The Environment and TV

In response to:The Environment and TV

Fri, 16 Mar 2007 16:07:23 +0100

Thankyou all for posting your comments, i have emailed those of you who posted 3 times or more asking for addresses for the incentives (£15) to be sent, thankyou to everyone for your help on the project.

MAW - CONGRATULATIONS, due to your continuous input you have won the extra £15.

Please continue to post comments if you have not replied to the last question

Thanks again

In response to:More Questions

Fri, 16 Mar 2007 15:04:15 +0100

Incidentally, your previous question about weather reports.

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration hav just released a report that said the globally averaged combined land and sea surface temperature for December to February was the highest since records began in 1880.

This sort of thing would be interesting because people could debate (on web-site or debating programme or documentary) about the causes of this.

In response to:More Questions

Fri, 16 Mar 2007 12:21:44 +0100

UKTV Documentary is a bit bland and nondescript. If the output is soley to do with environmental issues then it would be great idea to change.

Names I would suggest:
UKTV Environment - I think would be the simple and most obvious name. Although it may not appeal to people and may seem boring. But then it is limited to some extent becuase of the "UKTV" prefix.
UKTV On Green - (this has a good metre when reading aloud).

Your other names: UKTV Earth/Explore/X would not tell me that this is about the environment. Not at all and I would stay away from these in a five star hotel in Outer Mongolia.

I think that the TV channel is a really positive idea and wish them all the luck. I really hope that they consider the thoughtful issues that have been raised in discussions especially on this board. I also hope that they champion good quality broadcasting that is not whimisical/sensational but uses engaging presenters and thoughtful and enjoyable programmes.

I read some info on how the UK would have to cut down its carbon emissions by 90% to have the necessary positive impact on climate change. It was interesting because the major contributor was air travel. It was propositioned that the privileged few, the western world, should change their thoughts on flying, i.e. cut back (no weekend breaks using planes). We all look at such modern things as a necessity. But we do not think of the consequences. It is a shame because if mobile phones caused brain tumours then we would manage without them, but when it is not about yourself and is quite abstract (that is climate change at the moment is not tangible to the individual or has an actual impact yet) then there nothing is done. I think that UKTV would be good to bring in debates about morality. That is, is it morally acceptable to use planes or to drive big cars etc..

Anyway, I think other ideas such as programmes on local, national and international issues ( delievered in an impartial way) and a credible, easily navigable web-site have been discussed.

Best of luck!

p.s. I used my work bag at sainsburys last night instead of using their plastic bags. Big me up one time!

In response to:More Questions

Fri, 16 Mar 2007 10:36:59 +0100

'Thanks everyone for your comments, they have all been really useful. This is the final question so your last chance to post!

The channel is thinking of changing it's name to reflect the environment
focus- what do you think about this?do you have any ideas for names? Uktv earth, uktv explore and x are some options - any thoughts on this?

Any final thoughts or comments would also be welcome'

In response to:More Questions

Thu, 15 Mar 2007 14:53:16 +0100

I think that if a particular aspect of weather had a massive impact on people's lives then yes it is propbably relevant. However I am inclined to agree with the 2 comments above. Weather is covered in local and national news as a day to day point of knowledge/interest.

One possible way of linking weather to environmental issues directly relating to the viewers lives would be to have a section or article on the website looking at how we can make use of natural power resources, like wind farms or solar power. I think that there is a lot of inaccurate and speculative information going around and it would be useful to have the plain facts that may help the viewer when making choices. For example if a wind farm is proposed in their area, what are the real pro's and con's. Or -how efficient are solar panels that the public can afford to install on their own homes (I think you can buy something from B&Q)?

In response to:More Questions

Thu, 15 Mar 2007 14:53:03 +0100

In response to:More Questions

Thu, 15 Mar 2007 13:59:03 +0100

I agree with MAW there, I don't really think that the weather forecast has a place on the UKTV site.

I could maybe used in a comparitive way though i.e. the weather 100/50/20/10 years ago and a prediction of future weather based on the impact of climate change. This could include sea levels, forest area left etc to show the changing globe.

In response to:More Questions

Wed, 14 Mar 2007 21:07:03 +0100

It is good that UKTV documentary is looking at a holistic viewpoint but I think a weather section is too vague a link. I would not go on to an environmental web-site to find out my train times and in the same way I would not look for the weather.

Also freak weather does not necessarily mean that climate change has caused this. And any suggestion that it had would be inaccurate and unscientific and I would be put off by this. If, however, there were some scientific reports stating that they could find correlation between climate change and freak weather then I would be interested in that and that would fit the environmental theme. Otherwise, it may come over as a bit 6th form or sensationalist. I think that graphs and pictures or weather reports (that show climate change contributing to freaky weather) that can paraphrase scientific research, thus making it more digestible for the likes of my puny mind would be interesting.

In response to:More Questions

Wed, 14 Mar 2007 19:05:51 +0100

Do you think weather based tools fit on the UKTV Documentary website (e.g. local/ international weather, freak weather etc.)? Does this fit with the environment theme? If so, what could they have on there?

In response to:More Questions

Wed, 14 Mar 2007 15:40:57 +0100

I can only comment with certainty on what would appeal to me. I think engaging personalities for me are:Kevin McCloud (Grand Designs); George Monbiot; David Attenborough; Michael Portillo (surprisingly). I think some comedians or musicians would be good, although, it would depend on what they were doing. For example, Michael Palin (of Monty Python); Stephen Fry (that series on depression was excellent); Dave Gorman could present stuff in a entertaining (but wiht a serious edge). Musicians and artists could voice their concerns but people like Thom Yorke or Damon Alban could not present info in an unbiased way. It would be emotive, which could be interesting to have interviews where people get passionate about stuff.
If the programmes started to pander to the youth in a way that would be seen as "cool" then I would turn off. Especially, if Sarah Cox; anyone off Hollyoaks or Steve Jones (or anyone off T4) were involved. I can't stand disingenuous and egotistical people present tv. The problem with this pandering is that there would be gimmicks whcih are inherently not sustainable and people get bored with them. I don't think it is a black-white option of either: 1. boring old farts; or 2. "hip" and "cool" programming that has to be fast, furious and appeal to 14 year old girls and boys who have attention spans of a baby knat. If it is quality programming that has relevant instructive and informative advice about local, national, internation environment concerns together with pro-active advice on what the individual can do and together with a credible and easy to navigate web-site then I, myself, would be interested.
I don't think that glamour is needed. There is a huge amount of media publicity about climate change, what with the new bill, with the MPs wanting to change the world for whatever egotistical reason, this is a serious issue now.

In response to:More Questions

Wed, 14 Mar 2007 14:56:47 +0100

i think david attenborough would make most youths switch off, his voice is good for education/facts but too slow/lacks punchiness for entertaining youth with something which might appear as preaching /lecturing about the environment. you would have to get more regular presenters perhaps those associated with comedy (eddy izzard or funny people or music people/djs such as sarah cox or people in bands that might do gigs in land fill sites etc or wind fields.....who make the appeal broadened so you get rid of the stigma that environment issues onoy relate to vegetarian worm hunting earthy grubby people like bill oddy, bellamy and attenborough - the average person probably doesn't want to see someone lying in bat guana and recycling bananas - you have to find out how to attach glamour/prestige or the things which are appealing to a a subject which is normally associated with the green party dry/boring - its all about the future and saving the planet which alot of kids/people don't necessarily relate to istantly.enter/ edu-tainment has to be made a part of the channel else it cannot really compete

In response to:More Questions

Tue, 13 Mar 2007 19:24:50 +0100

I think David Attenborough is associated with great quality broadcasting. It is the antithesis of today's fast and nominal attention span programming. I would love a programme, instead of The Blue Planet maybe The Green Planet, although that title sounds a bit naff, that looks at how humans impact on negatively on the earth. I would also like to see the positive impact that humans have as well. As I think that these programmes should have a balanced view and give the viewer some hope. Otherwise, we'll think we are doomed and there is no point to do anything. It would be great if he could visit people who have done practical and resourceful things in their house, like they've got a generator that's run by their pet gerbils or something. Also, he could visit communities who have rallyed together to enhance their environment by some natural regeneration.
For the web-site, I think standalone interviews or standalone features by Attenborough on either a topic of negative or positive impact that humans have on the environment. I am not keen on the mini David idea for myself, but, maybe a cartoon, like Motty, would appeal to the younger audiences. I, myself, do not like updates because they verge on spam. I like to look at web-sites when I want to not have some email telling me something. If the web-site is good enough people will visit because there will be the interesting material on there without the need for gimmicks.
I also think that there should be standalone interviews (like with the meet the author website http://www.meettheauthor.co.uk ) with commentators like George Monbiot and also a 1-per-week interview with a viewer of the web-site or tv channel who has done something positive or has a campaign about something taht they want broadcasting. I think making it interactive with the viewer who by being able to comment either by writing or audio (with strict quality controls) would give people an incentive to contribute and ultimately visit and use the site and channel.

In response to:More Questions

Tue, 13 Mar 2007 18:11:20 +0100

Building on CS's comments about David Attenborough - how can the channel use him for programmes/clips or on the website? What do you think about a 'mini David' with environmental updates? Any other ideas?

In response to:More Questions

Tue, 13 Mar 2007 17:05:22 +0100

I've been thinking about how we can encourage people to recycle. programmes on the TV channel could focus (in an interesting and exciting way) on the recycling process -how it happens, what are the processes, and what are the end products. It could raise awareness of what and how to recycle -then what difference an individual and a community can make. Relating directly to the viewer.There could also be programmes aimed at children with simaliar aims- to raise awareness and encourage recycling. There could be a programme for younger children -how recycling can be fun and look at what we can make from all of these things. Also look at what happens to our planet and wildlife if we are careless. There could also be something along the lines of the Christmas Lectures -but a little less dry. These could take a very scienticic approach and be aimed at GCSE/A Level pupils who may be interested in the chemical processes, but obviously these would have to be fun, colourful and probably have an element of danger to keep them interested!

In response to:More Questions

Tue, 13 Mar 2007 14:56:42 +0100

you could also have a mini google type search on all topics related to environment so you could focus on on what was happening in your area socially and resouces for recycling etc.

In response to:More Questions

Tue, 13 Mar 2007 13:42:04 +0100

Freeman raises an interesting point about incentives. I think this is a good idea, instead of telling people you will be punished and damned in hell, you offer them hope and a postiive approach. Or even if there is no incentive, maybe a way of doing recylcing that is going to impact less financially - this could be done by a section called "what can I do?" or something similar for the individual.

I think that if the web site is good enough: accessible, interesting articles, practical advice; engaging personalities; then it won't need any sort of ideas such as "cool" type face or tip of the day which may be seen as gimmicky, which end up being for the sake of it and will not cut through to the issues in an interesting and informative way.

A campaign is an interesting approach, although, this may endanger its voice as an impartial broadcastor, which i think, to retain authority, it has to be. Therefore maybe it should highlight campaigns locally, nationally and internationally with links as opposed to leading campaigns, if that makes sense. Also, I am a meiser and love entering in competitions to win vouchers or anything. This would be a good incentive as well, I think.

I find youtube links and bbc video streaming clips quite interesting. Although, prefer youtbe links because they seem to come through quicker.

Have leading acamedics such as George Monbiot (he did an article today about the sensationalism of The Great Global Warming Swindle) http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/story/0,,2032575,00.html . Maybe get people like him and interesting cult figures to present programmes. I think Thom Yorke; Gruff Rhys; etc. Not Bono or Chris Martin or Geldof as I find them even more egotistical than most "personalities".

In response to:More Questions

Tue, 13 Mar 2007 11:07:24 +0100

I think a 'tip of the day' would be a good idea. It would be a good way of UKTV developing a 'widget' for people to download. These are becoming increasingly popular on the community sites such as myspace etc. A widget displays little bits of information at a time so ideal for a tip of the day and great for people to click on and come on through to the UKTV site.

Have a look at http://widgets.yahoo.com/ to see what kind of things are around.

Also, I mentioned in the meeting about a desktop device that folk could download which could offer daily advice and tips. A good example of this is the BBC 'Mini Motty' found here http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport3/worldcup2002/bsp/motty/default.stm.

We could have a 'mini david' with environmental updates??

I could see the website acting as an environmental portal with aggregates green news and issues from around the world whilst also providing a searchable directory for local green services/projects etc to get people involved.

Maybe there could even be a campaign across the channel and website with daily or weekly steps people can take. A bit like weight watchers but counting carbon rather than calories? Ok, I think I've overdone it there!

In response to:More Questions

Mon, 12 Mar 2007 20:22:05 +0100

As we discussed in the group, people really take notice of ideas that will save them cash. Perhaps some of the tips could be targeted at that - ways to reuse items that will make a financial difference.

In response to:More Questions

Mon, 12 Mar 2007 20:01:04 +0100

I think easy accessible tips, that are navigable from the home page would be great.

For me and my friends I think being told the basics would be helpful: what can and can’t be recycled. Also hints as to how to be resourceful at home, work and holiday, e.g. reusable bags for shopping. Maybe have a post code search engine for local recycling possibilities and if none then the option to name and shame local councils who were rubbish.

I think the web-site has to be clear and easy to use and not gimmicky. Like, I’ve harped on before, the Guardian environment web-site http://environment.guardian.co.uk/. Simple design ,easy to navigate and covers the whole gamet of environmental concerns. This is engaging, intelligent and useful. I always look at it everyday and that must be doing something right. I would contrast this with the “Cool” website (can’t remember the name) at the marketing interview. I thought this was gimmicky and teenagerish. It was trying to popular and not trying to be engagingly interesting.
Also, I would suggest a forum with different topics so that you interact with other people and how they recycled etc.

In response to:More Questions

Mon, 12 Mar 2007 16:11:42 +0100

Carrying on with the issue of recycling and online:

How do you feel about UKTV putting simple, fast facts/tips about how to recycle online(i.e. what to recycle, local recycling possibilities etc? How useful would this be to you/ others? Are there any other tips that UKTV could put on their website?

In response to:More Questions

Mon, 12 Mar 2007 13:47:18 +0100

I think SDB raises an interesting point that certainly a tv channel could investigate. Like a Panorama programme but for environment - subjects should cover things such as discrepencies between boroughs. MAybe a "name and shame"? MAybe the programme could breakdown what we get in return for our council tax and whether re-prioritisation of revenue should be considered.

for example, in Honor Oak Park (borough of the respendlent Lewisham), they have put in fancy pavings in some of the residential roads, yes it looks pretty, but maybe the thousands of pounds on materials and labour would have been better redirected on schemes such as accessible recycling centres or door to door collections.

Also, if the tv channel wants a web-site, maybe it could have template letters that people could amend and print that could be sent to local and national government to lobby for such initiatives. Like on www.moneysavingexpert.com have for reclaiming bank charges. Letters, I would think, are seen as more effective than the intangible and easily sent email.

Today it is gonna be 18 degrees celsius in London and it's first part of MArch. Just imagine if that became the norm and that the summer grew hotter. LAst summer's heatwave was rubbish for commuting and I am not sure if i am ready for even higher temperatures.

I am beginning to sound like my gran.

In response to:More Questions

Mon, 12 Mar 2007 13:29:19 +0100

I think that recyling facilities should be much more consistent accross boroughs and counties. My neighbouring borough has recycling bins for almost everything (although I am yet to see plastic!!) and yet 5 mins down the road in my borough they have taken away the cardboard recycling facility!!! The bins are few and far between as well. And whats more you may even have to travel (in a car if you have a large amount of recycling to transport)in order to recycle! Completly destroying the ethical process in the first place!
Also in some boroughs and counties the local council pick up bins and bags from peoples homes as a weekly recycling iniatiave and in others nothing or next to nothing is going on!! I really think the programme could highlight places that are doing their bit and interview the public in places around the country where recycling facilities are scarce. They could also interview the local councils to try to get to the route of the issue - why are there so few facilities? And are they going to do anything about it?

In response to:More Questions

Sun, 11 Mar 2007 23:32:39 +0100

Good point there JF, just like the ads voiced over by the lovely Eddie Izzard but extended to see what actually happens with stuff that you recycle. As part of the show this could be compared to items that are not recycled, showing the impact and amount of time it takes for the earth to absorb the effect!

I think as much as it is important for local authorities to provide easy to find/use recycle facilitates, it is just as important for producers to take an environmental approach to packaging. These days even a few items purchased from the supermarket can wield an upsetting amount of packaging. Surely there are better ways to package some products whilst educating folk about the benefits of avoiding the 'big 4' and shop locally to cut down on this problem.

If shops are selling items packaged in difficult to recycle containers (i.e. certain drinks cartons) could they not provide facilities to recycle these items??

I agree with the above comments on making recycling the norm and not something you have to go out of your way to do but surely people will only operate in this way if all items can be recycled? This draws me back again to the point of considerate packaging, should regulations be established and companies fined for over use of certain materials?

If we could eradicate more of what actually needs to be recycled at the source surely this would go along way in encouraging people in the act of recycling. I'm sure a lot of folk are still unclear of what they can and can't recycle and this deters them from doing it!

Personally I feel it is quite easy for me to recycle at the moment as here in Lambeth we chuck everything in the same orange bag. The only issue is what you can't put in! Food waste for example is something anyone could be encouraged to recycle with a good composter.

These bags however get left out in the street and torn to bits by foxes overnight, leaving crap all over the pavement, nice!

In response to:More Questions

Sun, 11 Mar 2007 22:45:07 +0100

I had an idea but I think it might be unorignial. What about showing the life cycle of a recycled item? So showing what happens to a coke can or a newspaper when it's recycled. Presumably before too long it's made into something useful and I think this could show a process really working and be cynic- proof.

In response to:More Questions

Sun, 11 Mar 2007 19:19:25 +0100

Anybody read the papers today about the conservatives wanting to enforce a 'green miles' allowance for flying on planes?

"pay as you burn" - is this a credible idea or just political point scoring?

for your information there is to be a climate change bill to be published this week. Miliband, environment minster, wants carbon taxes to be directed through to purely green clauses alhtough Gordon Brown seems to not be having any of it.

I think that a tv channel would benefit from covering environment issues, as it really seems to be a focus point in some sections of the media. I think a news type program that highlights environment news locally, nationally and internationally would be interesting as well.

In response to:More Questions

Sat, 10 Mar 2007 13:22:07 +0100

In response to the Moderator:
I think that the EU targets are a positive step. However, the real test is pulling over the USA and China over to the same ways of thinking. Bearing in my mind that these are vastly different cultures. With regard to the programme on Channel 4, I thought it was rubbish. The point of view, held by a few scientists that it is a folly because it’s just a natural climate change and some other reasons. It seemed a bit short on quality, more channel 5 than channel 4. A bit like that new Castaway programme on BBC 1. I digress.

I would not want this new channel to do ridiculous sensationalism programmes, why? Because it devalues everything else on the channel. Like the boy who cried wolf. It takes away the authenticity, and that is what I look for, in a world of Big Brothers, Celebrity shows and generally poor broadcasting. This theory would sit better if in the context of a general debate as to the causes of global warming.

In response to Freeman:
I think that’s a really good point about drawing parallel to smoking. Also, like drink-driving. I think if it is make lack of recycling socially unacceptable then that would be a great driving force. Maybe the television channel could show the impact of pollution by the individual and give people food for thought. Like, throwing litter, using cars and planes and then showing the cumulative effect without sounding like you are telling people what to do, instead, you are showing them the consequences of their actions and/or inactions.

As a general point, please look at this web-site http://environment.guardian.co.uk/
, I think it is very good and something I use. Also, notice how they link it to tv. Zoe Williams did an article about that Global warming swindle as well. It might be an idea to tie in the channel with newspapers such as these.

In response to:More Questions

Fri, 09 Mar 2007 22:53:02 +0100

I think it's an education issue - it needs to be a cultural thing to say that recycling is what we do. It shouldn't really be something that we feel massively smug about. It should just be what happens. Some sort of tax incentives would probably help but not as much as the frowns of friends if you don't. I think it'll be a bit like a viral marketing thing really. Maybe it'll be a bit like smoking; in a really short time it's gone from being ok to being really looked down on. That's the kind of shift that needs to happen with recycling (but obviously in the other direction). It will be much easier if the facilities are readily available. There have been 800,000 local authority jobs created in the last 9 years - maybe some of these guys could look at the environment.

Personally it's not too hard for me to do some recycling - my local council collect papers and bottles from the front door. But I try to do more than that and it's not always easy. For example, I don't run a car but then if recycling facilities are far away then it's a bit of a mixed message.

In response to:More Questions

Fri, 09 Mar 2007 17:16:44 +0100

That's really interesting - does anyone have any thoughts on the EU story in the papers today or 'The Great Global Warming Swindle' on Channel Four last night?

In response to:More Questions

Fri, 09 Mar 2007 12:56:12 +0100

For your interest, in today’s papers it was stated that the EU nations could agree a binding target of producing 20% of their energy from renewable sources by 2020. Interesting as it gives flexibility as to how each EU country would contribute to the overall goal. However, these proposals are subject to negotiations and will probably be compromised in the end, especially if they try and get the G8 involved. But at least there is some political will in good intentions, how far will they go?

I think this is a point for what we can do as individuals that each community will be different and therefore may require different actions, so if your community is in some island up in the north see you could probably generate more power from wind etc?

I was also thinking, as a digression that the television channel should debate how our future generations will perceive us if there is an adverse change in climate through man-made actions. This could be a driving force, as that song goes, “if you tolerate this then your children will be next”. If politicians are as vain as I think they are, you know like Blair being concerned with his legacy, would it not be good to highlight that these governments were presented with the facts and did not do enough to stop the change. Although, this may cross the border of scare mongering and sensationalism.

Did anyone watch that Global Watching Swindle programme t’other night?

In response to:More Questions

Thu, 08 Mar 2007 20:12:54 +0100

(a) The practical things that I and other could do include recycling: cardboard/paper; glass and clothes (local bins) although these are pain in the watsits without a car.
Using public transport (and not drive cars unnecessarily). This is a personal choice and London is so well connected with trains, tubes and buses that most journeys are probably quicker by public transport. If not in London, car-sharing may be optional in suburbs and this could be encouraged by employers, government and media with cash or tax incentives.

I think the individual should be responsible for the sorting the waste, or if the council, then burden the cost by paying more council tax. I would prefer to sort my own or have the option to as I resent paying inordinate council tax bills. Maybe there should be a means tested council tax. The more you personally recycle the less you pay. Although, this may not be practical at all.

Responsibility in the community – pro-active things should be encouraged, for example, like community initiatives such as conservation. This, I think this could be promoted through TV and websites that offer local forums where people discuss, maybe with local planning officer from the council. Jeremy Paxman stated, take more pride in the community where we live, and this is a concept that should be taught at home, at school and at work. This largely comes down to the individual to take responsibility, however, if you are born on a council estate in Peckham, you are hardly going to get excited about the smells and sights that perfume your neighbourhood. This is where it gets all sociologically and complex.

I think that any prohibitive measures should be for people polluting the environment more than they have to. Big cars; littering; using airplanes could be targeted. Like with the congestion charge or higher airport tax.

This also asks questions of the role of the state on the everyday life, however, I think that it would be great to see a positive environmental campaign be pursued through our media. But, I really believe that nothing will be actioned without some form of legislation. Unless there was some massive media campaign, but I can’t see that happening independently of Westminster.

(b) I feel that recycling is a very hard thing to do. Especially, as JT mentioned, as the council will not make it straight forward procedure. For instance, my local recycling bins are about a mile and a half away. Now, I need a petrol guzzling Jeep just to tow my recycled waste all the way down. However, this is me being lazy, and I know that I should really buck my ideas up. But, like others, I feel that the issue of environment, unless I see a dirty street, is an abstract concept: there is nothing tangible to remind us that the earth is going to be negatively effected. My friends and I, actually, never talk about the environment; it’s not a buzz topic. In my flat, last year, I got annoyed with the person who instigated the glass recycling because they never emptied it, and my other flatmate ended up putting it in the normal bin because our kitchen began to smell like the soiled trousers of a tramp who had just run 10km on a mid-summer’s day. Although, most of my friends in London do not have a car, yet, I feel this is down to the practical rather than any moral reason.

(c) I suppose I could recycle more; and do more in the community but I suppose the government (local and national) need to meet me half way, it is not as easy I would like it to be, but, that is the cost of trying to save the world.