Newsbot Posted October 10, 2007 Share Posted October 10, 2007 A political pressure group wants to see the proceedings of Tynwald Court made available to view on the internet. Source : http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/rss/-/1/hi/world/...man/7037008.stm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Albert Tatlock Posted October 10, 2007 Share Posted October 10, 2007 I'd rather it be made available on the radio e.g. AM broadcast. With only 50% of the public on the Internet it will be 'elite' viewing otherwise - unless it is made available in e.g. all of the town halls/libraries etc. Plus if people know they are on TV they have a habit of playing to the audience - and we'll soon have the 'spin-to-win, T-Factor' which IMO will further demean Manx politics. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moghrey Mie Posted October 10, 2007 Share Posted October 10, 2007 A political pressure group wants to see the proceedings of Tynwald Court made available to view on the internet. Source : http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/rss/-/1/hi/world/...man/7037008.stm It would be more useful to show the Select Committees at work. A lot of good work goes into those and most people don't know what they do. Just think we could have sat at home and watched the Mount Murray affair from the comfort of our own homes too. I think webcasting would help to explain to people what goes on. As regards cost they spend millions without batting an eyelid. But when it comes to a few thousand for webcasting they'll probably say they can't afford it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lost Login Posted October 10, 2007 Share Posted October 10, 2007 I have to question how many would actually log on to view but that is neither here nor there if the price is right. With regard to the price I heard the interview on Mandate with the PAG guy yesterday where he quoted a cost of £40,000. When questioned that turned out to be per chamber so presumably if it was to cover select committees as well that would be at least 3 lots of £40,000 per year. This though appeared to be the cost of hosting and web costs etc. I am not sure if it included costs of the equipment etc as it was not exactly clear what was included in the costs from the interview but from their web site it would apear to be included. What was not included in the £40,000 per unit are any staffing costs. Presumably these would be required to man the cameras, and then do all the down loading, editing, referencing etc etc. I would be interested in seing a costing for the complete coverage and hosting, referencing etc etc including staffing costs as at present the PAG guy was acting rather in a way that the government is accused of doing. In that strictly the cost per chamber for the equipment may be in the region of £40,000 so the stement he gave was truthful but the impression he gave was that the £40,000 was the total costs until actually questioned which was misleading. Presumably it was a deliberately policy to make the option seem cheaper than it really is whilst still being strictly truthful. It would be more useful to show the Select Committees at work. A lot of good work goes into those and most people don't know what they do. Just think we could have sat at home and watched the Mount Murray affair from the comfort of our own homes too. I think webcasting would help to explain to people what goes on. As regards cost they spend millions without batting an eyelid. But when it comes to a few thousand for webcasting they'll probably say they can't afford it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tempus Fugit Posted October 10, 2007 Share Posted October 10, 2007 camstreams.com is cheaper than £40,000 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keyboarder Posted October 10, 2007 Share Posted October 10, 2007 Plus if people know they are on TV they have a habit of playing to the audience - and we'll soon have the 'spin-to-win, T-Factor' which IMO will further demean Manx politics. Oh, I dunno. " Tony Brown, Come On Down " has a certain appeal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
When Skies Are Grey Posted October 10, 2007 Share Posted October 10, 2007 Plus if people know they are on TV they have a habit of playing to the audience - and we'll soon have the 'spin-to-win, T-Factor' which IMO will further demean Manx politics. Oh, I dunno. " Tony Brown, Come On Down " has a certain appeal. although they may struggle if they have to phone a friend! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mona Posted October 10, 2007 Share Posted October 10, 2007 Manx Radio engineers reckoned it would cost £80,000. They put in the "Hi-tech" voting system, that has failed on occasion. Apparently the screens at either end of the chamber cannot be read. "Format>>font>>increase size" would help. The orientation of the screens are at 90 degrees to the chamber that they are depicting - so another display of inadequacy there I'm afraid. If the screen font is increased and the 'graphic' is rotated 90 degree to make it easier to read during the next sessions of Tynwald then I might know that Manx Radio Computer Systems Engineers read this forum. I think the PAG guy has a very good point. Even if they do not have an all singing all dancing webcast then I am sure it would be relatively cheap (<£10,000k) to install a sound system that is web broadcastable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluemonday Posted October 10, 2007 Share Posted October 10, 2007 Will it beat Big Brother in the ratings? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Albert Tatlock Posted October 10, 2007 Share Posted October 10, 2007 Manx Radio engineers reckoned it would cost £80,000. What a rip-off - what's the real gain between seeing someone stand up and speak, or just listening to them on Manx radio (even perhaps with a simple wireless webcam)? If budgets are tightening up, I'd rather the money went to keeping something sensible open or operating. How many people are really likely to watch this on a regular basis - only a handful I suspect - and you can guarantee when some hot topic is eventually debated it will soon be overloaded. Anyhoo, they should consider putting in motion detectors first. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lost Login Posted October 10, 2007 Share Posted October 10, 2007 I can not comment on that but it does seem a bit pointless as I really struggle to see that it would have a tremendous amount of use. I have tuned in to the odd debate on the radio and unless you had a specific interest in a topic due to be discussed it is not something I can see many listening in to just to catch up on what was said. One of the reasons's given by the PAG guy that the system was required was that presently Hansard takes 2/3 weeks to be prepared. If that is a primary reason and it is such a critical matter to get out quicker then I would suggest spending the money on speeding up Hansard and ensuring you can access via the web Manx Radios recordings. Especially as I expect there will be a delay anyway getting it put on line while they do the editing, cross referencing, adding links, key words etc etc. What a rip-off - what's the real gain between seeing someone stand up and speak, or just listening to them on Manx radio (even perhaps with a simple wireless webcam)? If budgets are tightening up, I'd rather the money went to keeping something sensible open or operating. How many people are really likely to watch this on a regular basis - only a handful I suspect - and you can guarantee when some hot topic is eventually debated it will soon be overloaded. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Declan Posted October 10, 2007 Share Posted October 10, 2007 If it means they all start behaving in the same pathetic manner that David Cameron did at Question Time today, I'm against it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pat Ayres Posted October 10, 2007 Share Posted October 10, 2007 The whole point would be that the sittings would not only be live and uncensored but would be available for a long time for reference reasons. There would be no need to edit the proceedings and downloading would be instantaneous. If the proceedings were broadcast immediately it may make the participants more likely to tell the truth and think about what they are saying. They will be accountable and recordable through a media that isn't controlled by the government. BUGGER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I knew there would be a flaw in the proposal, the web isn't controlled by the government, at least not the open web. fancy letting out the actually truthful actions that occur on the hill by Brown and co. What next, free press and uncensored radio? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cronky Posted October 10, 2007 Share Posted October 10, 2007 In a nutshell, it's a gimmick. The vast majority of people are not even going to bother once never mind on a regular basis. A small minority of political anoraks will delight in replaying the pieces that annoy them and use this to blow certain debates out of proportion. Some politicians will be aware of this and play to the internet gallery. Good point, however, about the three week delay in publishing Hansard. That is the real issue to address. How about making it availble in public libraries the next day ot even publishing it in the paper? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest ravabelli Posted October 10, 2007 Share Posted October 10, 2007 PAG have a meeting on Monday 22nd October at the Claremont covering webcasting with a webcast presentation by Keith Young, Chief Executive of 'public-i' followed by a Q&A session. Now why don't sceptics take time out from the keyboard and listen to what she has to say before making your mind up? Don't want to sound too much like a MHK do you. See you there. Link to PAG Meeting details. Link to PAG document. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.