Jon Culshaw to join the Sky at Night team

[foundaplanet]

Get over yourselves all of you "more pompous than thou" lot.

Sir Patrick Moore will be laughing at you all. John Culshaw was involved in S@N programmes WITH Sir Patrick in the past. Insulting to his memory ? Whats your problem ?

The other members of the team clearly he is going to be an asset to the programme.

Good Luck to John and the Sky at Night team for the future.

Well said.

I find it disturbing that people can easily take an opportunity to belittle others that share a same/similar interest, it borders on elitism and selfish thinking. To think that the future of the program would not have been discussed by all involved over the last few years is nothing short of naive. I doubt we will ever really know what has gone on behind the scenes in securing the future of The Sky at Night for youngsters and astronomers alike but you can be sure that Sir Patrick himself would have been putting his thoughts across. Those that choose to denounce the direction of the program should pause to think a little about the man who was Sir Patrick Moore and the rest of the good people that were around him. He gave us a legend and he left us a legacy, a freedom and the joy of naive or knowledgeable curiosity of that which surrounds us.

Astronomy is for everybody and all should be welcome to share something which is glorious, whatever it's personal interpretation represents.

If you can not find the answer to that question you go and find the the book which does.

[mapstar]

I'll agree with foundaplanet on john and just shows that no matter who you are there are others out there with similar interests and not afraid to show it.

I've not heard the rather annoying dara o'brian on star gazing live say he's been into astronomy since childhood and wossy shouldn't even be on tv let alone a show with any influence or intelligence if it was up to most people I know.

Give him a chance, as you would when someone walks up to you whilst star gazing and says "what are you looking at?"

Recently I had a conversation with a my local councillor and council officer (he was very proud to tell me who he was when I opened my door about the subject of a tent that had appeared on the green across from my house and how bad it looks to maybe have those types round here) and after answering his question's and him giving me how he was so good at community,I asked him about getting a street lamp shielded he asked why so I told him and a snigger appeared on his face and his interest diminished rapidly stepping back and letting the council officer deal with me who was actually quite helpful.

John I have every faith in being genuine and given time he will prove it, but my local councillor just proves he's a waste of time and definitely not worth the effort next time he can knock till his knuckles bleed! Sorry war and peace on that!

[JamesF]

I've not heard the rather annoying dara o'brian on star gazing live say he's been into astronomy since childhood

He does however have a degree in theoretical physics, so he's not exactly underqualified for the job.

James

[long_arms]

I certainly don't feel I can comment on the direction of the sky at night, I am 20 years old and simply haven't watched enough episodes.

I can just say as a relative newcomer, I really have enjoyed the recent shows

However, I seriously think there needs to be A reasonably regular show (not suggesting any change to the sky at night) out there for attracting young people to the hobby.

I am 20 and I don't know anyone (in real life not social networks/forums) who has a remote interest, around my age range.

It is just MY OPINION but something inbetween the practical, astronomy-based what you can see style of the sky at night and a more modern format could do this. You see how after the Russian meteorite, other channels jumped at the chance to have a show dedicated simply to that. Why could they not have a more regular show?

This is not a criticism of the sky at night whatsoever, as I said I love the shows. As a young person, (barely ) they're clearly not looking to attract young people by having Culshaw...no offence Jon

When people say they don't want a show that looks for popularity it saddens me though. I see none of my peers caring about what's above their heads, only below them. But I'm bombarded with questions and enthusiasm when I show them some of my feeble attempts at astrophotography and tell them what they can see and show them. Or with these comets, asteroids, meteor showers.

Young people have a natural interest in these things I see it, I just think there's nothing out there that takes them to the next step of actually seeing it for themselves for the first time.

Dan

[Mondlicht13]

It can be the beginning of the end when the producers start to try and make the show more 'popular'.

Watch out for glamourous female presenters and fast cut sequences set to pop music and dumbing down..... any of those will mark the end of the show as we know it

I rest my case

[sologuitarist61]

Personally I think its a shame, his voice annoys me.

Couldn't agree more - in fact everything about him annoys me! Why do we have to have a celebrity on the team anyway?

[JamesF]

When people say they don't want a show that looks for popularity it saddens me though. I see none of my peers caring about what's above their heads, only below them. But I'm bombarded with questions and enthusiasm when I show them some of my feeble attempts at astrophotography and tell them what they can see and show them. Or with these comets, asteroids, meteor showers.

Young people have a natural interest in these things I see it, I just think there's nothing out there that takes them to the next step of actually seeing it for themselves for the first time.

I absolutely agree. The programme absolutely should strive to be popular and be engaging for all age groups. But I think that should be done by showing what a fascinating subject it is and that people can get involved themselves in all sorts of different ways, not by wheeling out some D-list celebrity because the producers know there's a whole load of people who will sit in front of anything if Lisa Riley is in it.

James

[MadAlbert]

On one hand I like the levity he brings and there's a good dynamic with all the presenters, but the undercurrent, for me, has to be the subject without to much distraction.

Maybe a shift in program layout to appeal to beginners, amateurs, nerds and AP (not mutually exclusive). Such a huge subject so not short on material (just budget, I suppose). Could easily fill one hour a month...

[Mondlicht13]

I go back to my original point. It seems that some people are desperate for their beloved Astronomy to remain the property of the elitist few and are therefore against anything and everything which might in some way

open the subject to a wider audience.

Popular seems to be a dirty word according to some of the views presented here.

Surely the reason for Sir Patrick driving this programme forward from its humble beginnings was to show the world that the

wonders of the universe could and should be enjoyed by everyone not just a privileged few.

It seems from the first two programmes since the sad passing of Sir Patrick that the BBC and the Sky at Night team are pressing ahead with this philosophy.

If that means "popular" then well and good. If more people are made aware of what they are missing under their light polluted skies then maybe something will be done about it.

[Fordos Moon]

How about getting one of our own experts from this forum on it?! Some advice on setting up, using kit, top tips perhaps?

[JamesF]

Popular seems to be a dirty word according to some of the views presented here.

I think that's perhaps because there's an awful lot of modern television programming that wishes to be popular regardless of the cost and in doing so they render the programme utterly vacuous. There is a difference, I think, between being "a popular television programme" and "a popular television programme about astronomy". Just as Top Gear, to pick a favourite SGL target, is "a popular television programme", but it is not "a popular television programme about cars".

James

[Mondlicht13]

I think that's perhaps because there's an awful lot of modern television programming that wishes to be popular regardless of the cost and in doing so they render the programme utterly vacuous. There is a difference, I think, between being "a popular television programme" and "a popular television programme about astronomy". Just as Top Gear, to pick a favourite SGL target, is "a popular television programme", but it is not "a popular television programme about cars".

James

I think you should take in the whole post and not just the bits that suit you

[Scott]

How about getting one of our own experts from this forum on it?! Some advice on setting up, using kit, top tips perhaps?

I get your point but a couple of our members already present the show

[nickdud]

maybe the beeb should get the top gear team in after all, some nice long vignette shots of some massive appertures, chris lintott screaming "MORE APPERTURRREEEEEEEE"(be honest, most of you do it on here anyway;) ), vignetted shots of the stars to remind you what you could see if you had loads more money, loads of classic rock in the background, and of course astro-stig testing a massive satellite every week... it would be awsome

*rubs my hands together, grins wildly and runs back to safe distance laughing like a crazed madman*

[JamesF]

I think you should take in the whole post and not just the bits that suit you

I did. That was the only bit I wanted to address though -- why some SGL users might be wary of what television producers deem suitable ways to become "popular". I don't see anyone saying that we shouldn't have as many people involved in astronomy as possible.

James

[Fordos Moon]

I get your point but a couple of our members already present the show

Ah, never realised thanks fella!

[estwing]

It can be the beginning of the end when the producers start to try and make the show more 'popular'.

Watch out for glamourous female presenters and fast cut sequences set to pop music and dumbing down..... any of those will mark the end of the show as we know it

... ...yes and i wish Jimmy Hill was still presenting M.O.T.D.

[starman1969]

What have I started? Surely a record number of posts for a thread I kicked off.

I watched the longer episode last night & that is the one I will set the Tivo to record.I really want to visit Kielder now. Does anyone know if there is a campsite or hotel in the area?

Long live The Sky at Night.

[Davey-T]

Couldn't agree more - in fact everything about him annoys me! Why do we have to have a celebrity on the team anyway?

I think you're onto something there Richard. "Celebrity come Astronomy", every week they could make celebrities stand out in the cloud and rain trying to spot and identify stars etc and take

astrophotos. They could dress up in sparkly costumes with red LED decorations.

Dave

[coulthamst]

Someone will be suggesting RA(nt) and Dec should present the programme next.

(Oh dear,I just did)

[fredster]

Watch out for glamourous female presenters

Awesome, when's that happening

[Treeden]

Watch out for glamourous female presenters

Awesome, when's that happening

Message from Dr Lucie Green: "You're off the Christmas card list!"

[fredster]

Message from Dr Lucie Green: "You're off the Christmas card list!"

oh no i forgot about the lovely Dr Lucie Green. I'll take it all back. We have a glamorous female presenter. The show is perfect. No more tinkering needed.

[AstroTux]

Am I the only one wondering that if S@N was put forward by the Beeb before WWII, would all this fuss have been made if Will Hay had been the presenter?

Let us not forget that SPM was also quite an entertainer in his own right.......

[Kropster]

Making the show more 'popular' is shorthand for getting a bigger audience...at any intellectual cost.

It is a false goal.

A larger audience? Is this audience those that the programme content is relevant too, or just anybody you can persuade to watch by altering the content to appeal more widely.... and thereby changing the program from what it was to something else.

Remember the core ethos of the original programme and the audience it is to service.

By all means make another programme for the wider audience, but don't trash the interest and respect of the original target audience.

It is about respect.