it's the argument, but it doesnt hold with me.two ways i see it:
1) sam neil did a great job fronting 'space', which was still explanatory, and precisely aimed at the same people. as an actor, he could evoke dramma and action more easily than most experts on that kind of prime time show.
2) the qualified presenters sprang up at the same time as the more involved programs of the type discussed further up, got marginalised. part of me cant help but feel that this was planned - by putting up authoritative front men on the same old type of show, it quietened any arguments about bbc1 & 2 dumbing down - which they have.
if you complained that factual programs have been shunted into the background, they would simply say 'but we have leading scientists and academics on every weekend at prime time!
disingenuous at best.
(1) sam neil did a great job fronting 'space', which was still explanatory, and precisely aimed at the same people. as an actor, he could evoke dramma and action more easily than most experts on that kind of prime time show.
2) the qualified presenters sprang up at the same time as the more involved programs of the type discussed further up, got marginalised. part of me cant help but feel that this was planned - by putting up authoritative front men on the same old type of show, it quietened any arguments about bbc1 & 2 dumbing down - which they have.
if you complained that factual programs have been shunted into the background, they would simply say 'but we have leading scientists and academics on every weekend at prime time!
disingenuous at best.
moke a man, a plan, a canal, panama!,
Thu 1 Apr 2010, 23:28,
archived)