The men's final atWimbledon may have been a chance to see one of the greatest players
of all time chase a record-equalling victory by taking on a home
favourite with a winning record in head-to-head match ups, but it was
also a chance for the BBC's coverage to do some unashamed crowd
watching and celebrity spotting.
For as long as television cameras have had the range to capture faces in the crowd, broadcasters have picked out spectators at sporting events, both famous and not, with the non-famous used to illustrate the atmosphere inside the arena, and the famous used to add glamour. Sunday's final took it to a new level though, with the director cutting to the famous (and occasionally the not so famous) faces so quickly after each point, that we could see their live reactions, as opposed to a replay a few seconds later.
The responsibility of
the broadcaster is to show the game first, and the BBC did not miss
any of the action, but by cutting away so often and so quickly,
viewers were often denied the chance to see how Roger Federer and
Andy Murray reacted, what their body language was like after each
point. Letting the picture dwell on the court for a moment or two
allows the viewer to digest what they have just seen. By instantly
cutting away to a reaction shot, the director is distracting and
detracting from the experience.
That is not to say that
viewers are not interested in seeing who is present, and not just for
the gossip. Knowing who is in attendance helps to get a sense of the
event, and showing the David Cameron, Boris Johnson and the
Middletons is not unreasonable a couple of times per set.
However, it became so
frequent during this final, that it began to feel voyeuristic and
uncomfortable, as it did for the close-ups of the players' families
and coaches. Again, there is some merit in seeing how they are
reacting, but when almost every point is followed by Judy Murray or
her son's girlfriend, it begins to feel less like a valid
journalistic choice, and more like an invasion of privacy. Moreover,
it quickly became apparent that none of these people were showing
much reaction to the match. They were cheering and clapping, but
nothing unusually demonstrative. The BBC was not showing anything
that enhanced the public's understanding of the final or the
atmosphere.
There is also something
seedy in the way that crowd shots are selected. The coverage of Euro
2012, produced in-house by UEFA, became famous for its preoccupation
with attractive female fans. Meanwhile how often did the BBC zoom in
on the boyfriends and husbands of the top female players, compared to
the wives and girlfriends of the male players?
The Euro 2012 coverage
was also tarnished by the revelation that the producers had been
pre-recording reaction shots to insert into the coverage and present
them as live. When Mario Balotelli scored against Germany in the
semi-final, one of the defining images was of a German fan in tears.
Yet she had been recorded 45 minutes earlier, crying at the national
anthem. This sets a dangerous precedent, a broadcaster such as UEFA,
that is also the organiser of the event, has a vested interest in
presenting a positive image of the tournament.
This entire
preoccupation with showing how the crowd is reacting, stems from the
need to convey the atmosphere of the live event to fans at home.
However, broadcasters are ignoring the sounds of the fans, and that's
what really conveys atmosphere. The odd shot of the fans is one
thing, but when images of fans, celebrities and family members become
so frequent that they are detracting from the coverage of the sport
itself, then it is time to make a change.
No comments:
Post a Comment