Re: [backstage] BBC Archiver
I like it, does what it says... So there's a +1 from me too. On 15/07/2010 20:32, Davy Mitchell daftspan...@gmail.com wrote: Glad someone likes it :-) People have being saying to me it looks unfinished, is cluttered, slow to navigate, 'pants', colours don't contrast well, 'pretty bad'. Just passing on feedback - don't shoot me... I'll give it time... Maybe I am holding it wrong... Cheers, Davy Mitchell - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
Re: [backstage] Freeview HD Content Management
On Wed, Jul 14, 2010 at 12:07, Nick Reynolds-FMT nick.reyno...@bbc.co.uk wrote: In the case of Erik's post that you mention all we are actually doing is cross posting to it on the Internet blog. So the editor of the About The BBC blog has editorial responsibility for it because it was published first there. What happens in practice in general is; - sometimes we (i.e. Paul and I) have an idea for a blog post and we ask someone to write it - we might help them by suggesting bullet points but we don't write it for them - the communications team also sometimes send us ideas for posts and in some cases finished posts - I assume they similarly help people write posts But I would certainly not write a finished post for someone like Erik. Senior executives have different attitudes - Anthony Rose for example writes all his posts in his own individual style. Others need or like more of a steer. All this is in a context where we have editorial control and can ask for a post to be changed and even have the right to refuse it - although I can only recall one occasion where we have. That's interesting stuff (genuinely!). you should probably do a blog post on it one day. it's good to know what the process is, in general (even if it varies). on the topic of 'things which it might be worth doing blog posts about': P4A. Again I disagree that I've been fed misleading information (and I'd like to know in what way) - I suspect that this is again about interpretation of information, which is another thing entirely. I'll respond to this bit properly when I've had a proper think about it -- interpretation comes down to it to an extent (i.e., how things are most likely to be interpreted by those reading stuff vs. how things are most likely to be interpreted by those with prior knowledge), but there're other things, too. predominantly I was struck by errors of omission, though (questions which don't really get answered, though not for the want of trying on your part, glossing over details which might not seem important but are). it's very difficult to know how much of this is deliberate and how much is a product of circumstance or just things being missed -- in either case, though, it comes across poorly and doesn't help the BBC's case any. as I say, though, I'll follow up on this later. M. - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
RE: [backstage] Freeview HD Content Management
glossing over details which might not seem important but are What does or does not seem important is a matter of interpretation and is in the eye of the beholder... -Original Message- From: owner-backst...@lists.bbc.co.uk [mailto:owner-backst...@lists.bbc.co.uk] On Behalf Of Mo McRoberts Sent: 16 July 2010 16:03 To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: Re: [backstage] Freeview HD Content Management On Wed, Jul 14, 2010 at 12:07, Nick Reynolds-FMT nick.reyno...@bbc.co.uk wrote: In the case of Erik's post that you mention all we are actually doing is cross posting to it on the Internet blog. So the editor of the About The BBC blog has editorial responsibility for it because it was published first there. What happens in practice in general is; - sometimes we (i.e. Paul and I) have an idea for a blog post and we ask someone to write it - we might help them by suggesting bullet points but we don't write it for them - the communications team also sometimes send us ideas for posts and in some cases finished posts - I assume they similarly help people write posts But I would certainly not write a finished post for someone like Erik. Senior executives have different attitudes - Anthony Rose for example writes all his posts in his own individual style. Others need or like more of a steer. All this is in a context where we have editorial control and can ask for a post to be changed and even have the right to refuse it - although I can only recall one occasion where we have. That's interesting stuff (genuinely!). you should probably do a blog post on it one day. it's good to know what the process is, in general (even if it varies). on the topic of 'things which it might be worth doing blog posts about': P4A. Again I disagree that I've been fed misleading information (and I'd like to know in what way) - I suspect that this is again about interpretation of information, which is another thing entirely. I'll respond to this bit properly when I've had a proper think about it -- interpretation comes down to it to an extent (i.e., how things are most likely to be interpreted by those reading stuff vs. how things are most likely to be interpreted by those with prior knowledge), but there're other things, too. predominantly I was struck by errors of omission, though (questions which don't really get answered, though not for the want of trying on your part, glossing over details which might not seem important but are). it's very difficult to know how much of this is deliberate and how much is a product of circumstance or just things being missed -- in either case, though, it comes across poorly and doesn't help the BBC's case any. as I say, though, I'll follow up on this later. M. - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/ - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
Re: [backstage] Freeview HD Content Management
On Fri, Jul 16, 2010 at 19:27, Nick Reynolds-FMT nick.reyno...@bbc.co.uk wrote: glossing over details which might not seem important but are What does or does not seem important is a matter of interpretation and is in the eye of the beholder... Not really... What does this mean for consumers in real terms? is pretty important -- that's why I wrote the guardian article (can't think of a better way to refer to that piece, sorry). I'm not sure that's particularly subjective, given that most of the questions being posed were along those lines, most of the misunderstandings (which came about as a result of it not being clearly explained _prior_ to anybody else having a stab at it) were in that area, and there was still stuff that -- unless you already knew the technology well -- was completely non-obvious (for example, compatibility with TVs which didn't support HDCP). The *big* thing people wanted to know from the outset was how it would affect them -- whether they'd have to replace bits of their equipment, whether they'd even want to, what things would stop working and what things wouldn't -- most people couldn't care less if Tom Watson or Cory Doctorow was wrong, because even being wrong they were saying more that was substantive and along the right lines than the BBC were. People didn't really *want* Oh, Tom got it all wrong in his blog post, they wanted Tom got it all wrong in his blog post, we're sorry we didn't post this sooner, these are the things you need to know. M. - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
RE: [backstage] Freeview HD Content Management
What does this mean for consumers in real terms? is pretty important -- that's why I wrote the guardian article (can't think of a better way to refer to that piece, sorry). The Grauniad recital =D I'll get my coat - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
