Neil Oliver lidless
Re: Neil Oliver lidless
This?
"Making Sense of Cancer with Hannah Fry":
https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m0017wzq
Thanks
Jonathan
"Making Sense of Cancer with Hannah Fry":
https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m0017wzq
Thanks
Jonathan
-
- Posts: 11034
- Joined: 7 Jul 2014, 9:45pm
- Location: Near Bicester Oxon
Re: Neil Oliver lidless
Yes, that's the one.
- simonineaston
- Posts: 8062
- Joined: 9 May 2007, 1:06pm
- Location: ...at a cricket ground
Re: Neil Oliver lidless
I recall a friend of mine who worked as a researcher for the BBC, here in Bristol. He commented that (I paraphrase...) there's a reason you see these people on the telly (ie the well-known presenters) and that's because they have clawed their way, tooth and nail, often over the dead bodies * of the competition, up to the top of the heap.Shall we draw up a list?
* that's a metaphore, of course!
S
(on the look out for Armageddon, on board a Brompton nano & ever-changing Moultons)
(on the look out for Armageddon, on board a Brompton nano & ever-changing Moultons)
Re: Neil Oliver lidless
Heres my list of preferred presenters...
Steve Davis
Father Stone (Father Ted programme)
Chris Packam
Kier Starmer
Al
Steve Davis
Father Stone (Father Ted programme)
Chris Packam
Kier Starmer
Al
Reuse, recycle, thus do your bit to save the planet.... Get stuff at auctions, Dump, Charity Shops, Facebook Marketplace, Ebay, Car Boots. Choose an Old House, and a Banger ..... And cycle as often as you can......
-
- Posts: 3992
- Joined: 26 Mar 2022, 7:13am
Re: Neil Oliver lidless
My strange answer to J’s question is that I don’t know, because they communicate without leaving an indelible impression of themselves on the brain.
I listen to Radio 4 far, far more than I watch TV, and they deliver some very good programmes on complex topics, good-quality explanation and analysis, but I don’t think I could name a single presenter of their ‘deeper’ programmes. As random examples: one recently about price inflation in food supply, where most of the talking was from a farmer and senior bod in the flour-milling industry, with the presenter asking good questions to elicit the picture; a couple where they’ve looked in depth at healthcare provision and cost in different countries etc.
Just because TV has pictures, the presenter doesn’t have to hog the camera, they can choose to elicit, or voice-over, and give most of the picture-time to others, or the subject matter - pictures can, after all, speak a thousand words.
Some things, and dealing with cancer is one, need different styles for different purposes. A programme designed to help those experiencing it will be different from a “purely science” one about understanding it, and the technical aspects of treatment.
I listen to Radio 4 far, far more than I watch TV, and they deliver some very good programmes on complex topics, good-quality explanation and analysis, but I don’t think I could name a single presenter of their ‘deeper’ programmes. As random examples: one recently about price inflation in food supply, where most of the talking was from a farmer and senior bod in the flour-milling industry, with the presenter asking good questions to elicit the picture; a couple where they’ve looked in depth at healthcare provision and cost in different countries etc.
Just because TV has pictures, the presenter doesn’t have to hog the camera, they can choose to elicit, or voice-over, and give most of the picture-time to others, or the subject matter - pictures can, after all, speak a thousand words.
Some things, and dealing with cancer is one, need different styles for different purposes. A programme designed to help those experiencing it will be different from a “purely science” one about understanding it, and the technical aspects of treatment.
Re: Neil Oliver lidless
Bonefishblues wrote: ↑19 Jun 2022, 11:11am... I was wondering what you thought about Prof. Fry's recent programme about her own experience of cancer?
Just watched it for the first time.Jdsk wrote: ↑19 Jun 2022, 11:13am"Making Sense of Cancer with Hannah Fry":
https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m0017wzq
I had no strong views about her style beforehand.
Good:
Openness about her personal story. Showing what current care looks like. Adult discussion of reproductive organs (see the saddle threads in this forum). David Spiegelhalter. Margaret McCartney. The difficult statistics. The use of headcount diagrams.
Not so good:
Trying to get four stories into one programme: hers, the difficult statistics, screening programmes, the man who had decided he didn't want further interventions. Poor infographics. No discussion about how we decide which national screening programmes we should provide and which we shouldn't. No discussion of HPV vaccination.
Recommended.
Jonathan
Re: Neil Oliver lidless
I can understand that preference. But I don't share it, and I will watch, listen or read things because I know that a particular presenter adds something for me.Nearholmer wrote: ↑19 Jun 2022, 11:51am My strange answer to J’s question is that I don’t know, because they communicate without leaving an indelible impression of themselves on the brain.
Yes, they're often excellent. And it's very reassuring that the documentaries and those prepared programmes on current affairs haven't deteriorated in the same way as the BBC's headline news coverage and the three daily programmes on Radio 4.Nearholmer wrote: ↑19 Jun 2022, 11:51amI listen to Radio 4 far, far more than I watch TV, and they deliver some very good programmes on complex topics, good-quality explanation and analysis, but I don’t think I could name a single presenter of their ‘deeper’ programmes. As random examples: one recently about price inflation in food supply, where most of the talking was from a farmer and senior bod in the flour-milling industry, with the presenter asking good questions to elicit the picture; a couple where they’ve looked in depth at healthcare provision and cost in different countries etc.
Jonathan
-
- Posts: 752
- Joined: 24 Feb 2019, 5:37pm
Re: Neil Oliver lidless
Speaking as a maths teacher, both HF's broadcasts and books on the subject are very well done IMHO.
-
- Posts: 36778
- Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 2:44pm
Re: Neil Oliver lidless
How much editorial input does a presenter of a TV programme have?
-
- Posts: 11034
- Joined: 7 Jul 2014, 9:45pm
- Location: Near Bicester Oxon
Re: Neil Oliver lidless
Thanks for a second opinion. It left me wanting more in terms of answering, or attempting to answer, the "Which means that..." questions that inevitably accrue, but I came out of it with a different perspective on treatment and 'the numbers'.Jdsk wrote: ↑19 Jun 2022, 12:27pmBonefishblues wrote: ↑19 Jun 2022, 11:11am... I was wondering what you thought about Prof. Fry's recent programme about her own experience of cancer?Just watched it for the first time.Jdsk wrote: ↑19 Jun 2022, 11:13am"Making Sense of Cancer with Hannah Fry":
https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m0017wzq
I had no strong views about her style beforehand.
Good:
Openness about her personal story. Showing what current care looks like. Adult discussion of reproductive organs (see the saddle threads in this forum). David Spiegelhalter. Margaret McCartney. The difficult statistics. The use of headcount diagrams.
Not so good:
Trying to get four stories into one programme: hers, the difficult statistics, screening programmes, the man who had decided he didn't want further interventions. Poor infographics. No discussion about how we decide which national screening programmes we should provide and which we shouldn't. No discussion of HPV vaccination.
Recommended.
Jonathan
I found the piece where she sat in with the lady in her late 60s truly shocking in terms of how a relatively simple message simply hadn't transmitted - at all. Surely that alone would be a takeaway for the NHS, if nothing else.
Re: Neil Oliver lidless
It varies enormously. The credits can give a hint, look out for the presenter's name reappearing towards the end...thirdcrank wrote: ↑19 Jun 2022, 12:37pm How much editorial input does a presenter of a TV programme have?
And for those of us who have or had regular jobs it's worth remembering that these are at the other extreme: you may never get another offer, so walking away on principle is very difficult.
Jonathan
Re: Neil Oliver lidless
This comes up quite often in this forum, and I always try to remember to advise writing down questions beforehand so that you don't forget to ask them in the stress of consultation and having a route of communication after the consultation as subsequent questions arise.Bonefishblues wrote: ↑19 Jun 2022, 12:37pmI found the piece where she sat in with the lady in her late 60s truly shocking in terms of how a relatively simple message simply hadn't transmitted - at all. Surely that alone would be a takeaway for the NHS, if nothing else.
Jonathan
PS: [hobbyhorse] I don't think that there's anything special about the NHS in this regard. It's a takeaway for all healthcare professionals working in all sorts of systems... [/hobbyhorse]
Last edited by Jdsk on 19 Jun 2022, 12:55pm, edited 3 times in total.
Re: Neil Oliver lidless
+1
I saw some of his [Cox's] 1st TV series when 1st broadcast and some of the errors were "unforgivable". Even though probably not noticed by many you'd hope a science documentary presented by a professor with a team of researchers would get it right - even to the last minute check when the words come out of professor's mouth he should be stopping and saying "that's wrong" (from his supposed knowledge of the subject).
Ian
Last edited by Psamathe on 19 Jun 2022, 12:57pm, edited 1 time in total.
Re: Neil Oliver lidless
My pet hate is 'celebrity' presenters who clearly have little or no knowledge of the subject. Only occasionally do they shine. I like Joanna Lumley's travel programmes, her lively personality shines through. However Susan Calman gets swiftly turned off and never revisited!
Why does every man and his dog want to make their version of Devon and Cornwall?
Al
Why does every man and his dog want to make their version of Devon and Cornwall?
Al
Reuse, recycle, thus do your bit to save the planet.... Get stuff at auctions, Dump, Charity Shops, Facebook Marketplace, Ebay, Car Boots. Choose an Old House, and a Banger ..... And cycle as often as you can......
-
- Posts: 11034
- Joined: 7 Jul 2014, 9:45pm
- Location: Near Bicester Oxon
Re: Neil Oliver lidless
NHS only because ubiquitous JonathanJdsk wrote: ↑19 Jun 2022, 12:45pmThis comes up quite often in this forum, and I always try to remember to advise writing down questions beforehand so that you don't forget to ask them in the stress of consultation and having a route of communication after the consultation as subsequent questions arise.Bonefishblues wrote: ↑19 Jun 2022, 12:37pmI found the piece where she sat in with the lady in her late 60s truly shocking in terms of how a relatively simple message simply hadn't transmitted - at all. Surely that alone would be a takeaway for the NHS, if nothing else.
Jonathan
PS: [hobbyhorse] I don't think that there's anything special about the NHS in this regard. It's a takeaway for all healthcare professionals working in all sorts of systems... [/hobbyhorse]