For the sheer joy of confusion I’m going to start with the last paragraph of the article.
The writer says:
10 O’Clock Live gives politics a vibrancy that simply just doesn’t exist on any other political programme
I was in many occasions under the impression a great deal of excitement concerning politics often lay in the subject or in the situation the economy is in. Granted, the credit crisis is the least sexy crisis I have ever experienced. However the current status Great Britain is in is an interesting one. Just like in many other countries due to the credit crisis. I’ve never been more interested in hearing whatever politicians cooked up this time, if only to see if the current Government, be it the British one or the Dutch one, can work it out and keeps standing. That’s why I’m watching and listening more closely than I ever have.
Beside that, what 10 O’Clock Live is trying, I’m using the word ‘trying’ deliberately because it doesn’t quite work yet, is not new. Political comedy shows are as old as TV is, almost. The writer should have realized that with all the comparisons which are made. For instance, the most obvious one, the Daily Show, is one and happens to have come up more than once or twice. So to say they’re trying something completely new is not completely true.
One paragraph earlier the writer talks about how people were complaining about the ‘left wing’ leanings. I agree a lot of the things said were simply sensible and should have a positive response, though there’s no need to cheer and whoop on every occasion a silence or no silence occurs. The audience was a bit too happy for my liking and they put off the presenters a few times which resulted in awkwardness. Even David Mitchell himself referenced to the atmosphere as ‘panto’, which was, I think, not necessarily a positive note. Also, I happen to know for the Alternative Election Night show the audience was selected on political conviction. But that was another show all together in another situation, so let’s not bring that up.
Then the third paragraph from the bottom. Here the writer assumes all tweeters are “people with increasingly short attention spans” and with “dull brains”. That’s not completely fair. I followed tweets all night long when the show was on. What I saw often was that people were actually disappointed certain subjects weren’t explored any deeper and that people were wishing they weren’t skipping through subjects so quickly. What I remember is that people were excited about David Mitchell’s interview with MP David Willetts about the tuition fees. To say that Twitter’s discontent had to do with their short attention spans is a downright lie.
The fourth and fifth paragraph from the bottom lead up to the third paragraph from the bottom. Here it’s quite obvious the writer based thoughts about the average tweeter on 1 tweet. One tweet hardly represents a whole population where every single member has a voice. Please do a proper research before spewing your impressions and opinions into the world or at least phrase them with more care the next time.
What I think the writer misinterpreted is why the tweeters generally weren’t happy with the show. The tweeters applauded the idea, just not the execution of the idea. With that said I have to agree the average tweeter was unnecessary harsh since they were complaining about a new show which is also live. Where I think a great deal of the twitter society went wrong is; their own patience. The word ‘fruition’ doesn’t seem to exist in their book.
Someone on twitter said (paraphrased): “Charlie Brooker could probably fill a whole episode of Screenwipe about this show”. He probably could, but I think if he hadn’t been involved, he would have had the decency to let the show run for a while before shooting it down and he would only shoot it down if the show didn’t improve after the first run. Twitter made me wish Charlie would make a Screenwipe. Not about how bad 10 O’Clock Live is, but about how hard it is to put a new (live) show on its feet.
Source: ATV Networks 10 O’Clock Live: The Twitter Response
No comments:
Post a Comment