advertisement


Prince Philip RIP

miktec said:
Yet more whinging on your part....

Haven't you something better to do with your Sunday - shooting peasants or some such?
Click to expand...
A million channels on TV, radio and the internet. Take your pick - I did, chose not to watch BBC and also didn't cry about their coverage.
 
myles said:
A million channels on TV, radio and the internet. Take your pick - I did, chose not to watch BBC and also didn't cry about their coverage.
Click to expand...
Indeed. Disappointing as it was to not have the Friday evening programmes we’d anticipated (GW, mostly, TBH), we just used it as an opportunity to catch up with some other stuff we’d recorded. But I still think the BBC’s approach was OTT.
 
Sue Pertwee-Tyr said:
Indeed. Disappointing as it was to not have the Friday evening programmes we’d anticipated (GW, mostly, TBH), we just used it as an opportunity to catch up with some other stuff we’d recorded. But I still think the BBC’s approach was OTT.
Click to expand...
I agree with you - BBC1 given over to the coverage would have been enough.
I record TOTP from BBC4 every week so had a few hours of that, hours of playing records, Radio Paradise playing in the background when I was cooking, football on in the afternoon, I streamed a few albums I may buy on LP, a bit of gardening. This covered off my time from the moment it was announced Philip had died up to now - I didn't mourn the loss of a few channels on the tellybox.
 
Tony L said:
The specific form is no longer there, but I’ve just made a formal complaint through the normal BBC process here. I expect my stock ctrl-c/ctrl-v response within 30 days...

PS My complaint was specifically about the blanket cross-channel coverage/blackout of all other content.
Click to expand...
Me too. I deliberately did not use the dedicated page because I knew that would pretty much guarantee being fobbed off. I also made it clear I would escalate the complaint if I received a generic response that did not address the specific points I made (a bluff really; doubt I could be arsed).

It's not like I especially wanted to watch BBC4 that night. It's about the principle of the thing, and what I see as a deliberate attempt by the state broadcaster to impose conformity on the public mood where none exists (around 20% of the population is republican, starters).

Like you say, North Korea (watch the video!).
 
droodzilla said:
Me too. I deliberately did not use the dedicated page because I knew that would pretty much guarantee being fobbed off. I also made it clear I would escalate the complaint if I received a generic response that did not address the specific points I made (a bluff really; doubt I could be arsed).
Click to expand...
Given that actuarially speaking Liz is most likely to be next, I think the chances of the BBC not giving as much coverage next time round are significantly less than nil. After that it may well be a different story.
 
droodzilla said:
(around 20% of the population is republican, starters).
Click to expand...

Well there you are, 80% of British people adore the royal family.

droodzilla said:
what I see as a deliberate attempt by the state broadcaster to impose conformity on the public mood where none exists
Click to expand...

National identity, the sense of Britain as a single nation with shared values, is reinforced. That’s pretty important.

Marchbanks said:
Given that actuarially speaking Liz is most likely to be next, I think the chances of the BBC not giving as much coverage next time round are significantly less than nil. After that it may well be a different story.
Click to expand...

Hard to predict how people will respond to King Charles III.
 
Marchbanks said:
Given that actuarially speaking Liz is most likely to be next, I think the chances of the BBC not giving as much coverage next time round are significantly less than nil. After that it may well be a different story.
Click to expand...
Not being much of a royalist (although admiring of the Queen's dedication to duty over the last trillion years - somewhere around the house I have the little tin box with the medal that we all got in primary school on Coronation day), and therefore not having read most of this thread, and therefore apologising if this has come up before but...all centenarians get a letter from the Queen. Would she have handed Philip's to him over the breakfast marmalade, or would he have had to wait in the post like the rest of the peasantry?

I can foresee vast amounts of TV coverage when Elizabeth goes to meet her Maker, not so much on Elizabeth herself, but on what has happened to the UK since that June day in 1953. A sort of "how are the mighty fallen". Remember how Churchill saw the beginnings of "a new Elizabethan age"? Of course, it went into reverse, as the UK went from pretending to be still a world power (this status had vanished in the Second World War) to, well, pretending to be a world power with even less justification. But, as Jean-Baptiste Karr said, "Plus ça change..." - the place, now as then, is run by clueless upper-class twits, and it shows. Perhaps under King Charles (or whatever his regnal name would be - I'm betting on George VII, as neither of the two previous Charles (never mind the Scottish one) is a good precedent), the UK will become more realistic. Charles has already spoken of trimming back the royal household, which cannot but be a good thing.

I daresay we won't be seeing a parade like this - no African colonial troops!

 
tones said:
Not being much of a royalist (although admiring of the Queen's dedication to duty over the last trillion years - somewhere around the house I have the little tin box with the medal that we all got in primary school on Coronation day), and therefore not having read most of this thread, and therefore apologising if this has come up before but...all centenarians get a letter from the Queen. Would she have handed Philip's to him over the breakfast marmalade, or would he have had to wait in the post like the rest of the peasantry?

I can foresee vast amounts of TV coverage when Elizabeth goes to meet her Maker, not so much on Elizabeth herself, but on what has happened to the UK since that June day in 1953. A sort of "how are the mighty fallen". Remember how Churchill saw the beginnings of "a new Elizabethan age"? Of course, it went into reverse, as the UK went from pretending to be still a world power (this status had vanished in the Second World War) to, well, pretending to be a world power with even less justification. But, as Jean-Baptiste Karr said, "Plus ça change..." - the place, now as then, is run by clueless upper-class twits, and it shows. Perhaps under King Charles (or whatever his regnal name would be - I'm betting on George VII, as neither of the two previous Charles (never mind the Scottish one) is a good precedent), the UK will become more realistic. Charles has already spoken of trimming back the royal household, which cannot but be a good thing.

I daresay we won't be seeing a parade like this - no African colonial troops!

Click to expand...
I somehow doubt Charles will take a different regnal name: just imagine the confusion amongst the hoi polloi.
 
In Islington there was a pub called The Three Kings - and the sign had three kings on it. I remember one was Elvis, one was King Kong but for the life of me I can’t remember the third.

Remembered - it’s obvious, Henry VIII. Here’s the sign

3kings.jpg
 
MikeMA said:
I am genuinely surprised, and not a little shocked, at the amount of TV some pfm members must habitually be watching , or should that be currently not watching , to be seriously put out by the HRH PP coverage.
Click to expand...

I am always surprised, in an amused, baffled sort of way rather than being shocked, at the things some pfm members get their keks in a twist about. (I haven't watched 'proper' TV for several months, so have missed all the D of E hoo-hah).

An early warning sign: if you find yourself writing 'was that aimed at me?' in response to a post, you're taking pfm way too seriously.
 
How pleasant to see Andrew making an appearance on TV today....
What particularly impressed me when the news broke was how quickly the female newsreaders got changed into their black widow gear.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


advertisement


Back
Top