Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

BBC To Ditch "Tomorrow's World"

Posted by Hemos on from the replacing-the-past-with-tomorrow dept.

Pipsicola writes "The BBC news site reports their decision to ditch the Popular science show, Tomorrows World , after 30 years. It may not have had the most bleeding edge content (we often dubbed it 'Yesterdays World' ...), but it was one of the few programmes which fired the imagination of young British nerds. Several generations of Britain's scientists and technologists grew up watching TM. Lets hope the BBC fulfills its promise to replace it with more science-based shows using a different format. Which formats have worked in other countries I wonder?"

10 of 225 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Beyond 2000 by LostCluster · · Score: 3, Interesting

    TechTV seems to think Beyond 2000 makes a suitable replacement for Tomorrow's World on their lineup. Presently, the two shows are taking turns aring in the 8:30pm ET weeknight slot on the network.

    However, for some strange reason TechTV is starting with the 1997 episodes of Beyond 2000, even though the show is still in first-run production. Not yet clear what will happen when TechTV reaches the end of the 1997 episodes.

  2. Shame by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting
    The show really went downhill in the mid-90s, after which Howard Stableford and co left..

    They removed the Christmas quiz with people like Clive Sinclair as guests!
    And most importantly, the studio element of the show with scientific demonstrations etc.

    Phillipa Forrester really didn't have a clue (see the Brass Eye special), at least Adam Hart-Davis has something to do with science!

    Conclusion: bring back Howard Stableford (where is he now?!) and actually invite people in to show off cool stuff! :)

    1. Re:Shame by 91degrees · · Score: 2, Interesting

      It seems everyone except the BBC knows why the show started to fail. Give us real world demonstrations that we can relate to!

      Adam Hart Davies was great. It's a shame that everyone had already given up watching by the time he became a presenter. I didn't realise until it was announced that the show was being axed. Actually, perhaps they should have given him some creative control. "What the Romans did for us" had a lot of the elements that TW was missing. Hell, Local heroes did for that matter.

      Carol Voderman wasn't as smart as people gave her credit for either.

      Howard Stableford seems to still be around as a media presenter. I heard him on the radio last week talking about a family who live on an Alaskan island, miles away from any city.

    2. Re:Shame by Quboid · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Adam Hart Davies was great. It's a shame that everyone had already given up watching by the time he became a presenter. I didn't realise until it was announced that the show was being axed. Actually, perhaps they should have given him some creative control. "What the Romans did for us" had a lot of the elements that TW was missing. Hell, Local heroes did for that matter. Exactly the same here. I hadn't noticed either and probably would have tried watching it again if I'd known. So, here's the salvage plan if the BBC are listening... 1. As 91degrees suggests give Adam Hart Davis more control, and bring in whoever else he needs from Local Heroes and What The {Romans,Victorians,Tudors,Stewarts} Did For Us. 2. Move it to BBC2 at 8pm. It needs to be on early enough for children to watch but if it's on BBC1 then it is forced to compete with Coronation Street etc. on ITV. The 7pm slot is too early for the adults that want to watch it. ISTR it being on Thursday at 8pm when I found it compulsive viewing as a child. It also happens to be a very similar slot to the one occupied by What The * Did For Us. In the current TV climate I don't believe even the old TW would succeed on BBC1 in a prime-time slot. 3. Remove the emphasis on medical and environmental stuff. Bring back the gadgets and the get the inventors themselves in the studio. 4. Ensure that there is a much better mix of pre-recorded stories and studio stuff. Maybe if the BBC does this they'll end up with a show that people enjoy watching and feel as if they've gained something from it. It won't ever get the viewing figures that it used to get in the seventies and eighties but nothing could today.

  3. What seems to work well by mao+che+minh · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Instead of putting all of your efforts into one drawn out television series, focus instead on one or two strong mini-series of documentaries. "Blue Planet" and "Evolution" (PBS) come to mind as quick examples. The Discovery channel has made a market out of this kind of a thing, with all of the dinosaur and "what if" based shows. Good stuff, and the production quality (I.E. entertainment value) of such ventures are great. Next, interesting works of modern man are always entertaining, like "Modern Marvels". I'm sure that the producers could find some other interesting topic and make a similar show.

  4. This IS a true loss by SoVi3t · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Look at the impact this way. Alot of children do watch television. I used to watch it, but not as much. I still flip through the channels however. Many a time, I've come across a channel showing something about technology, or space, or something scientific, and I'll leave it there. Learning something new, is ALWAYS a good feeling. With the loss of this show, we may in fact hinder our chances of having children decided to choose a scientific field, to major in, and thus lose their creative input on the world of tomorrow. I hope they replace the show with another cutting edge science show, or maybe a show that talks about various world events, and the conspiracy theories that they relate to (I love reading about them here at /.)

    --
    Defender of Microsoft and Communism!!!
  5. That's a shame by applef00 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I've always loved "science of tomorrow" shows. My personal favorites being the old Discovery Channel shows "Next Step" (hosted by the guy with the moustache that later went on to host "C|Net Central" on USA Network, if memory serves) and "Beyond 2000" (a BBC production, if I remember correctly). Admittedly, "Beyond 2000" had a built-in expiration. But it was still quite entertaining.

  6. About time! by FTL · · Score: 2, Interesting
    I don't mean to Troll, but I am thankful that Tomorrow's World has been canceled. It is by far the worst 'science' show I've ever seen, and is (in its current form) a discrace to the Beeb. I live in the UK and have had the misfortune of watching it from time to time.

    When they present a story, they repeat the same material three times (using slightly different wording each time) just to make sure that the viewers comprehend. It is like watching Teletubbies.

    The content they present is beyond 'light'. They never go into any depth. They don't sray from the press release upon which they based the segment.

    And they dwell on safety. All they care about is safety. Did I mention that safety is important to them? (A good example is the segment on a new line of kitchen appliances that have lower magnetic fields. They [or rather the manufacturer's press release] implied that magnets are dangerous to your health. Nothing was offered to back up this claim.)

    I remember when the Canadian Discovery Channel purchased Tomorrow's World. They jumped up and down for joy at acquiring the BBC's flagship science program. After airing two episodes, they realised what a collosal mistake this was and pulled it.

    --
    Slashdot monitor for your Mozilla sidebar or Active Desktop.
  7. Why Tomorrow's World sucked.. by wackybrit · · Score: 3, Interesting

    You're so right.

    They had some real crap on Tomorrow's World simply so it'd appeal to Joe Sixpack and five year olds.. both of who WEREN'T THE MAIN GROUPS WHO WATCHED THE SHOW!!

    Tommorrow's World would spend tons of time looking at stupid inventions like quicker ways to open tin cans, or 'Young Innovators' fairs where 8 year olds would invent automatic dog food dispensers.

    Instead of focusing on such jevenile crap they should have focused on cool widgets, technologies that could change the world, and things of some importance to science, rather than things which make it easier to do the washing up.

    --
    mogorific carpentry experiments
  8. Re:Connections by Phil+Wilkins · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Absolutely amazing program. All three series of Connections are still available on VHS, and the first on is available on DVD.

    http://www.documentary-video.com/ShowSubject.cfm?s id=22

    I treated myself to the DVDs last year, and they're every bit as good as I remembered, and not that dated (since they're mostly dealing with the history of technology). Well, apart from his suit...