Who or what is the target audience?

A) The complete new person to gardening? In that case the celebrity is not
required, someone who can put things over in an interesting and informative
way. Someone who remembers that they too once knew nothing about gardening,
but doesn't talk down to the beginner.

B) Someone who has been gardening in their patch for years to keep it 'nice
looking' but doesn't know the names of plants, other that it is a 'Rose', a
'Daffodil' (I think or is that the Tulip?) and would like to get their
fingers a little more dirty in the garden and experiment and be encouraged?
Then someone as in A) but a bit more of a 'household name' but not the
celebrity

C) The person who knows it all and the TV Programmes are just for them to
criticise?

Mike



--

"'Mike'" wrote ...
Who or what is the target audience?

A) The complete new person to gardening? In that case the celebrity is not
required, someone who can put things over in an interesting and
informative way. Someone who remembers that they too once knew nothing
about gardening, but doesn't talk down to the beginner.

B) Someone who has been gardening in their patch for years to keep it
'nice looking' but doesn't know the names of plants, other that it is a
'Rose', a 'Daffodil' (I think or is that the Tulip?) and would like to get
their fingers a little more dirty in the garden and experiment and be
encouraged? Then someone as in A) but a bit more of a 'household name' but
not the celebrity

C) The person who knows it all and the TV Programmes are just for them to
criticise?


The great unwashed who, it has been decided by the producers, want to be
entertained without engaging brain. You only have to look at what's on offer
every evening to see that. Personally I tend to only watch documentaries,
the news, and scientific programs but they seem to be getting fewer and more
dumbed down too.

The person in C does not exist, nobody knows everything about
gardening/plants. I've been gardening all my life but almost every week I
learn something new on here and elsewhere.

--
Regards
Bob Hobden

On May 28, 6:44 pm, "Bob Hobden" wrote:
"'Mike'" wrote ...



Who or what is the target audience?

A) The complete new person to gardening? In that case the celebrity is not
required, someone who can put things over in an interesting and
informative way. Someone who remembers that they too once knew nothing
about gardening, but doesn't talk down to the beginner.

B) Someone who has been gardening in their patch for years to keep it
'nice looking' but doesn't know the names of plants, other that it is a
'Rose', a 'Daffodil' (I think or is that the Tulip?) and would like to get
their fingers a little more dirty in the garden and experiment and be
encouraged? Then someone as in A) but a bit more of a 'household name' but
not the celebrity

C) The person who knows it all and the TV Programmes are just for them to
criticise?

The great unwashed who, it has been decided by the producers, want to be
entertained without engaging brain. You only have to look at what's on offer
every evening to see that. Personally I tend to only watch documentaries,
the news, and scientific programs but they seem to be getting fewer and more
dumbed down too.

This is a function of two processes:
1) aging; as I get older, I find TV more and more trite; when I was
younger TV was also mainly rubbish but we tend to remember the best
bits. We were easier to impress then. I was anyway. When I was a
kid we had one channel (RTE; Irish TV); then when I was a teenager, we
had 3 more (BBC1,2 and ITV (from Northern Ireland if we were lucky or
Wales if you were less so). This was exotic and exciting at the
time. In retrospect it was probably mainly dull drivel but I have
fond memories.
2) the real world. The BBC used to be able to do as it liked. This
included stuff to help the general improvement of society and it could
quite happily put on very non commercial programming just because they
thought it was good for you. This resulted in patronising drivel and
brilliantly educational and or entertaining (e.g. Monty Python) TV,
side by side. These days, they have to compete more and more in a
lowest common denominator driven commercial world. They can show less
and less of the weird stuff and have to show more and more stuff that
will pull in the ratings.

You notice it with particular series like Horizon. That used to be a
very high-brow show with expensive production values and lots of
boffins working on weird stuff. These days, I have been horrified at
some of the shows. They seem to show you nothing much for a whole
show or do very politically correct; touchy feely science.

The BBC and C4 are still my favourite channels and I am very lucky to
get them. Gardeners World is doomed to be a lifestyle, glossy coffee
table magazine type show if it is to be shown at 8.00 or 8.30pm on
Fridays. That is commercial reality. Punters do not like latin names
or complicated procedures. They want entertaining male presenters and
glamorous wimmin doing things with diggers and champagne and low cut
overalls. Put in latin names and real world muck and it will be much
more interesting to me and will get axed.

Disgruntled in DUblin




The person in C does not exist, nobody knows everything about
gardening/plants. I've been gardening all my life but almost every week I
learn something new on here and elsewhere.

--
Regards
Bob Hobden

Des Higgins wrote:

snip

The BBC and C4 are still my favourite channels and I am very lucky to
get them. Gardeners World is doomed to be a lifestyle, glossy coffee
table magazine type show if it is to be shown at 8.00 or 8.30pm on
Fridays. That is commercial reality. Punters do not like latin names
or complicated procedures. They want entertaining male presenters and
glamorous wimmin doing things with diggers and champagne and low cut
overalls. Put in latin names and real world muck and it will be much
more interesting to me and will get axed.

Disgruntled in DUblin


Whilst I agreed with everything else you said, esp. the science program
efforts. I think that under Monty gardeners world took a real good turn,
away from "garden design" (I do keep using that phrase) and back more
toward the real world gardening. Dividing plants, sowing seeds, potting up,
building raised beds, composting etc etc etc all useful stuff. Admittedly
I don't really think Joe or Carol contribute greatly to that area but they
are just there to appeal more to the former AT fans.

I also think this is partly why it's going to be so difficult to replace
Monty if he leaves the show forever, heaven forbid, there are very few
good, practical and environmentally aware gardeners out there.

Duncan

Duncan

On May 29, 3:04 pm, dr wrote:
Des Higgins wrote:

snip



The BBC and C4 are still my favourite channels and I am very lucky to
get them. Gardeners World is doomed to be a lifestyle, glossy coffee
table magazine type show if it is to be shown at 8.00 or 8.30pm on
Fridays. That is commercial reality. Punters do not like latin names
or complicated procedures. They want entertaining male presenters and
glamorous wimmin doing things with diggers and champagne and low cut
overalls. Put in latin names and real world muck and it will be much
more interesting to me and will get axed.

Disgruntled in DUblin

Whilst I agreed with everything else you said, esp. the science program
efforts. I think that under Monty gardeners world took a real good turn,
away from "garden design" (I do keep using that phrase) and back more
toward the real world gardening. Dividing plants, sowing seeds, potting up,
building raised beds, composting etc etc etc all useful stuff. Admittedly
I don't really think Joe or Carol contribute greatly to that area but they
are just there to appeal more to the former AT fans.

I also think this is partly why it's going to be so difficult to replace
Monty if he leaves the show forever, heaven forbid, there are very few
good, practical and environmentally aware gardeners out there.

Duncan

Duncan

I have always liked Monty (since his Observer column) and I take yer
point. I was rambling.

Des Higgins wrote:

On May 29, 3:04 pm, dr wrote:
Des Higgins wrote:

snip



The BBC and C4 are still my favourite channels and I am very lucky to
get them. Gardeners World is doomed to be a lifestyle, glossy coffee
table magazine type show if it is to be shown at 8.00 or 8.30pm on
Fridays. That is commercial reality. Punters do not like latin names
or complicated procedures. They want entertaining male presenters and
glamorous wimmin doing things with diggers and champagne and low cut
overalls. Put in latin names and real world muck and it will be much
more interesting to me and will get axed.

Disgruntled in DUblin

Whilst I agreed with everything else you said, esp. the science program
efforts. I think that under Monty gardeners world took a real good turn,
away from "garden design" (I do keep using that phrase) and back more
toward the real world gardening. Dividing plants, sowing seeds, potting
up,
building raised beds, composting etc etc etc all useful stuff.
Admittedly I don't really think Joe or Carol contribute greatly to that
area but they are just there to appeal more to the former AT fans.

I also think this is partly why it's going to be so difficult to replace
Monty if he leaves the show forever, heaven forbid, there are very few
good, practical and environmentally aware gardeners out there.

Duncan

Duncan

I have always liked Monty (since his Observer column) and I take yer
point. I was rambling.

If you get the chance try to find a copy of his series "Fork to Fork" it
really was excellent, nice combo of gardening and cooking, and I was so
jealous of his house :-)
Duncan