On Tue, 23 Apr 2013 12:08:29 +0200, Martin wrote:


There isn't any difference. There should be. Commercial stations need
high viewing numbers otherwise they don't attract advertisers and
income. The BBC gets income whatever it shows. The BBC used to set
standards. It is not obliged to target those with the lowest
intelligence or poor education. 80-90% of BBC programmes are repeats.
They have plenty of time to show serious science programmes.
Countryfile spent a lot of time on pesticides and bees, and recapping
what had been said earlier in the programme. It wouldn't have taken
much time to have given a more balanced view of the problem, but of
course saying that 5% of bees deaths can be attributed to pesticides
is neither dramatic nor entertaining. They might have least got the
facts right about the proposed EU Commissioners pesticide ban, which
was rejected by EU member states at the beginning of March

I agree entirely with your view that BBC tv documentaries have
declined dramatically in quality in recent years. I have not found
anything worth watching on BBC2 for at least a year. Thankfully there
are the occasional programmes by Al Khalili and Januszczak on BBC4
that are worth watching.

From memory the EC proposals to restrict the use of neonicotinoids
failed to get the necessary qualified majority in an EU vote but the
Commission have not dropped the proposition. I understood that they
were awaiting a response from Bayer et al before proceeding.
--
rbel