Saturday, August 07, 2004


Holiday TV

Sarah Sands obviously has quite boring hoidays if she spends any significant amount of them watching TV, but I could identify with this entertaining tale of leaving the BBC behind and finding oneself marooned with CNN.

I had that experience for a number of months in rural Spain. Only CNN and an obscure and frighteningly dull films channel were in English, and I needed my English-time every day, so CNN it was.

From experience I think Sarah Sands falls in to the category of a Telegraph apologist for the BBC (the Telegraph very hazily splits 50:50 on the matter- unlike its editorial policy which is squarely sceptical of our national broadcaster), and it appears this article is supposed to be a gentle reminder of 'how lucky we are' to have an Aunty who's always thinking about us.

True, she does describe how 'The cultural imperialism of the BBC vanishes.' when you leave the country and the channels behind- but this is no significant criticism in the pages of the Telegraph (whilst it will win you kudos with any passing stray Guardianistas).

She then describes how disconcerting it is to have one's country (Britain anyway) portrayed by CNN when one is used to the BBC. Personally I found it liberating, and then a bit boring, but she went straight to the 'boring' phase- with a lot of irritation thrown in.

In the curiously two-faced style of today's Telegraph she has a dig at the way 'CNN is a gleaming illustration of the patronising nature of American liberalism.'- and then proceeds to bash Kerry as being p.c.- completely missing how p.c. the BBC frequently is, and how pro-Kerry. She actually calls the BBC 'regionally correct', which is, to my mind, just an extra layer of p.c.- just as having extra tier of local government still leaves you with a government to deal with.

Finally, in words that might be interesting to stereotype gatherers in the US, she describes the virtue of the Beeb to British eyes, in uncannily Kerryesque blurriness:

'It is a nuance of tone. The BBC is cosy. It is family. There is none of the neurosis and sheen of CNN. The difference between CNN and the BBC is that between a hyperpower and a small but stout-hearted island in the Atlantic.'

Well, I'd agree that the BBC is more sophisticated than CNN, but what I remember from my time marooned with CNN was a reassuring sense that this was a news channel, and not a cultural artifact. Yes, the presenters were insecure, glossy, unreal- but they also had to shove in as many genuine facts between the ad breaks as they could, to justify being taken seriously amidst the glitz.

 
Google Custom Search