The Sky at Night - The End

[thegoatboy]

Well Stargazing live is on next year init, so would they can the astronomy show if they are still pushing that?

[BinocularSky]

Sam Delaney on BBC R4 Today Programme this morning somehow managed to completely miss the point. He seems to think it is about the amount of astronomy & science on TV generally and clearly lacks so much as a clue about what *amateur* astronomy is. for which S@N is the only programme by amateurs for amateurs.

We do not need a sleb-professional presented programme; they have a history of making irritating gaffes that most experienced amateurs would have avoided.

[Ant]

I listened to that interview as well, your right he didn't have a clue did he. 

To my knowledge there is now other show on TV that does what S&N does. End off.

I'm not a huge fan of the show, but I will watch it if its on and I remember - but the fact remains that there is nothing else like it and it should continue.

Ant 

[DaveS]

I heared Sam Delany as well, nearly spluttered my tea. The bloke hasn't *lost* the plot, he never had one to start with. Typical arty journalist. Probably gave up any science at GCSE.

Gods save us!

[Rockrae78]

Was just thinking the same thing... How can they say that the content of Sky at Night is covered elsewhere.  I get Sky World (which is basically every channel under the sun) and there is nothing else like the Sky at Night on there.

Yes, there are plenty of Brian Cox's 'Wonders' type programmes, but that isn't the same on any level! 

if this is what BBC heads think, then no wonder they want to can it... 

I can only assume that no one at Radio 4 contacted anyone from the petition to get their point of view.... strongly worded email coming up! 

[Macavity]

Well, it has finally made the science pages of the guardian:

http://www.theguardian.com/media/2013/sep/24/sky-at-night-faces-bbc-axe

Doubtless to remain secondary to the latest "iniquity of men"

or panegyric to Richard Dawkins on the front page:

[malc-c]

To be honest I think that once Patrick passed away the cards were marked and the closure of the program was inevitable. The Sky at Night was Patrick... OK Chris and Lucie  have tried their best to step in Patrick's shoes so to speak, and to some degree it may be that by getting Lucie to co-present the show the producers were hoping to draw in more male viewers, but the format for me at least has lost a unique something that I can't put my finger on.

Yes it would be sad to see the end of the program, but I guess that now Patrick isn't around to fight the BBC, the loss of Patrick has almost given the BBC the excuse to cut its small budget production a year on after Partick's death.

[foundaplanet]

Sam Delaney on BBC R4 Today Programme this morning somehow managed to completely miss the point. He seems to think it is about the amount of astronomy & science on TV generally and clearly lacks so much as a clue about what *amateur* astronomy is. for which S@N is the only programme by amateurs for amateurs.

We do not need a sleb-professional presented programme; they have a history of making irritating gaffes that most experienced amateurs would have avoided.

I didn't hear the show this morning but I wouldn't expect anything more from a bloke who was been the editor of ''Heat'' magazine.

I think your second point is the exact point and what the BBC are failing to see. Amateurs are exactly that and what they want to see is other amateurs not some glossy personality taking at them like they are ill informed. It is time they started to re engage with their audiences who pay the rent. They are no longer the big player on the information front they have lost that to the internet.

I can think of a few people on here that would make great contributions to The Sky at Night. You for one, Steve Richards, Peter Drew and Moonshane amongst others.. 

It appears that the programmes monthly viewing figures are around 200,000, it would be interesting to know what each show costs to make. I would have thought a couple of quid off each of those licence payers would be more than enough to cover it.

[jezhughes]

Interestingly also, after browsing iPlayer today, the BBC don't even have a 'Science' category in their programme listings... Of course, they do have a 'Religion & Ethics' category though. REALLY?  . Where do today's youth get their science scheduling..

Secondly interestingly, I can't find the last S@N to watch 

[Laurie61]

I think if I had been planing this potential new show I would have wanted to start it while S@N was still running and kick it of at a time when there is something going on that's making the news, like Ison in October/November ? There could then have been an assessment period for the new show and if the ratings did not pan out as well as the ideas folk thought and they decided to bin the new show there would still be a fall back position. I feel if S@N goes and the new show doesn't meet expectations there will be no sleepless nights caused at the BBC if this new show is dropped.  

[palebluedot]

Interestingly also, after browsing iPlayer today, the BBC don't even have a 'Science' category in their programme listings... Of course, they do have a 'Religion & Ethics' category though. REALLY?  . Where do today's youth get their science scheduling..

Screen Shot 2013-09-25 at 11.34.21.png

Secondly interestingly, I can't find the last S@N to watch 

Look under factual.

[palebluedot]

I didn't hear the show this morning but I wouldn't expect anything more from a bloke who was been the editor of ''Heat'' magazine.

I think your second point is the exact point and what the BBC are failing to see. Amateurs are exactly that and what they want to see is other amateurs not some glossy personality taking at them like they are ill informed. It is time they started to re engage with their audiences who pay the rent. They are no longer the big player on the information front they have lost that to the internet.

I can think of a few people on here that would make great contributions to The Sky at Night. You for one, Steve Richards, Peter Drew and Moonshane amongst others.. 

It appears that the programmes monthly viewing figures are around 200,000, it would be interesting to know what each show costs to make. I would have thought a couple of quid off each of those licence payers would be more than enough to cover it.

Look at what the ignorant git tweeted! More cause for complaint me thinks.

[Rockrae78]

It's despicable! I can't believe that the BBC would allow him on the air with comments like that! 

[knobby]

Petition is flying up to 11000 :-)

[jezhughes]

Look under factual.

"Factual" contains BBC delights such as 'Motorway Cops', 'A Very British Murder' and 'Bargain Hunt'. I'm assuming you're as uncomfortable as i am with having science programmes listed alongside these?

[foundaplanet]

Look at what the ignorant git tweeted! More cause for complaint me thinks.

Unreal, and folks pay for numpties like that. That's disgusting. 

[davew]

I don't know if it's just me but on looking around recently ( Mainly due to this thread ) I get the impression that some people out there are confusing Astronomy with science

If I want to know what's in the sky this month I'm hardly going to watch a programme on Nucleic Acid. interesting though it is !

Dave

[foundaplanet]

Petition is flying up to 11000 :-)

It is gathering pace, it's gone up 500 in the last 5 minutes..

[RT65CB-SWL]

I never heard the broadcast either.

I take it then BBC Radio 4 has interviewed someone today who has more qualifications than me, and thinks he/she is re-structuring the organisation.

In other words...

I take it then BBC Radio 4 has interviewed an 'idiot' today who thinks they are 'a Jack/Jill of all trades and a master of none' who has a degree in Media Studies. 

[Jase_v2]

Unreal, and folks pay for numpties like that. That's disgusting. 

Thats the first time Ive ever looked on twitter  - and its re-inforced my view of the whole thing - inane drivel foisted by people who think their opinions are actually worthy of public airing. Im missing nothing! Lets hope he gets hauled over the coals for it - unlikely though. Petition signed

[LukeSkywatcher]

Thats the first time Ive ever looked on twitter  - and its re-inforced my view of the whole thing - inane drivel foisted by people who think their opinions are actually worthy of public airing. Im missing nothing! Lets hope he gets hauled over the coals for it - unlikely though. Petition signed

Agreed. Its the first time ive looked at the site and i now see i also am not missing much. His comments are homophobic and also inciting violence "football was better when..............".

Shocking stuff.

[brucen]

It's a shame the tv figures don't take into account people like me who record it then watch it another day. Would be interesting to know those figures!

I am just keeping my fingers crossed that in 2014 we have a monthly astronomy show !

I believe they produce figures which estimate 'live' watchers and also those up to 7 days and also 28 days. It used to be done by monitoring the devices in 25,000 homes but not sure how many they use now.

[LukeSkywatcher]

I record it so i can watch it back without the annoying bits. 

[JamesF]

I believe they produce figures which estimate 'live' watchers and also those up to 7 days and also 28 days. It used to be done by monitoring the devices in 25,000 homes but not sure how many they use now.

They probably just ask the NSA for the figures now.

James

[JamesF]

Agreed. Its the first time ive looked at the site and i now see i also am not missing much. His comments are homophobic and also inciting violence "football was better when..............".

Shocking stuff.

I don't twit either, but I have to admit I'm somewhat bemused by the fact that he should make such comments, and even more so that he gives the impression that he thinks it's clever to make such comments.  If he's representative of the sort of person the BBC employ these days it's quite clear why most television is an utter load of drivel.  Has the BBC become the place people with useless qualifications go when Macdonalds aren't recruiting?

James