GardenBanter.co.uk - View Single Post

08-09-2003, 03:12 PM

In article ,
(Mike Lyle) writes:

Subject: new thread alan titchmarsh subject
From: (Mike Lyle)
Date: 6 Sep 2003 11:20:35 -0700

(BridgeP) wrote in message
...
[...]
I think the truth is that many people think they are demonstrating some
sort of
superiority by rubbishing the latest range of presenters. The fact is, you
can't please everybody, and most people like them. You will always get
most
comment from those who do not like something.

Well, who wants to read a newsgroup where every post says "You are so
right"? You're disagreeing yourself, after all.

I don't either. The point I was making was that many (mostly the objectors)
create these long threads, which are mostly mild flames.

I am mainly a lurker on this NG. However, I have noticed that there are
always
more posting about topics with only a vague relationship with gardening.
Many
of these posts are to complain that there is not enough gardening!! This
topic
started of by an innocent post from somebody who was starting an AT fan
club,
an look at the furore it has generated. Don't ell me about those
wonderful,
caring, understanding gardening folk.

What's the problem with discussion? that's what I come here for. This
isn't a mutual support group for the insecure who need to be told
positive things all the time!

I absolutely agree. Nothing at all wrong with discussion, but frankly whether
one likes the current range of garden presenters or not (a very sweeping
condemnation IMO) is rather beside the point. Do you imagine that BBC/ITV, etc
are so stupoid as to use unpopular presenters? This NG is obviously a VERY
small % of people interested in gardening, but most of the general public do.
Rightly or wrongly there is a public obsesion with 'celebrity'.

Most 'gardening' progs are actually 'design' progs. I think that if we are
honest there will be VERY few of us who have watched such a prog and not seen
something that we may like to copy, or has given us a few ideas that hitherto
had not ocured to us. IMO the only real gardening prog is GW, and even that
can stray from the straight and narrow at times.

Peter Bridge

AT and all the others should take solace in the saying that goes something
like
'disgree, criticise, etc but what you do, don't ignore me!'. Or perhaps
'all
publicity is good publicity'.

Well, yes. And I doubt very much if AT gives a flying one. But in this
thread I haven't noticed many messages which didn't give reasons for
what the posters thought. And in fairness, the discussion has *not*
been irrelevant to gardening: are we content to have the public
informed about gardening by people whose prime qualification may not
be their gardening experience?

Sorry, but where does that come from. I don't know in detail what the
qualifications of the curent crop of presenteres but I think they have rather
more than most of us. This thread started of about AT. He is very experienced
I think.

Do we want programmes that tell us
something we didn't know already? I think that's perfectly relevant.

The national media, they will always be telling somebodies granny how to suck
eggs. You only need to read any gardening magazine. Every year there are the
same topics, often for the beginner of which there will hopefully be many.

You also seem a bit unfair in suggesting that most urg discussions
aren't about gardening: I reckon people here stick to the point pretty
well.

I didn't suggest that, only that the the OT topics are often the most popular.

Mike.