|
Post by Gsry on Feb 23, 2006 13:18:35 GMT
But hasn't somebody already said that the original BBC '69 moon-landing tapes got accidently wiped because of a labeling mess up, rather than the BBC actively going out to destroy the tape ? I am sure we have all made similar mistakes to this ! These forums are too full of people preaching about how terrible the BBC was for wiping all those programmes, whilst ignoring the commercial reasons as to why the BBC had to do it. It happened, get over it, we should be praising the likes of Andy and Paul who spend their spare time trying to track down what is left, rather than sitting and whinging on an Internet Forum about how beastly and horrible the BBC were to wipe those tapes in the first place. I think it was put forward by somebody as a theory that the wiping was a cockup. We dont know for sure. The point is youd think with something that important they would been more careful.
|
|
|
Post by Gary on Feb 23, 2006 13:20:14 GMT
That me Gaz again misspelling my own name
|
|
|
Post by Clive Shaw on Feb 23, 2006 13:23:27 GMT
Drifting back to the original topic, I am surprised that more footage of the BBC Moonlanding coverage hasn't turned up on domestic formats.
It was arguably the top achievement of the 20th Century. Of particular interest to scientists and educational establishments. The main action occured in the early hours of the morning (although this was not realised until the last minute)
I am therefore a little surprised that not more footage has been found from University / Science Institutes who were most likely to have video recording equipment in 1969.
|
|
|
Post by Clive Shaw on Feb 23, 2006 13:28:59 GMT
I think it was put forward by somebody as a theory that the wiping was a cockup. We dont know for sure. The point is youd think with something that important they would been more careful. Bit like when I accidently wiped one of my 'Sounds of the Sixties' tapes ! We all make mistakes. But I do question 'the importance' part of the BBC Moonlanding coverage, many inserts and all the Nasa footage survives, as does off air audio. All we are really missing are the pictures of James Burke (with hair - SHOCK) trying to pad out and fill the time between anything interesting coming through from NASA. Yep it gives perspective, would be nice to see again etc. But important ?? I question that....
|
|
|
Post by Gary on Feb 23, 2006 15:02:06 GMT
Dick Fiddy doesnt anyway thankfully.
|
|
|
Post by Andy Henderson on Feb 23, 2006 18:43:00 GMT
Some of these postings are good comedy, if nothing else. Again, I ask those who are on the offensive to remember that you are adding melodramatic layers of interpretation into my postings in the same way you castigate the BBC with no inside knowledge to back up your statements. That is your choice.
I'm not interested in scoring points on how many episodes I found or anyone else found, but it is a mild insult to Paul's efforts and possibly mine to describe years of effort as just a few episodes or whatever.
My point was that I do take issue with the constant, boring repetitive wails about the BBC's shortcomings and how much you have a passion for archive television and apparently, I don't.
You have nothing new to add and you are willing to misrepresent people who genuinely do try to help and state this in public. Shame on you.
Bleating about the past with venom will achieve nothing, whether morally right or wrong. As with just about everything in this sphere of interest, people love to add layers of mystery, smoke and mirrors. Stay with them, reinforce your attempts at conjecture and perhaps one day you will understand how futile your moral stance is, but I doubt it.
|
|
|
Post by Andrew Doherty on Feb 23, 2006 22:44:26 GMT
I would just like to state that Paul Vanezis and Andy Henderson know just how difficult it can be to hunt for missing television with all the 'blind alleys', reluctant collectors and missed opportunities that are the lot of searchers. I consider that I have been fortunate to have contacted the few people who have been willing to send in any items, which have been missing from the archives, and my investigations are not concluded yet.
Relating this to the Buddy Holly thread, I can't help wondering if some of the less than helpful, indeed, downright silly postings on that thread may have put the recovery of such footage at risk. Though, I have asked if 'feelers' can be sent out courtesy of Granada Media (not related to the lead on other London Palladium shows, by the way).
Yes, I did mention the story of the mix-up with the serial numbers on video tapes, which resulted in the wrong tapes being wiped. This being the case, it would be something that was a dreadful mistake and not anything that was deliberate.
It would not be the only situation where a programme was intended to be kept and, by accident, wasn't.
So, let us look forward to the programme 'A Night To Remember' on Monday morning and be grateful that there is, apparently, some recovered studio footage from the BBC coverage of the Apollo 11 Moon landing event.
Yours with a positive attitude,
|
|
|
Post by Laurence Piper on Feb 23, 2006 23:16:27 GMT
Again, I ask those who are on the offensive to remember that you are adding melodramatic layers of interpretation into my postings in the same way you castigate the BBC with no inside knowledge to back up your statements. That is your choice. I'm not interested in scoring points on how many episodes I found or anyone else found, but it is a mild insult to Paul's efforts and possibly mine to describe years of effort as just a few episodes or whatever. My point was that I do take issue with the constant, boring repetitive wails about the BBC's shortcomings and how much you have a passion for archive television and apparently, I don't. You have nothing new to add and you are willing to misrepresent people who genuinely do try to help and state this in public. Shame on you. Stay with them, reinforce your attempts at conjecture and perhaps one day you will understand how futile your moral stance is, but I doubt it. I need no inside knowledge of TV to hold a basic belief that the wipings were principally wrong. I see nothing new that you've added to the debate either. At least I do have a moral standpoint that the TV companies had no moral right to act in the unilateral way they did in wiping so much of what should belong to the nation today. Surely that is obvious to anyone with an interest in our modern history and visual culture? Not to you. The layers of interpretation added are yours alone, Andy. You are quite a dab hand at selectively misreading my words. Don't put Paul and yourself together either - you are different people. The fact is you made the choice to seek out missing material (who knows why?!? You seem to think so little missing TV is that important - can you name ANYTHING, in fact); no one forced you to do this. So if you resent the fact that others choose not to follow suit, then you'll have to get over that, i'm afraid. The shame is on YOU for trying to make others feel guilty.
|
|
|
Post by Andy Henderson on Feb 24, 2006 0:30:40 GMT
Laurence, I think anyone reading this thread would know your opinion on the wipings, but unfortunately that opinion is painfully obvious.
It isn't part of a debate or even an argument, it is part of a pipe dream from a Utopian world. A world not driven by commercial considerations. You might as well damn the BBC for not attempting to record all pre-war television.
There is a huge amount of existing 60s television which never sees the light of day and I doubt would ever be very much use to the nation. Aside from the novelty of an occasional archive repeat, there does not appear to be a great public need for these programmes, let alone complete runs.
When I look for old television, I am far more interested in examples of programmes which no other recordings exist (e.g. Jango). Now that programme itself may be standard comedy from the 60s, but it does fill in lost detail in the way that finding a routine episode of 'The Troubleshooters' might not. As far as history is concerned, it is a footnote in television history, but of course, not a major cultural/media item. Those are much rarer, in the sense that they do give the casual viewer a very defined insight into the values of a moment long forgotten.
A good example would be Andrew Doherty's 'Ideal Home' recording, which is historically important and unique in many ways. It isn't mentioned much and would today attract far less attention than the Moon Landing BBC studio recording, but repays the viewer with far more information about British television (and culture).
|
|
|
Post by B Thomas on Feb 24, 2006 4:18:38 GMT
Oh, for f*cks sake! Would you all get over yourselves?
All you're doing is winding each other up and allowing yourselves to be baited. None of the bickering is adding anything new to this discourse - neither is it helping to alleviate strained relationships here.
Why further inflame an already volatile situation between members? Time to make up and move on...
|
|
|
Post by Clive Shaw on Feb 24, 2006 5:59:42 GMT
I need no inside knowledge of TV to hold a basic belief that the wipings were principally wrong. I see nothing new that you've added to the debate either. At least I do have a moral standpoint that the TV companies had no moral right to act in the unilateral way they did in wiping so much of what should belong to the nation today. Surely that is obvious to anyone with an interest in our modern history and visual culture? Not to you. The problem with your viewpoint Lawrence is that you attack the TV companies as if they had wiped programmes specifically to deny future generations the right to view them. The BBC never wiped anything from a moral standpoint, but rather for commercial and contractual requirements. If the BBC had had unlimited funds in the cash-strapped early 70s and the freedom to store programmes indefinitely then I am sure they would have done so.
|
|
|
Post by SteveS on Feb 24, 2006 10:43:53 GMT
You have nothing new to add and you are willing to misrepresent people who genuinely do try to help and state this in public. Shame on you. Don't you think you're taking this all a bit personally, Andrew? People have expressed opposing views. Nothing shameful has been done. Let's keep to the facts.
|
|
|
Post by John G on Feb 24, 2006 10:59:07 GMT
Initially the view in this thread about the moon landings was nothing to do with drama programmes, the BBC, what Andy keeps in his cupboard or what he does or does not do for archive programming. Just really a statment of surprise that we indeed have 24 hours of recordings of the 1970 general election but little of the moon landings.
Of course we know nothing can be done about it , its in the past and thats that, but Andy seems to have used it as a vehicle to lecture us from the high ground?
|
|
|
Post by SteveS on Feb 24, 2006 11:00:09 GMT
I need no inside knowledge of TV to hold a basic belief that the wipings were principally wrong. I see nothing new that you've added to the debate either. At least I do have a moral standpoint that the TV companies had no moral right to act in the unilateral way they did in wiping so much of what should belong to the nation today. Surely that is obvious to anyone with an interest in our modern history and visual culture? Not to you. The problem with your viewpoint Lawrence is that you attack the TV companies as if they had wiped programmes specifically to deny future generations the right to view them. The BBC never wiped anything from a moral standpoint, but rather for commercial and contractual requirements. If the BBC had had unlimited funds in the cash-strapped early 70s and the freedom to store programmes indefinitely then I am sure they would have done so. Contractual issues and a lack of cash are two different subjects though. Contractual issues didn't seem to be a hindrance in instances where the intention was to deliberately keep a recording. If the will to preserve an item was there, it was preserved anyway. Perhaps what is really being suggested here is that there should have been a system in place whereby the default was to retain more rather than the opposite. This perhaps should have been part of the BBC set-up as a public service. That they wiped so much of what cost a lot to make in the first place served us badly. Maybe this fact needs to be acknowledged?
|
|
|
Post by B Thomas on Feb 24, 2006 12:07:03 GMT
Quick! Whips at the ready, boys - I see another dead horse that needs flogging...
|
|