OT - Patrick Moore RIP
 

In article , John Hall
wrote:
In article , Jim Lesurf
writes:
What does bother me is that the programmes all tend to start from
square one, and assume the viewers are clueless about maths or the
basics. We get very little that assumes the viewers have got even to
A-level in maths or sciences.

But for 80 or 90% of the audience that is going to be true. We aren't
going to get any TV programmes that only those with A-level maths can
understand, as they would attract audiences measured in the hundreds of
thousands rather than the millions.

Yes, I suspect that is exactly what Tv producers think. However I suspect
they are simply wrong. My feeling is that those who did have sufficient
interest to get to A-level or above in maths or science would be more
likely than the general audience to go out of their way to watch and
appreciate such programmes. I don't know how many people do have A-level or
equivalent in maths or physical science. But I'd not be surprised to find
it was the order of a million people or more.

Isn't the publisher of Stephen Hawkings' "A Brief History of Time"
supposed to have told him that each equation that he included would
halve the book's sales? In the end, I believe he got it down to three
equations. That must have been 20 or 30 years ago, so it's nothing new.

It is a nice analogy in some ways. We can then go on to observe that
textbooks and ones that assume some ability in maths, etc, *have* sold in
fair numbers. For me the obvious example is Horowitz and Hill. I suspect
they have done well out of their books on "Art of Electronics" despite it
going into a lot of detail about a technical subject. Books on astronomy
also sell well even when they go into details and assume prior knowledge.

I've also had similar comments from editors wrt graphs or diagrams. I'm
sure they are right that the widest audience means the lowest level of
assumption about prior understanding. But that doesn't mean *every* book or
programme must make the same assumptions and go for the same audience.
And if you look at programmes on arts, humanities, etc, they clearly often
assume some knowledge with a level and detail that varies.

Slainte,

Jim

--
Please use the address on the audiomisc page if you wish to email me.
Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm
Armstrong Audio http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/Armstrong/armstrong.html
Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html

OT - Patrick Moore RIP
 

In article , charles
wrote:
In article , Mark Carver
wrote:
On 10/12/2012 16:40, Roderick Stewart wrote:

Soviet-style rewriting of the past isn't good either. Like it or
not, popular culture is part of social history, and regardless of
Savile's extracurrucular activities he did play a significant part
in it. We shouldn't obliterate all references to something that
happened in the past just because we don't like it now. We should be
concerned if we see any sign of this happening, regardless of the
subject matter.

I fully agree with you. It would be as ridiculous as destroying all
audio and film records of Hitler, no one should be airbrushed out of
history.

The Soviets tried that with Stalin, though. I had a school Russian
textbook which came to me second hand. The opening page had pictures of
Lenin & Stalin side by side. New copies only had Lenin.

Which also makes me think of the photos of Lenin where Trotsky had been
painted out of the image.

Mind you, I would not personally dispair if TOTP vanished from BBC4TV! But
I guess it is in the spirit of "every equation halves the audience" for it
to continue. :-)

Slainte,

Jim

--
Please use the address on the audiomisc page if you wish to email me.
Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm
Armstrong Audio http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/Armstrong/armstrong.html
Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html

OT - Patrick Moore RIP
 

In article , John Hall
wrote:
In fact I would
suggest that this is something of a golden age for the science
documentary,

gasp!

as there seem to have been more in the last couple of years
than I can ever remember.

Oh I see. You're talking about quantity, not quality.

Naturally the quality has been variable, but there have plenty of
excellent programmes, including those featuring the three presenters
that I mentioned.

There have been a few excellent moments, but sadly the format of a
modern TV programme seems to be more about presentation than content.
Give them a location budget and they'll spend it. Give them computer
graphics and they'll use it. Give them 58 minutes and whatever they
have to say will be padded out to 58 minutes regardless.

If I want an explanation or demonstration of something nowadays I
usually turn to YouTube, where a skilfully produced 5-10 minute
presentaion, often by amateurs, will usually convey more information in
less time than a mainstream TV programme will take just to introduce
itself. You have to search amongst a huge amount of rubbish on Youtube
of course, but that just makes the discovery of the good stuff all the
more rewarding, a bit like the spirit of science itself.

Rod.
--

OT - Patrick Moore RIP
 

In article , Grimly
Curmudgeon wrote:
I visited the old Edinburgh Observatory once and spotted a plaque on
the wall saying that the re-furbed building had been opened by one
P.Moore. I felt utterly humbled and awed to think I was standing in
the same spot as was once occupied by the world's baggiest suit.

He mentioned once in an off-air studio moment that he'd worn the same
one for 12 years. We found this entirely credible, despite our
inability to dismiss completely the possibility that he slept in it.

Rod
--

OT - Patrick Moore RIP
 

In article , Ian wrote:
I'm sure there are a few of us on here who would find it difficult to
erase "Uncle Mac" from our personal history.

He is of course too dead to be charged.

Really? Him as well? I never knew.

Were there ever any children's entertainers that were *not* involved in
something unsavoury?

Rod.
--

OT - Patrick Moore RIP
 

In article en.co.uk,
Roderick Stewart wrote:
Were there ever any children's entertainers that were *not* involved in
something unsavoury?

Sooty. If you ignore the hammer.

--
*The more people I meet, the more I like my dog.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

OT - Patrick Moore RIP
 

In article ,
Jim Lesurf wrote:

Which also makes me think of the photos of Lenin where Trotsky had been
painted out of the image.

There's a book on the subject, "The Commissar Vanishes":

http://www.amazon.co.uk/The-Commissa.../dp/0805052941

-- Richard

OT - Patrick Moore RIP
 

"Roderick Stewart" wrote in
message .myzen.co.uk...
In article , John Hall
wrote:
In fact I would
suggest that this is something of a golden age for the science
documentary,

gasp!

as there seem to have been more in the last couple of years
than I can ever remember.

Oh I see. You're talking about quantity, not quality.

Naturally the quality has been variable, but there have plenty of
excellent programmes, including those featuring the three presenters
that I mentioned.

There have been a few excellent moments, but sadly the format of a
modern TV programme seems to be more about presentation than content.
Give them a location budget and they'll spend it. Give them computer
graphics and they'll use it. Give them 58 minutes and whatever they
have to say will be padded out to 58 minutes regardless.


I've also noticed a lot more recently that give them a button which says
'replace colour with a blue cast' on a handheld camera which can be jerked,
zoomed and rapidly panned, then almost unquestionably they'll use it to its
maximum potential.

OT - Patrick Moore RIP
 

On 10/12/2012 12:16, Grimly Curmudgeon wrote:
On Mon, 10 Dec 2012 10:49:58 +0100, Martin wrote:

and hated foreigners, was anti-EEC.

He spent part of the war as a bomber navigator, but hated the Germans
because his girl friend was killed in bombing raid on London.

Hypocritical old ****, in other words.
I wonder how many peoples' girlfriends he killed?

Well, none actually!

OT - Patrick Moore RIP
 

On 11/12/2012 12:36, Martin wrote:

Were there ever any children's entertainers that were *not* involved in
something unsavoury?

like Muffin the Mule?

Not today thanks!