The Eternal Breakfast Debate in a New Place

[aka Calum Da Jazbo]

has any one seen CBH and Conchita Wurst in the same room at the same time?

[Serial_Apologist]

Conchita Wurst

Some kind of German sausage?

[Flosshilde]

something like that

(some readers might like to look away now)










(the beard's real, by the way)


(but I don't think the bosom is)

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

(but I don't think the bossom is)

"Bossom"???





Neither one thing, nor ...

[ahinton]

HAS anybody had " Are you being served?" as a specialist subject on mastermind?

Has anyone ever had "The Eternal Breakfast" as one?...

[ahinton]

has any one seen CBH and Conchita Wurst in the same room at the same time?

Fortunately, I've never seen either of them in the same or indeed any other room at the same or indeed any other time but, just out of curiosity, is the latter related to Olga, do you know?

If Burton hyphen, then Page, say I...

[ahinton]

Perhaps someone should suggest Breakfast finds its own Samantha.....

Provided that Dave could spare her, of course...

[french frank]

Just as a matter for discussion: since it's an accepted fact that people/everyone will dive into Wikipedia as a first port of call for a bit of background detail, how acceptable is it for an R3 presenter to read out part of an article, word for word without attribution to Wiki? No copyright problem but ... ? Does it give a superficial (false) impression that presenters are 'well-informed'?

[P. G. Tipps]

(some readers might like to look away now)

At least one reader regrets he ever bothered looking in the first place, especially after eagerly consuming a hearty plate of Jordan's jumbo-oats porridge for breakfast.

And what a truly shocking waste of a nice dress in these austere times ...

[ahinton]

Just as a matter for discussion: since it's an accepted fact that people/everyone will dive into Wikipedia as a first port of call for a bit of background detail, how acceptable is it for an R3 presenter to read out part of an article, word for word without attribution to Wiki? No copyright problem but ... ? Does it give a superficial (false) impression that presenters are 'well-informed'?

I don't know but I imagine that such an impression might equally well be gained by some people had the origin of the uncredited information been the programme producer or someone on the production team, or indeed from any other source; much would surely depend upon the extent to which and frequency with which some listeners might choose to assume that information provided by presenters has been researched by them personally rather than by someone else? That said, it seems only reasonable to quote at least some sources, especially when whole chunks are quoted.

[Zucchini]

Does it give a superficial (false) impression that presenters are 'well-informed'?

No more so than a football pundit telling us that Eric McTiddle headed into the net from the halfway line in the 3rd round of the 1957 FA Cup and the ball had to be cleaned to get the Brylcream off

[Old Grumpy]

That said, it seems only reasonable to quote at least some sources, especially when whole chinks are quoted.

[ahinton]

Serendipitous that typo was not! Thanks for drawing it to my attention and enabling me to correct it before the PC brigade here begins to fire off accusations that it was so!

[ahinton]

No more so than a football pundit telling us that Eric McTiddle headed into the net from the halfway line in the 3rd round of the 1957 FA Cup and the ball had to be cleaned to get the Brylcream off

That takes you back! It would more likely be the organic fairtrade pomegranate and mint dry hair conditioner these days!

[french frank]

I don't know but I imagine that such an impression might equally well be gained by some people had the origin of the uncredited information been the programme producer or someone on the production team, or indeed from any other source; much would surely depend upon the extent to which and frequency with which some listeners might choose to assume that information provided by presenters has been researched by them personally rather than by someone else? That said, it seems only reasonable to quote at least some sources, especially when whole chunks are quoted.

But it doesn't matter who 'researched' the information in Wikipedia, or whether it was done because, whoever it was, they had no special knowledge of the subject. As you suggest, it's the point at which the information/detail is conveyed to the audience in exactly the same words as Wikipedia and (as I suggested on a different thread) the one slight addition seems to have been doubtfully correct anyway.

This interests me because the BBC Trust reported a few years ago that their research showed that 'listeners' found the presenters 'well-informed'. It didn't say which presenters, nor did it indicate whether it was the sought-after new listeners 'with little knowledge of classical music' who were so impressed. [To be fair, they did also report that professional bodies indicated the reverse, but they didn't count for much.]