On Screen Pointless

Hello again, The BBC. It's me, Rob. I recently contacted you complain about you sticking "Coming Next" banners over the last few minutes of programmes I was watching. If you can't remember, you can go read my original complaint, and your reply, here.

I'll be honest... your reply did not really satisfy me. It didn't really feel like you paid much attention to what I'd said. In fact, it felt like you took only the most cursory glance at  my complaint and then sent out an impersonal, standard reply, dismissing me like you might a spaniel, or a medieval serf. Well. Much as I love you, The BBC, and support you vigorously on a constant basis, I feel you have let me down here. Leaving me with trust issues. BBC Trust issues, if you will.

Luckily for me, you have given me the option to take my complaint further, if I am not satisfied. I can only assume this is some kind of 'weeding out' process, designed to filter out less persistent complaints and see who is really determined to have a moan even when faced with your blank indifference. Having considered the kind of compaints you do respond to, perhaps I should have said something like this:


Dear The BBC

I never watch any of your channels, but the Daily Mail told me that you are a bunch of bastards, and I, for one, am outraged. Apparently one of your programmes offended their journalists in some way, and even though I haven't seen it I would like you to crawl on the floor in repentance and never do it again. Whatever it was.

yours idiotically

A. Moron


I've seen the results of these letters before. You love apologising to those guys. You apologise and apologise, make good people resign for no reason,  and then you institute blunt, idiotic changes to the editorial freedoms of your staff. Because for some reason an irritated, ill informed attack on something that doesn't matter sends you all into spirals of panic and self doubt. But heaven forbid you actually listen to someone who is upset at the quality of the viewing experience itself. No. They can have a standard, impersonal response that does nothing but justify your own pre-existing policy and utterly ignore everything they have said.

Well, not good enough. I have a couple of issues with your response. Here they are. Please read them this time.

1. "We have duty to let the audience know about the choices available..."

Let's assume this is true, and you do see this as a service rather than, say, advertising. Here are some ways people can find out about your programmes:

Any newspaper
The Radio Times
Any other television listing magazine
Literally dozens of sites on the internet
Announcements between programmes
Announcements over the end credits of programmes
Phoning up the BBC (apparently)
Electronic Programme Guides
Waiting until it is on and saying "Oh! I like this!"
Watching it on iPlayer if you miss it anyway

All methods, you'll notice, which don't intrude on the actual act of watching the programme itself. Which, of course, is the only reason to advertise the bloody thing in the first place.

I think this offers a sufficient range of opportunities for finding out what is on telly next. I don't think you need to fret about your duty not being done. In fact, I'd say that if people can't work out what is on after being given all these opportunities, they are probably too stupid to understand television, and probably use theirs as an altar for sacrificing chickens.

 2. Our research suggests...

"The feedback we received is positive regarding the enjoyment levels of our trails. The results show that trails found to be entertaining and informative are generally high."


 I'm going to come right out and say that I don't believe this, at all. You are saying that these specific bits of advertising -'in programme pointers' you call them - are appreciated by more viewers than they annoy? Really?

Hmm. Actually, you're not quite saying that, are you? You say your research 'suggests' this. Suggests... Shall I tell you what this 'suggests' to me? It suggests that you have taken some very broad research about trailers in general, and applied it unscientifically to this particular issue. I think you had a survey that went something like this:

Do you find trailers on the BBC:

a) brilliant and useful
b) pretty good
c) not too bad - certainly better than being sick

And people have thought about trailers - you know, like the lovely one at Christmas with David Jason or the brilliant 'Bring Me Sunshine" one from last year- and thought "Yeah! They're excellent! Much better than being sick!" And they've all given you really positive feedback.

And then you've applied these vague and positively-weighted results to the justification of all your advertising - including the horrible, irritating On Screen rubbish you insist on sticking over the end of programmes. I mean, please correct me if I'm way off on this. If you can direct me to the specific research that you have done - research on the subject of 'on screen pointers' that has options ranging from "I find on-screen pointers useful" to "I think on-screen pointers are cultural vandalism, they make me want to puke, I hate them, arg, arg, the misery!" - if you can show me that research, and it proves your case, I will believe you.

But I don't think you can. So I won't.

I think this is self serving, meaningless nonsense, using nebulous 'research' to justify decisions that have already been made for commercial reasons. You want to talk about duty? You have a duty to provide quality programming - a duty that exceeds any invented requirement to inform people of what's on in five minutes time. You want to talk about audience feedback? Let's see a response to this complaint that mirrors your reaction when someone whips up a tabloid frenzy about a swear word they thought they heard.

I love you, The BBC. You are important, and artistic, and clever and bold. If you were a woman I would try to get you drunk. If you were a man I would try to impress you by doing the 'Funny how?' monologue from Goodfellas. As it is, you are a creative enterprise and so I want to encourage you to be better.

Be better. Get rid of these on screen pointers. Do it now.