes, Alison Balsom,, Emma Johnson, Lang Lang and Nicola Benedetti. In most cases, these interviews are followed up by an hour and a half's concert from the artist in question.

Not musical, but in the same series as the Previn, last night there were thought provoking interviews with Peter and Christopher Hitchens- an hour each, back to back.

An excerpt from today's Telegraph review:-

In an age of soapy soundbites, Sky Art’s hour-long interview strand is a serious attempt to delve deeper into its subjects. These two brothers, both of them clever and cunning, justified the format.

Lazy and unimaginative?

I think not.

[Flosshilde]

some sort of student common room knee-jerk reaction.

Not at all - a mature reaction to a media owner who wants to accrue more power to his organisation, power which he uses to manipulate politicians (not to mention the rest of us - if we fall for his blandishments). His aim is to destroy the BBC because it is far more unbiased than his own media, & he doesn't like anything he can't control or charge people for. He exemplifies Kipling's (& later Baldwin's) view that "What the proprietorship of these papers is aiming at is power, and power without responsibility — the prerogative of the harlot through the ages".

Of course, Mr Pee, some people don't care who they get into bed with, as long as they have a good time.

[Eine Alpensinfonie]

You were speaking of canards only recently, Panjandrum ... a basic schoolboy error there .... a crescendo rises to a climax

More of a tabloid error, I should say - found from time to time in Rupert Murdoch's comics.

[Mr Pee]

Of course, Mr Pee, some people don't care who they get into bed with, as long as they have a good time.

Perhaps if the BBC were able to offer me a good time, I wouldn't need to get into bed with anybody else. But since their serious music coverage is pretty much negligible these days -even on Radio3 which increasingly resembles Classic FM- then I'll exercise my rights as a consumer and exercise freedom of choice.

Or perhaps you're only in favour of freedom of choice as long as one of those choices is not Murdoch?