One more Olympic post...

After a long break, I am back, and I promise to start posting with a vengeance, so watch out! I've finished up some things and now have time and a television. Whee.

As the new fall TV season is just getting started in the U.S. I don't have too much to say on American television. Yet. But, I have a list of shows I want to give a chance, and a color coded schedule will be coming soon. But, I have been watching some stuff here in Great Britain--namely the Olympics. I know this post is a little outdated since the Michael Phelps Games (ahem, the 2008 Summer Olympics) finished about three weeks ago or so, but I hope you will indulge me for just one more Olympic post.

I did most of my watching via the internet, which I think is the wave of the future (or, I guess the wave of the present). There were several things that I liked, both about watching on-line and with the BBC broadcast. The obvious one being that it was great to be able to watch the Olympics without owning a television, because I had been worried about that, as I am AN OLYMPIC FREAK. The other nice thing about watching on the internets was that I had several different streams of sports available to me at any given time, and I could watch highlights (of say, the swimmer boys) over and over if I wanted to. Not that I did, of course.

Specifically to the BBC broadcast, first and foremost were the English, Scottish, and Irish accents. Seriously, that was fun. I also got to "meet" athletes that weren't American or have the required sob story needed to make it on American coverage. There was still plenty of "American" action, and Michael Phelps was covered in great detail.

The parts that I didn't enjoy so much included:

Losing the element of surprise. Events were shown live around 3 am in the morning and generally I woke up, opened my computer, and found the results are displayed all over my screen. I have to say, the events I managed to not know the outcome (such as the Men's 4x100 Medley Relay) were much more exciting than when I did know the results. (such as which American gymnast won the gold). I also missed not getting to see American athlete interviews: I admit it, I am a homer. I root for Americans (often, though not always) and I like to hear what the athletes have to say. Even if it is just so I can make fun of them.

The idea of showing events live is an interesting one, and I get that generally this is a good idea, but I'm not sure about it in practice. Beyond what I mentioned above, doing this meant that sometimes I only got to see highlights: if I didn't catch the event live or on rebroadcast, I didn't always get to see it, if the BBC decided not to upload the full coverage.

I do think, however, that this practice points to a more general difference in the BBC experience versus the NBC one. In the U.S., it is all about ratings, and we are fed one feature story after another, barely seeing athletes or events that aren't either American or high profile, and have lots of commercials, albeit cool ones. The Olympics are a "viewing event" so to speak, much like an extended Super Bowl. Here the Olympic coverage is much more practical and no-nonsense. Because it isn't all about ratings (as the BBC does not need commercials or ratings to survive) there isn't the sense that one needs to pull out all the stops. I saw literally, no features stories, and no commercials. I can't necessarily say that one is better than the other, as I think they both have their good and bad points. I suppose the perfect experience would be somewhere in the middle, with some features, and more events and athletes shown. Maybe in 2012 I will broadcast Sara TV with this combo of coverage.

There is just one other point I'd like to mention, mainly because I find the contrast interesting and discussion provoking. If anyone watched the diving events, and more specifically the Men's Platform Final, you know that Matthew Mitchum from Australia won. It was a very emotional victory and his final dive was beautiful. Throughout the competition, the British commentators mentioned that he had recently been through a rocky time, and that was mainly due to the fact that he had recently come out as a gay man. This was said in a very matter of fact tone, and as part of the general info on the diver, but it was pointed out doing this has been the cause of a lot of pressure on him. I remember wondering at the time if this fact was mentioned on the U.S. broadcast. I did some digging after the event and found out that this little fact was not mentioned, but other athletes' heterosexual relationships were mentioned. You can read about it here if you like, from Yahoo Sports. I am not writing this to stir up things, but because I found the contrast interesting. I'm not entirely sure as to all the reasoning behind this, but I would wager that part of it is because NBC relies upon adverstisers and high ratings to survive.

Anyway, that was my Olympics. If anyone is reading this, let me know what you think, and what you thought of your Olympic viewing experience in whatever country you are in.

I'll be back soon with many thoughts on the new Fall TV season, one of my favorite times of the year!

My first Olympics away from home

Before I get going, I must say in the interest of full disclosure, I LOVE THE OLYMPICS.  I love everything about them: the sports, the athletes, the outfits, the cheesy commentary, the tear-at-your-heartstrings features, the commercials...literally everything.  But, for the interest of a blog about TV, I am going to focus (as much as possible) on the television aspects of the Olympics and the overall viewing experience.  

One of the big differences that experience this year, more so than ever before, is the proliferation of streaming internet video.  I have to say it makes it so much easier for someone who does not have an actual TV set to stay connected, and it also gives quite a bit of choice on what to watch.  Obviously the jury is still out on how effective it will be, but it definitely adds a new dimension to the event.

For me most importantly, this is the first time I will ever watch the Olympics from a different location than the United States. Here in London all the coverage is from the BBC--and there is a great deal of it--especially since London will be the host in four years. The city (and country) definitely have Olympic fever. As eager as I am to see the Olympics from a different perspective, I will cop to the things I will miss: the NBC Olympic theme, Bob Costas, and the Chevy Olympic Moment they do every night.  What I won't miss--the blatant focus on American athletes at the expense of other interesting people from around the world. 

So, on to my thoughts, which is mainly a comparison of what I am used to and what I see now. The first major difference so far is that the main coverage is shown between 2 pm and 6 pm each day.  I've been trying to work out why this is done, but I haven't figured it out.  I thought it was maybe so events could be shown live, but I think China is 8 hours ahead of London, so I don't think that is why.  Since I don't know when the coverage has traditionally been shown in the past I'm not sure if this is typical or not. What I do know is how unusual it is for me!  I am used to the U.S.-style of coverage where all things important are shown in prime time.  Lucky for me I am able to watch the coverage (for the most part) during the day, but I think I would be quite frustrated if I was working full-time.  Then again, if this is how it has always been done, other people probably don't give it a second thought.

When watching the Opening Ceremony  the coverage was pretty similar to what I am used to, with the major exception being the British accents (don't you know the Olympics are being held in Chiner?). Though Michael Johnson, he of the 1996 Olympics, Nike golden shoes, and two gold medals in the 200m and 400m, is a commentator so I did get an American accent fix.  Also, I think I was sort of expecting there to be a heavy concentration on Great Britain and its athletes, but not so much. Of course during the Parade of Nations there were quite a bit of discussion on the team, but there was also as much discussion about President Bush. Granted this is a very controversial Olympics, but still it constantly amazes me how often American culture, politics, and people are mentioned in international broadcasts.  I'm not sure this is entirely a good thing, and sadly, our coverage never reciprocates. I mean seriously, can you imagine the U.S. coverage having a British person on the commentating team talking about all the British athletes and their chances. No? Me either. 

The other major difference I noticed, thus far, is the absence of the "special features" so to speak.  We are all aware of those Olympic Moments (the ones I love) and how they are designed to make you cry.  Or manipulate you, depending on your perspective and willingness to cry. And how you can't really get through an entire night of coverage without at least two of these stories. I didn't see a single one of those in the 4+ hours of coverage I saw.   But, I am actually totally okay with that.  It doesn't seem like a very British thing to do, and my tear ducts will enjoy taking some time off.

What I am excited for is the chance to see athletes that aren't American participate in events. I have already seen more gymnastics coverage of British athletes in a short 6 minute video than I probably have seen in all of my other Olympic gymnastics viewing; and believe me I have spent many (many) hours watching Olympic gymnastics.  I am excited to hear different commentary and different points of view and hear different anthems.  

As the coverage goes on I will try and talk about the similiarites and differences some more and let you know if anything else exciting happens, by way of the TV.  So please enjoy the Olympics! I know I will.