Hello and welcome to the brand new Biased BBC site! It’s a revolution in design and I hope you will have a look around and settle in to this new look site.
Of course these things take a lot of work and that’s why my first responsibility is to express my sincere thanks to Geoff – he from All Seeing Eye – without whose enthusiasm, good humour and sustained effort this would not have been possible. I also want to publicly thank G.O.T. (Warning; sweary blog!) for his excellent and visionary work here. We owe these two fine gentlemen thanks for bringing this work to fruition and I doff my cap to both. This is also a work in progress so please bear with us as we finesse and complete. Now, to deal with the BBC…
Nice new look Dave. Thanks for all the hard work you’ve put in.
HoweverThat happy snap of yours does look a lot like Abu Bowen.
Pounce
Nice new look Dave. Thanks for all the hard work you’ve put in.
HoweverThat happy snap of yours does look a lot like Abu Bowen.
Pounce
I can maximize the comment box with Firefox 3.
I can maximize the comment box with Firefox 3.
I can maximize the comment box with Firefox 3.
Fantastic new banner by the way! Looks splendid.
Fantastic new banner by the way! Looks splendid.
Fantastic new banner by the way! Looks splendid.
Much as I think that David Vance’s heart is in the right place, he’s not the reason I visit Biased BBC. With Natalie, Laban and Ed offering less and less input, it’s in the comments that one finds the best observations. However, it appears that this particular archive of BBC bias has been cast aside. I can’t imagine how pissed off David Preiser must feel to visit this site today only to discover that his lengthy fisking off Peter Marshall, posted early this morning, has now vanished. Instead we get more of Mr Vance’s trademark knee-jerk responses to news reports, the supposed bias of which are often tenuous and more to do with the BBC simply reporting stuff he doesn’t like.
I notice that, apart from the prominent photo and bio of David at the top left of the new layout, the bottom of the website reads “Copyright © David Vance 2004-2009 and the respective owners whoever they may be.” He should consider making his picture even more dominant, and perhaps changing the header to “David Vance’s Biased BBC” (with his name much bigger, naturally).
Much as I think that David Vance’s heart is in the right place, he’s not the reason I visit Biased BBC. With Natalie, Laban and Ed offering less and less input, it’s in the comments that one finds the best observations. However, it appears that this particular archive of BBC bias has been cast aside. I can’t imagine how pissed off David Preiser must feel to visit this site today only to discover that his lengthy fisking off Peter Marshall, posted early this morning, has now vanished. Instead we get more of Mr Vance’s trademark knee-jerk responses to news reports, the supposed bias of which are often tenuous and more to do with the BBC simply reporting stuff he doesn’t like.
I notice that, apart from the prominent photo and bio of David at the top left of the new layout, the bottom of the website reads “Copyright © David Vance 2004-2009 and the respective owners whoever they may be.” He should consider making his picture even more dominant, and perhaps changing the header to “David Vance’s Biased BBC” (with his name much bigger, naturally).
Much as I think that David Vance’s heart is in the right place, he’s not the reason I visit Biased BBC. With Natalie, Laban and Ed offering less and less input, it’s in the comments that one finds the best observations. However, it appears that this particular archive of BBC bias has been cast aside. I can’t imagine how pissed off David Preiser must feel to visit this site today only to discover that his lengthy fisking off Peter Marshall, posted early this morning, has now vanished. Instead we get more of Mr Vance’s trademark knee-jerk responses to news reports, the supposed bias of which are often tenuous and more to do with the BBC simply reporting stuff he doesn’t like.
I notice that, apart from the prominent photo and bio of David at the top left of the new layout, the bottom of the website reads “Copyright © David Vance 2004-2009 and the respective owners whoever they may be.” He should consider making his picture even more dominant, and perhaps changing the header to “David Vance’s Biased BBC” (with his name much bigger, naturally).
Sorry to sound harsh, but ooof. Nice try but the humongous top banner and addition of extra images and widgets really don’t make for the smoothest or fastest of vewing. Very Blockbusters.
Google and Yahoo! search – in case people get lost on the internet?
Who thought that photo of David Vance was of useable quality? And welcome to the DV show..
More doesn’t necessarily mean better – focus on the content.
Sorry to sound harsh, but ooof. Nice try but the humongous top banner and addition of extra images and widgets really don’t make for the smoothest or fastest of vewing. Very Blockbusters.
Google and Yahoo! search – in case people get lost on the internet?
Who thought that photo of David Vance was of useable quality? And welcome to the DV show..
More doesn’t necessarily mean better – focus on the content.
Sorry to sound harsh, but ooof. Nice try but the humongous top banner and addition of extra images and widgets really don’t make for the smoothest or fastest of vewing. Very Blockbusters.
Google and Yahoo! search – in case people get lost on the internet?
Who thought that photo of David Vance was of useable quality? And welcome to the DV show..
More doesn’t necessarily mean better – focus on the content.
The site does look really neat – but lets not dwell on style over content.
Just one thought – shouldn’t the letters “BBC” be upright and not italic? After all it cost the license payer a fortune when the BBC changed it for reasons only known to themselves.
Jon
The site does look really neat – but lets not dwell on style over content.
Just one thought – shouldn’t the letters “BBC” be upright and not italic? After all it cost the license payer a fortune when the BBC changed it for reasons only known to themselves.
Jon
The site does look really neat – but lets not dwell on style over content.
Just one thought – shouldn’t the letters “BBC” be upright and not italic? After all it cost the license payer a fortune when the BBC changed it for reasons only known to themselves.
Jon
Thanks to all for compliments and brickbats.
I do not mean to make this the DV show and am sorry if some think that. Not my plan, I am simply providing content and others are able to do likewise. If they don’t, is that my fault? If it’s just open threads you want then you can have them.
There has been a lot of work gone into this and unlike the BBC, it is done without any charge to anyone, except those who have spent their time working on this.
Thanks to all for compliments and brickbats.
I do not mean to make this the DV show and am sorry if some think that. Not my plan, I am simply providing content and others are able to do likewise. If they don’t, is that my fault? If it’s just open threads you want then you can have them.
There has been a lot of work gone into this and unlike the BBC, it is done without any charge to anyone, except those who have spent their time working on this.
Thanks to all for compliments and brickbats.
I do not mean to make this the DV show and am sorry if some think that. Not my plan, I am simply providing content and others are able to do likewise. If they don’t, is that my fault? If it’s just open threads you want then you can have them.
There has been a lot of work gone into this and unlike the BBC, it is done without any charge to anyone, except those who have spent their time working on this.
Obviously work on the site design is continuing – but meanwhilehere are someimmediate comments:
1 No offence, David, but I really feel the bio stuff about you should not be so prominent. It should be at the right side – or at the foot. Much of the real strength of the site comes from the comments from all and sundry – yes, you and others kick things off with specific postings, but you should not allow the site to be portrayed as mainly the “rantings” of a handful of individuals such as yourself.
2 The previous design had various quotes from senior BBC people that confirmed and condemned the endemic bias at the BBC. That stuff needs to be put back in – and very prominently. For new visitors to the site, it was a real eye-opener – and a standing rebuke to all the Beeboids who claim no bias. So, the self-condemnatory BBC statements should be reinstated, maybe with some updating. It should IMHO be the top item on the left hand side, I think.
3 My browser does not allow enlargement of the comments box. Also, I have to scroll way down the screen before I reach any entries about BBC bias.
4 Losing the archives would be a tragedy. How can they be accessed ?
5 I lie the bold new banner – but I rather doubt whether the links at the lower line of the banner should all be there. Why link to Tangled Web and All Seeing Eye, for example ? And why to Biased-BBC Forum ?
6 It is essential to allow us to post links easily – not using HTML.
Obviously work on the site design is continuing – but meanwhilehere are someimmediate comments:
1 No offence, David, but I really feel the bio stuff about you should not be so prominent. It should be at the right side – or at the foot. Much of the real strength of the site comes from the comments from all and sundry – yes, you and others kick things off with specific postings, but you should not allow the site to be portrayed as mainly the “rantings” of a handful of individuals such as yourself.
2 The previous design had various quotes from senior BBC people that confirmed and condemned the endemic bias at the BBC. That stuff needs to be put back in – and very prominently. For new visitors to the site, it was a real eye-opener – and a standing rebuke to all the Beeboids who claim no bias. So, the self-condemnatory BBC statements should be reinstated, maybe with some updating. It should IMHO be the top item on the left hand side, I think.
3 My browser does not allow enlargement of the comments box. Also, I have to scroll way down the screen before I reach any entries about BBC bias.
4 Losing the archives would be a tragedy. How can they be accessed ?
5 I lie the bold new banner – but I rather doubt whether the links at the lower line of the banner should all be there. Why link to Tangled Web and All Seeing Eye, for example ? And why to Biased-BBC Forum ?
6 It is essential to allow us to post links easily – not using HTML.
Obviously work on the site design is continuing – but meanwhilehere are someimmediate comments:
1 No offence, David, but I really feel the bio stuff about you should not be so prominent. It should be at the right side – or at the foot. Much of the real strength of the site comes from the comments from all and sundry – yes, you and others kick things off with specific postings, but you should not allow the site to be portrayed as mainly the “rantings” of a handful of individuals such as yourself.
2 The previous design had various quotes from senior BBC people that confirmed and condemned the endemic bias at the BBC. That stuff needs to be put back in – and very prominently. For new visitors to the site, it was a real eye-opener – and a standing rebuke to all the Beeboids who claim no bias. So, the self-condemnatory BBC statements should be reinstated, maybe with some updating. It should IMHO be the top item on the left hand side, I think.
3 My browser does not allow enlargement of the comments box. Also, I have to scroll way down the screen before I reach any entries about BBC bias.
4 Losing the archives would be a tragedy. How can they be accessed ?
5 I lie the bold new banner – but I rather doubt whether the links at the lower line of the banner should all be there. Why link to Tangled Web and All Seeing Eye, for example ? And why to Biased-BBC Forum ?
6 It is essential to allow us to post links easily – not using HTML.
7 Also – the comments box does not allow me to click on links others have posted. And the word-verification thingy is surely unnecessary ? And I am now forced to type in “JohnA” each time, I don’t want to use the GGogle stuff. (What was wrong with haloscan – it seems better than the rather tiresome new scheme ! If it works….don’t fix it !)
7 Also – the comments box does not allow me to click on links others have posted. And the word-verification thingy is surely unnecessary ? And I am now forced to type in “JohnA” each time, I don’t want to use the GGogle stuff. (What was wrong with haloscan – it seems better than the rather tiresome new scheme ! If it works….don’t fix it !)
7 Also – the comments box does not allow me to click on links others have posted. And the word-verification thingy is surely unnecessary ? And I am now forced to type in “JohnA” each time, I don’t want to use the GGogle stuff. (What was wrong with haloscan – it seems better than the rather tiresome new scheme ! If it works….don’t fix it !)
Looks terrific. Congrats to all involved. Considering this is all maintained and worked on by individuals in their free time I really do think a few around here could offer their instant criticism in gentler tones. It is starting to read a little obnoxiously. I am sure changes are still being made. It only went live today for crying out loud. If people feel so strongly about the profile then they need to get a bit of a grip. Surely that is up to the people who run the site. Criticism of the actual active elements of the site is probably useful as is concern re commenting. All the rest is subjective waffle.
Well done to all involved. It looks great.
Looks terrific. Congrats to all involved. Considering this is all maintained and worked on by individuals in their free time I really do think a few around here could offer their instant criticism in gentler tones. It is starting to read a little obnoxiously. I am sure changes are still being made. It only went live today for crying out loud. If people feel so strongly about the profile then they need to get a bit of a grip. Surely that is up to the people who run the site. Criticism of the actual active elements of the site is probably useful as is concern re commenting. All the rest is subjective waffle.
Well done to all involved. It looks great.
Looks terrific. Congrats to all involved. Considering this is all maintained and worked on by individuals in their free time I really do think a few around here could offer their instant criticism in gentler tones. It is starting to read a little obnoxiously. I am sure changes are still being made. It only went live today for crying out loud. If people feel so strongly about the profile then they need to get a bit of a grip. Surely that is up to the people who run the site. Criticism of the actual active elements of the site is probably useful as is concern re commenting. All the rest is subjective waffle.
Well done to all involved. It looks great.
Geoff said “it works fine in Firefox”… alas, not on my brand new version 3.0.10 it don’t – no word appears in the verification window? I’m accessing through ‘chrome’. Any ideas Geoff?
Geoff said “it works fine in Firefox”… alas, not on my brand new version 3.0.10 it don’t – no word appears in the verification window? I’m accessing through ‘chrome’. Any ideas Geoff?
Geoff said “it works fine in Firefox”… alas, not on my brand new version 3.0.10 it don’t – no word appears in the verification window? I’m accessing through ‘chrome’. Any ideas Geoff?
Hmmm, it’s not letting me post comments all of a sudden. I had to close the comment window, refresh the main page and then come back. This is the second time it’s happened. I wonder what gives?
I also agree that some of the criticism on the new site has been a little on the obnoxious side….I guess those users who think that B-BBC is “all about the comments” should maybe go start their own forum somewhere else! The blog authors are the Christmas trees from which the comment baubles hang. Sorry for the mind-numbingly awful analogy, I think I have swine flu (I’m serious)
Hmmm, it’s not letting me post comments all of a sudden. I had to close the comment window, refresh the main page and then come back. This is the second time it’s happened. I wonder what gives?
I also agree that some of the criticism on the new site has been a little on the obnoxious side….I guess those users who think that B-BBC is “all about the comments” should maybe go start their own forum somewhere else! The blog authors are the Christmas trees from which the comment baubles hang. Sorry for the mind-numbingly awful analogy, I think I have swine flu (I’m serious)
Hmmm, it’s not letting me post comments all of a sudden. I had to close the comment window, refresh the main page and then come back. This is the second time it’s happened. I wonder what gives?
I also agree that some of the criticism on the new site has been a little on the obnoxious side….I guess those users who think that B-BBC is “all about the comments” should maybe go start their own forum somewhere else! The blog authors are the Christmas trees from which the comment baubles hang. Sorry for the mind-numbingly awful analogy, I think I have swine flu (I’m serious)
Maybe the bio could be put in the profile link blogger uses, which would take it off the front page.
If people feel really strongly about the archives and they can be accessed then we could go back to the old site which I could update from within rather than a direct download from something else. Geoff found this download there are 160 of them free for blogger and it looks fantastic but there are others.
Perhaps a simple widening of the writing area would have done?
I know there is a way to minimise the left hand column….. and widen the middle section if you’d prefer that?
I did offer updating from within without losing content ……
If there is anything I can do…..????
I don’t like the massive banner or the BNP colour scheme.
Maybe the bio could be put in the profile link blogger uses, which would take it off the front page.
If people feel really strongly about the archives and they can be accessed then we could go back to the old site which I could update from within rather than a direct download from something else. Geoff found this download there are 160 of them free for blogger and it looks fantastic but there are others.
Perhaps a simple widening of the writing area would have done?
I know there is a way to minimise the left hand column….. and widen the middle section if you’d prefer that?
I did offer updating from within without losing content ……
If there is anything I can do…..????
I don’t like the massive banner or the BNP colour scheme.
Maybe the bio could be put in the profile link blogger uses, which would take it off the front page.
If people feel really strongly about the archives and they can be accessed then we could go back to the old site which I could update from within rather than a direct download from something else. Geoff found this download there are 160 of them free for blogger and it looks fantastic but there are others.
Perhaps a simple widening of the writing area would have done?
I know there is a way to minimise the left hand column….. and widen the middle section if you’d prefer that?
I did offer updating from within without losing content ……
If there is anything I can do…..????
I don’t like the massive banner or the BNP colour scheme.
David,
Can you clarify what’s happened to the old Haloscan comments? If we’ve lost seven years of exposing BBC bias in the comments section, that’d be a great pity.
David,
Can you clarify what’s happened to the old Haloscan comments? If we’ve lost seven years of exposing BBC bias in the comments section, that’d be a great pity.
David,
Can you clarify what’s happened to the old Haloscan comments? If we’ve lost seven years of exposing BBC bias in the comments section, that’d be a great pity.
BNP color scheme? Oh so the colors red, white and blue are taboo now? Get out of here! I suppose you would frown upon anyone with a British bulldog too?
BNP color scheme? Oh so the colors red, white and blue are taboo now? Get out of here! I suppose you would frown upon anyone with a British bulldog too?
BNP color scheme? Oh so the colors red, white and blue are taboo now? Get out of here! I suppose you would frown upon anyone with a British bulldog too?
The halo scan comments ought to e still over at haloscan. Who is the biased bbc account holder?
The halo scan comments ought to e still over at haloscan. Who is the biased bbc account holder?
The halo scan comments ought to e still over at haloscan. Who is the biased bbc account holder?