So how did the BBC do?

I have to admit I thought the BBC did a great job of covering the games.
The fact that they covered every single thing going on was amazing, and we should feel privelaged that we got to see everything on our TV screens if we wanted too.
Of course you got the odd hiccup here and there, but it's TV, it happens.
I really enjoyed all the commentary, the rowing commentator was by far my favourite.
And surprisingly Claire Baulding was my favourite presenter. I thought she was class throughout.

How do you guys think the BBC did?

Fantastic.

My parents were in France for much of the Olympics and insanely jealous of the 24 channels available. Being able to watch any sport you liked was amazing, and even the field events in the athletics (which athletic fans have long moaned about)!

In general the commentary was very good, a few things for people to moan over, and arguably a bit too biased towards GB (although nothing like what would be going on in other countries I'd imagine). Agree with the consensus about Clare Balding, also thought Thorpe was an excellent pundit, and Gary Lineker a good presenter.

The specialist commentary was great for the uninitiated (e.g. I felt I understood quite a lot about diving and gymnastics by the end), but I suspect simplistic if you were yourself a specialist (I base myself on the fencing commentary here, which was fairly mundane and at times innaccurate).

Overall though these are minor quibbles, the BBC did a fantastic job, as seen by the absence (or nearly) of criticism in the Torygraph.

8.5 or 9/10 for me.

Funnily, the NZ Herald had this to say:

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/best-of-sport-analysis/news/article.cfm?c_id=1502180&objectid=10826504

What was out of whack was the hugely lopsided work of the BBC. They didn't just drop their cloak of impartiality; they biffed it over the bridge.

Interviewers wore Team GB shirts and chatted to sixth or seventh-place finishers while races were still on. "We" was everywhere. It was cringeworthy, and unworthy of the organisation.

But speaking as a kiwi living in the UK I say, what should it matter? The BBC are there to present the Olympics to the british people. They are there to cheerlead the British involvement and they did a superb job I think. Most of all, I believe the input of foreigners such as Michael Johnson and Ian Thorpe further enhanced this. It was hard not to be caught up in the emotion of the British team's acheivements and the BBC got everything right I think. 5Live was brilliant to listen to as well....

You can only say they did a great job. Yes, some of the pundits aren't up to much, but they showed every minute of every sport on the website with great coverage even on Freeview.

As for the impariality, if they can't be a bit biased during a home games when can they be? Especially as it was success after success for GB, I think the coverage captured the joyous mood of the event perfectly.

Almost faultless!

One thing I didn't like was ending the montage with Imagine. The montage with "London" was far better or they could have used Proud by Heather Small.

Generally the coverage was excellent, and certainly the 24 (+2) dedicated channels worked well.

My main criticism (beyond those already made regarding pundits) was that if you wanted to watch one of the events that was also being covered on BBC1 or BBC3 (those complete with studio analysis and interviews), there was no commentary from the stadium . Was particularly a bug-bear for the athletics, when field events were on-going but the main coverage was more interested in the pontificating of Inverdale and the studio guests.

One thing the extensive coverage did allow was for you to pick and choose what to watch - this is why the Olympics is so good, as you can go from table tennis to taekwondo. Great exposure for and of minor (in the UK) sports.

Good old Auntie. They did a brilliant job as usual although there were a few moments when the presenters had to think on their feet. Personally, I love such moments and how the presenters get through them with their professionalism, and occasionally a little luck.

10 out of 10 Auntie.

.

I echo Mike: I was back in France for the final week-end, and the BBC coverage was so superior to the French - only one channel, understandably covering mainly French interest, but to the extent that they didn't even show the women's 1500 final (either live or on tape)?! Also loved the fact the BBC got people in who really knew about the sports (Thorpe in the swimming, Cavendish in the cycling the two stand-outs for me). Admittedly Colin Jackson is pretty awful but hey, can't have everything.

Was it a bit too GB-centric? Maybe for the neutral, but with the red button you could always watch your choice of sport anyway (how brilliant was that?) and I think it's only fair for British channels to cover British interest first and foremost.

Some minor quibbles, but overall thought they did a fantastic job, 9/10 for me.

The NZ herald is gash. What is it with your media- allways having a swipe. I just dont get it!

Olympic Dave wrote:Almost faultless!

One thing I didn't like was ending the montage with Imagine. The montage with "London" was far better or they could have used Proud by Heather Small.

And they closed with it on BBC Three! Great song is London!

mystiroakey wrote:The NZ herald is gash. What is it with your media- allways having a swipe. I just dont get it!

I thought the Herald 's coverage of the Olympics was highly professional, objective, and informative due to the journalists extensive level of knowledge of all the sports covered.

Right just like Chruis Rataue is highly professional, objective and well informed because he used to play rugby (see also Stephen Jones)


I guess showing an "adjusted" medal table which places you 1st isnt "parochial" in any sense?
This is a corker from the Aussies mind
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/sport/news/article.cfm?c_id=4&objectid=10825019
Apparently Channel9 sport only showed the top 9 in the medal table when NZ were 10th, genius.

Auckland that really doesnt suprise me.,

What i love about that article is how so many Kiwi posters admit that its a horrid article. There are many great kiwis out there- But there is a real issue with GB or England within your press.- This Kiwi sums it up well, But the place is flooded with this view..

"Kiwis love to knock the motherland. The fact that the olympics were a total success must be a real problem to them so they start nit picking. My word a 40 minute wait at a atation in a city with 10 million people and an additional 1million visitors all trying to get to the same area hahah pretty pathetic.

What happened in nz at the RWC ? people stuck on trains missing the whole of the opening ceremony when only 40000 people were attending. NZ,s fail on a major stage. Rest of the world had a good old laugh at the kiwi yokels."

Your media set you up as being so much better than anyone else especially New Zealand , yet sadly when you are told that you arent. you think we are knocking you when in all honesty we arent, all we are doing is telling you the truth and you cant handle it.

Its you that cant handle the truth. Its quite absurd actually- You need to read what other Kiwis think. You are thankfully the minority on this.

The Journo quoted NBC in the article as the if they are the pinnacle- OMG. Do I have to say anymore. Its Journolism at its worst. We in this country never knock others acheivemnets. Its only the 'village type' that do that

I can handle the truth a lot better than you.

Of course you English dont knock others achievements, thats because they dont recognise them.

We dont recognise others acheivements!! Your laughable Auckland. What a deluded world you live in. You are sounding very very xenaphobic.

Apologies for bursting your bubble aucklandlaurie but the rest of the world & the UK in particular aren't quite as obsessed with your little island as you seem to hope. The comments I've heard regarding NZ during the Olympics are of the "well done" variety reserved for medallists & the "hard luck" variety for the rest, pretty much the same as for the other countries. The only person I've been aware of knocking the Kiwis is my colleague (who happens to be one) - though, to be fair to him, he seems to hate anyone winning a medal, most noticeable GB & the Aussies.

So tell me when did any members of the New Zealand media ridicule the English Olympic team?

Galted wrote:Apologies for bursting your bubble aucklandlaurie but the rest of the world & the UK in particular aren't quite as obsessed with your little island as you seem to hope. The comments I've heard regarding NZ during the Olympics are of the "well done" variety reserved for medallists & the "hard luck" variety for the rest, pretty much the same as for the other countries. The only person I've been aware of knocking the Kiwis is my colleague (who happens to be one) - though, to be fair to him, he seems to hate anyone winning a medal, most noticeable GB & the Aussies.

galted
Whos your colleague?

Just a bitter Kiwi who seems to hate the UK but continues to live here, I'm hardly going to name him. He's generally-speaking quite a decent person but seems to have a giant chip on his shoulder. The reason I mentioned him is because, as I stated, he was the only person I've heard denigrating any of NZ's achievements.

Are you sure hes a New Zealander? it doesnt sound like the behaviour of a Kiwi.

Well Done NZ, Well done GB and NI. Heres to not getting brainwashed by bad media. That Article is horrid. But the majority of kiwis are not. GB's Media can also be shocking but on the whole the BBC and London put on a great show.

Mystir

looking back on the last two weeks, I personally think it was the best olympics televisually (excuse me for not attending in person) ever. Id go so far as to say that I dont usually worry about things like opening and closing ceremonies, To tell you the truth Id rather just jump straight to the Athletics in week two. but Yesterday morning I was working at home , so I had the telly going and that closing ceremony was utterly brilliant. i still would have liked to see Mick, Keith, Ronnie and Charlie but hey you cant have everything.

It was a good show.

aucklandlaurie wrote:

Mystir

looking back on the last two weeks, I personally think it was the best olympics televisually (excuse me for not attending in person) ever. Id go so far as to say that I dont usually worry about things like opening and closing ceremonies, To tell you the truth Id rather just jump straight to the Athletics in week two. but Yesterday morning I was working at home , so I had the telly going and that closing ceremony was utterly brilliant. i still would have liked to see Mick, Keith, Ronnie and Charlie but hey you cant have everything.

Apparently the Stones were asked to play, but declined as they're not currently in "touring mode"

Their 2 main channels were completely focused on the British side of things so I avoided them for the most part. Used the 24, as it was largely unbiased or less so at least. Not a problem with bias or anything just saying.