Originally Posted by martyh (Post 35457595)

or the organisers could have simply asked for 50 performers to act in a sequence for the opening ceremony and some just happened to be from ethnic backgrounds which is hardly surprising given that even people from ethnic backgrounds may quite like the performing arts and even (and this may be a revelation to you so hang on to your britches) take part in them

Originally Posted by Gary L (Post 35457596)

Could be, but not for leaflets and literature.

Originally Posted by martyh (Post 35457597)

why?

Originally Posted by Maggy J (Post 35457599)

Funny thing.My husband loves the cycling and managed to watch yesterday and is watching today with no effort required to understand what is happening..But then I guess he's another person who knows nothing about a the sport :rolleyes:

Originally Posted by Gary L (Post 35457598)

Because you don't ask for volunteers. you have to pick them.

Originally Posted by martyh (Post 35457603)

nonsense

Originally Posted by Gary L (Post 35457604)

Why?

Originally Posted by martyh (Post 35457605)

because as usual you are seeing conspiracy where there is none

Originally Posted by Gary L (Post 35457606)

There's no conspiracy. it's just there. as clear as 2 colours.

as I said. I have no problem with it. but it does come across as patronising.

Originally Posted by mertle (Post 35457555)

thanks danielf what maggy fails to understand this info critical to watching the spectacle. Its like watch tennis not given the scores.

Cap it they did not show the bronze finish very well.

Incidently new issue India going ape aparantly.

Some women who they dont know not part indian olympic team.

Not sure even if she locog stood next to flag hogging limelight got trunkated coverage.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-india-19035583

Maybe we should do rendition of madona's whose that girl.

https://www.cableforum.co.uk/images/local/2012/07/3.jpg

I hope all these problems ironed out.

Originally Posted by martyh (Post 35457611)

they are just there because they where just there not because someone said "get me some actors and models and make sure some are black"

Originally Posted by Maggy J (Post 35457612)

Originally Posted by Gary L (Post 35457614)

You can only hope and guess. you can't know.

do you agree that it was a concious decision for the black and white couple and their child they used?

or was it just the woman said I want to play the part of his wife?

Originally Posted by martyh (Post 35457622)

no i don't agree ,it could have been and it could have been just coincidence either way it doesn't matter .If they deliberately chose a black and white couple they must have "hand picked" a white person just as much as they "hand picked" a black person .

Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 35457626)

Are we talking about the lad and girl in the music sequence? (where he finds her phone).

Originally Posted by Gary L (Post 35457623)

No, I don't mean a concious decision of which 2 faces they used. I mean a concious decision to use a black and white couple to depict as a typical British family.

you have to take into account that this is being broadcast all over the world. so with that reasoning you have to wonder if and even why they wanted to depict the typical British family in this way.

you have to remember that a lot of countries won't know what a typical British family is. and this is what they will think it actually is.

Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 35457626)

Are we talking about the lad and girl in the music sequence? (where he finds her phone).

Originally Posted by martyh (Post 35457629)

I saw it as a typical British family who happened to be of mixed colours ,which of course is quite normal in most countries including this one.

Originally Posted by martyh (Post 35457629)

It's the sequence immediately after mr bean where the mum and her son are coming home in the mini.

Originally Posted by gazzae (Post 35457572)

Were you not complaining when a Welsh player was called English?

Originally Posted by martyh (Post 35457629)

I saw it as a typical British family who happened to be of mixed colours ,which of course is quite normal in most countries including this one.

Originally Posted by Russ (Post 35457666)

The Daily Mail (unsurprisingly) kicked off over this one and for once, I partially see their point. They were saying it did not represent British families as a whole etc and I have to agree.

Having lived in Leicester for 2 years I would say multiculturalism is the norm. People of all colours, all over the place so in that instance (or as the Mail put it, an 'ethnic' person in each scene) the ceremony got it right.

However back in my home town, a small Welsh village where 99% (my estimate) of people are white, it's very much wasted and certainly not representative. Don't get me wrong, it's not a massive thing but for once the Mail kind of has a point.

Originally Posted by Maggy J (Post 35457692)

Must be me then because I never even noticed..let alone thought to comment about it..and I suggest that the vast majority didn't notice either..or more to the point didn't actually care until the Daily Fail pointed it out.

Originally Posted by me

Don't get me wrong, it's not a massive thing but for once the Mail kind of has a point

Originally Posted by Russ (Post 35457666)

However back in my home town, a small Welsh village where 99% (my estimate) of people are white, it's very much wasted and certainly not representative. Don't get me wrong, it's not a massive thing but for once the Mail kind of has a point.

Originally Posted by Damien (Post 35457698)

More and more people live in larger cities. It's not the norm but neither is it abnormal and the Opening Ceremony should showcase as much as the nation as possible. So while The Mail is right in that it doesn't represent the majority of couples it's a facile point and they are blowing it out of proportion in order to pander to what they perceive their readers' prejudices to be. The idea you can be outraged at the display of multiculturalism in a Opening Ceremony based in London is something only the Mail, and maybe The Express, can pull off.

It's just a shame that in a Opening Ceremony that has been widely praised around the world and at home The Mail chooses to focus on the race of it's participants. There was a tribute to the 'green and pleasant lands' of Jerusalem before giving way to the industrial revolution, a tribute to the health service and to children's literature, a tribute to our musical and comedic history. However Danny Boyle had the temerity to cast a ethnic minority in a big role and The Daily Mail hits the outrage button and throws it's toys at our the pram. It's pathetic. The Mail has a point but the real question is, who cares? It's not that The Mail is factually wrong, it's that it thinks it matters in the first place.

However this is what they want. They are professional trolls and hate-mongers. They know what they are doing. A person who visits the story in anger counts just as much as someone who visits it in support, they show up just the same in the hits and the ad revenue. Best thing we can do is ignore them, or at least don't visit their website.

Originally Posted by Damien (Post 35457698)

More and more people live in larger cities. It's not the norm but neither is it abnormal and the Opening Ceremony should showcase as much as the nation as possible. So while The Mail is right in that it doesn't represent the majority of couples it's a facile point and they are blowing it out of proportion in order to pander to what they perceive their readers' prejudices to be. The idea you can be outraged at the display of multiculturalism in a Opening Ceremony based in London is something only the Mail, and maybe The Express, can pull off.

It's just a shame that in a Opening Ceremony that has been widely praised around the world and at home The Mail chooses to focus on the race of it's participants. There was a tribute to the 'green and pleasant lands' of Jerusalem before giving way to the industrial revolution, a tribute to the health service and to children's literature, a tribute to our musical and comedic history. However Danny Boyle had the temerity to cast a ethnic minority in a big role and The Daily Mail hits the outrage button and throws it's toys at our the pram. It's pathetic. The Mail has a point but the real question is, who cares? It's not that The Mail is factually wrong, it's that it thinks it matters in the first place.

However this is what they want. They are professional trolls and hate-mongers. They know what they are doing. A person who visits the story in anger counts just as much as someone who visits it in support, they show up just the same in the hits and the ad revenue. Best thing we can do is ignore them, or at least don't visit their website.

Originally Posted by Russ (Post 35457666)

The Daily Mail (unsurprisingly) kicked off over this one and for once, I partially see their point. They were saying it did not represent British families as a whole etc and I have to agree.

Originally Posted by martyh (Post 35457707)

That pretty much says what i was trying to get across .I think the point was not that we have multicultural families and feel the need to boast about it and feel all righteous about it but that we don't really care and attach no importance to it ........IT'S NO BIGGIE

Originally Posted by Damien (Post 35457698)

More and more people live in larger cities. It's not the norm but neither is it abnormal and the Opening Ceremony should showcase as much as the nation as possible. So while The Mail is right in that it doesn't represent the majority of couples it's a facile point and they are blowing it out of proportion in order to pander to what they perceive their readers' prejudices to be. The idea you can be outraged at the display of multiculturalism in a Opening Ceremony based in London is something only the Mail, and maybe The Express, can pull off.

It's just a shame that in a Opening Ceremony that has been widely praised around the world and at home The Mail chooses to focus on the race of it's participants. There was a tribute to the 'green and pleasant lands' of Jerusalem before giving way to the industrial revolution, a tribute to the health service and to children's literature, a tribute to our musical and comedic history. However Danny Boyle had the temerity to cast a ethnic minority in a big role and The Daily Mail hits the outrage button and throws it's toys at our the pram. It's pathetic. The Mail has a point but the real question is, who cares? It's not that The Mail is factually wrong, it's that it thinks it matters in the first place.

However this is what they want. They are professional trolls and hate-mongers. They know what they are doing. A person who visits the story in anger counts just as much as someone who visits it in support, they show up just the same in the hits and the ad revenue. Best thing we can do is ignore them, or at least don't visit their website.

Originally Posted by Damien (Post 35457698)

More and more people live in larger cities. It's not the norm but neither is it abnormal and the Opening Ceremony should showcase as much as the nation as possible. So while The Mail is right in that it doesn't represent the majority of couples it's a facile point and they are blowing it out of proportion in order to pander to what they perceive their readers' prejudices to be. The idea you can be outraged at the display of multiculturalism in a Opening Ceremony based in London is something only the Mail, and maybe The Express, can pull off.

It's just a shame that in a Opening Ceremony that has been widely praised around the world and at home The Mail chooses to focus on the race of it's participants. There was a tribute to the 'green and pleasant lands' of Jerusalem before giving way to the industrial revolution, a tribute to the health service and to children's literature, a tribute to our musical and comedic history. However Danny Boyle had the temerity to cast a ethnic minority in a big role and The Daily Mail hits the outrage button and throws it's toys at our the pram. It's pathetic. The Mail has a point but the real question is, who cares? It's not that The Mail is factually wrong, it's that it thinks it matters in the first place.

However this is what they want. They are professional trolls and hate-mongers. They know what they are doing. A person who visits the story in anger counts just as much as someone who visits it in support, they show up just the same in the hits and the ad revenue. Best thing we can do is ignore them, or at least don't visit their website.

Originally Posted by Matt D (Post 35457273)

Nope - I hate watching sport. It bores me, even if it's Team GB at the Olympics or England at the football.

The TV will be showing it all non-stop... but only because Mrs D loves it all. I won't be watching.



Another story on it: http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2012...ony?CMP=twt_gu


No surprise really. NBC's coverage came in for criticism from the very beginning.

- No live-stream, just a time-delayed broadcast that began when the ceremony finished.

- The NBC presenters were ignorant of who Tim Berners-Lee was. Apparently they suggested to the audience that they just Google him, not knowing that if it wasn't for TBL in the first place they would not be able to Google TBL...

- Replacing the "memorial wall" section with a Ryan Seacrest interview :rolleyes:

Originally Posted by Gary L (Post 35457708)

It's because people try to be too nice. there was absolutely no reason why it couldn't have been just a plain and simple white family.

we had to go for the mixed relation to make a point. a point, an expression, a message to all.

you ask the person who decided on it. he'll tell you.

---------- Post added at 20:09 ---------- Previous post was at 20:08 ----------




You're delivering your own opinions again. which is good.
but they just read as fact sometimes :)

Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 35457745)

And there is absolutely no reason why it couldn't be the plain and simple family that they showed - it's only a big thing to those who think it is; I hadn't even noticed.... (which is why I asked the question earlier).

Originally Posted by Gary L (Post 35457747)

Like I said. ask the person who chose to use a white woman and a black man to depict a typical British family. he'll tell you he did it for a reason.

which therefore means that those who question his thinking have a valid point.

which is. why?

Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 35457749)

Straw man argument, Gary - you may think he/she thought that way, but that does not mean he/she thought that way, so your proposition is built on how you think they thought (because you may think that way), not on how they thought (because they may not think that way).

Originally Posted by Gary L (Post 35457751)

I've never played the devils advocaat before, but to prove a point that there was some sort of biast in the way Britains history and its present was represented in the olympics ceremony, is. were there any rich black business people in the industrial revolution era. as there were shown to be in the production?.

Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 35457745)

And there is absolutely no reason why it couldn't be the plain and simple family that they showed - it's only a big thing to those who think it is; I hadn't even noticed.... (which is why I asked the question earlier).

Originally Posted by Maggy J (Post 35457782)

It has only just occurred to me that my next door neighbour has a black partner and a mixed race son...:D

Originally Posted by Maggy J (Post 35457782)

It has only just occurred to me that my next door neighbour has a black partner and a mixed race son...:D

Originally Posted by Gary L (Post 35457751)

What?

Originally Posted by Gary L (Post 35457751)

I've never played the devils advocaat before.

Originally Posted by carlwaring (Post 35457794)

Originally Posted by Gary L (Post 35457804)

Thanks Carl, but it was the other part.

Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 35457749)

Straw man argument, Gary.

Originally Posted by Gary L (Post 35457751)

What?

Originally Posted by carlwaring (Post 35457808)

So I don't know what "other part" you're referring to :confused:

Originally Posted by Gary L (Post 35457810)

The rest after
Straw man argument, Gary.

Originally Posted by devilincarnate (Post 35457829)

My Nephew point this out this morning as he is the Solider in the middle of the three leaving Lords?

Sickening:mad:

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage...BY-KILLER.html

Originally Posted by danielf (Post 35457840)

Sour grapes from the Fail



Morons.

Originally Posted by danielf (Post 35457840)

Sour grapes from the Fail



Morons.

Originally Posted by carlwaring (Post 35457827)

Which was, basically, an explanation of why he considered it such an argument. So that first sentence summed it up.

Originally Posted by Damien (Post 35457870)

The Mail is going quite crazy over the Olympics....

Originally Posted by devilincarnate (Post 35457829)

Sickening:mad:

Originally Posted by Pierre (Post 35457873)

Not news though was it?

It was a comment in a column, an opinion, and like it or not she's entitled to give an opinion.

Originally Posted by danielf (Post 35457878)

And likewise, like it or not, I'm entitled to express my opinion that Jan Moir and the Daily Fail editorial board are a bunch of xenophobic Morons.

Originally Posted by Gary L (Post 35457876)

I'd let him stay in his job for a bit so he can rant at some more not so tolerant soldiers.

Originally Posted by Arthurgray50@blu (Post 35457885)

I find it really sad that these games are supposed to be the jewel for Britain, yet when these games are being televised, there must be more watching them at home than in the actual seats.

Originally Posted by Arthurgray50@blu (Post 35457885)

I understand that there were thousands of tickets sold, so why the empty seats - the old touts must be making a fortune.

I find it really sad that these games are supposed to be the jewel for Britain, yet when these games are being televised, there must be more watching them at home than in the actual seats.

Originally Posted by Damien (Post 35457870)

Well at least he is facing the sack. The soldiers I have encountered so far have been professional and helpful, shows what a blessing in disguise it was that G4S failed to provide enough staff..

Originally Posted by Damien (Post 35457905)

An album of the songs from the Opening Ceremony has been released and is doing quite well:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2012...ny-compilation




The best thing about it is not the common tracks (there aren't much of them anyway) but the music created for the ceremony itself like the song they played during the torch lighting (Caliban's Dream) and that which played during the industrial part (And I Will Kiss).

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Isles-Of-Won...54180&sr=301-1

Originally Posted by LSainsbury (Post 35457908)

CD quality is much better than MP3 / ACC.

Originally Posted by carlwaring (Post 35457909)

Wrong. Amazon MP3s are encoded at 320k whilst CDs are usually only 128k.

Originally Posted by carlwaring (Post 35457909)

Wrong. Amazon MP3s are encoded at 320k whilst CDs are usually only 128k.

Originally Posted by carlwaring (Post 35457909)

Wrong. Amazon MP3s are encoded at 320k whilst CDs are usually only 128k.

Originally Posted by carlwaring (Post 35457909)

Wrong. Amazon MP3s are encoded at 320k whilst CDs are usually only 128k.

Originally Posted by danielf (Post 35457913)

Then why is an 128k MP3 roughly 10% of the size of a WAV file? The bitrate of CDs is actually about 1411k.

Originally Posted by Maggy J (Post 35457906)

Originally Posted by danielf (Post 35457925)

And you just signed up to tell us about this nice little app?

Well, I'm not clicking that link...

Originally Posted by martyh (Post 35457217)

I want to know how people think the money spent has been wasted :confused:

Originally Posted by danielf (Post 35457925)

And you just signed up to tell us about this nice little app?

Well, I'm not clicking that link...

Originally Posted by LGray (Post 35457933)

I didn't actually so I'm disappointed you removed my link. This thread is about the London 2012 Olympic games and it's a Usain Bolt related app.....I just thought it was a bit of fun :-(

Originally Posted by LGray (Post 35457933)

I didn't actually so I'm disappointed you removed my link. This thread is about the London 2012 Olympic games and it's a Usain Bolt related app.....I just thought it was a bit of fun :-(

Originally Posted by LSainsbury (Post 35457942)

:p: :rofl:

CF 1 - 0 LGray

Originally Posted by danielf (Post 35457913)

Then why is an 128k MP3 roughly 10% of the size of a WAV file? The bitrate of CDs is actually about 1411k.

Originally Posted by carlwaring (Post 35457947)

I may have got the figures mixed up :o

Originally Posted by Gary L (Post 35457945)

I can make Gary L out of his name :)

Originally Posted by carlwaring (Post 35457947)

I may have got the figures mixed up :o

Originally Posted by LSainsbury (Post 35457942)

:p: :rofl:

CF 1 - 0 LGray

Originally Posted by Russ (Post 35457952)

Absolutely - if companies want to promote themselves on CF we have very attractive advertising rates.

If they don't want to pay then they will be dealt with :)

Originally Posted by Gary L (Post 35457945)

I can make Gary L out of his name :)

Originally Posted by LGray (Post 35457956)

Damn I was so close!

I am really a she though!

Originally Posted by carlwaring (Post 35457947)

I may have got the figures mixed up :blush:

Originally Posted by Gary L (Post 35457590)

But you do have to admit that they do go out of their way to get ethnic minorities into these kind of things. such as leaflets and literature.

not that it's a bad thing. but you can clearly see that they had to physically go out there and hand pick them if you like.

I'm not bothered either way. but you have to wonder whether it's sort of patronising to those who are hand picked.

With regards to the black and white couple. that was obviously a concious decision. which really imho was a bit pathetic.

Originally Posted by Chrysalis (Post 35457962)

I replied on that page and here is the gyst of what I posted.

I live in leicester which is a multi cultural area, many races living in one area which is fine.

However when I leave leics I do notice just about everyone I see is white, so I also know leics is not representative of the country as a whole. Also even in leicester I rarely see mixed race couples. So yes some people are racist, but also that the bbc are noticebly trying too hard to support mixed races.

Originally Posted by Maggy J (Post 35457230)

Now let me see.
A nice new world class stadium..
A nice new Olympic standard swimming stadium.
A new cycling stadium..along with a bmx track

A whole set of buildings in the Athletes village that will be used as flats by Londoners after the Olympics have long closed..2,818 new homes.all with parks with improved transport system.
Plus a whole lot more..

Why don't you actually do some damned research?

http://www.london2012.com/mm%5CDocum...t2_Neutral.pdf

Or is it just that you can't put your preconceived prejudices to one side.

Oh and remember these games were sought and gained under a Labour Government and completed by a Coalition government so scoring political points is pretty meaningless.:rolleyes:

Originally Posted by Chrysalis (Post 35457967)

your the one who has just brought politics into it. I just said I feel its a waste of money.

The problem with all that you listed is its all spent in london. What has been built and so forth will not be permanent, and there is football clubs currently fighting over the olympic stadium.

Originally Posted by Chrysalis (Post 35457962)

However when I leave leics I do notice just about everyone I see is white, so I also know leics is not representative of the country as a whole. Also even in leicester I rarely see mixed race couples. So yes some people are racist, but also that the bbc are noticebly trying too hard to support mixed races.

Originally Posted by Chrysalis (Post 35457967)

your the one who has just brought politics into it. I just said I feel its a waste of money.

The problem with all that you listed is its all spent in london. What has been built and so forth will not be permanent, and there is football clubs currently fighting over the olympic stadium.

Originally Posted by Damien (Post 35457978)

A lot of it will be permanent (not to mention the housing, retail and transport improvements made as a result). The Velodrome is staying to be part of a new cycling complex and will bid to have UCI World Track Championships. The Olympic Stadium will also host the 2017 World Athletics championships. The Aquatics Centre will remain and likely be at the center of future bids as it will become the main aquatic centre for London. The Hockey Centre will host the 2015 European Hockey Championships.

It will also be a 'tech city' (offices and such replacing the media center and other temporary buildings). The Athletes village will be turned into homes. The area will be a 'urban park'. All in all it's going to be a nice place in London combining three new and large sporting centre-pieces, homes and businesses in a green and pleasant area of London.