It’s unfair to compare two things which are completely different.
Virtual Revolution is a glossy television series about the internet aimed at a mass audience on a Saturday night on BBC TWO.
R&DTV is a video aimed at a much smaller audience who want to know about “interesting tech stories inside and outside the BBC.” It’s not on television, it’s online.
However, both do claim to be “open”.
From the BBC Backstage blog post:
“R&DTV is a pilot show, designed to be shareable, remix-able and (strange gap here in the original copy)
redistribution. It was built for the internet era and all
the assets which make up the show are released under a Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial license.”
From the Virtual Revolution’s website:
“The Virtual Revolution was an open and collaborative production, which encouraged the web audience to help shape the series”
“It was also a radical change for BBC documentary making – an open and collaborative production, which asked the web audience to debate programme themes, suggest and send questions for interviewees, watch and comment on interview and graphics clips, and download clips for personal use and re-editing, all months before broadcast.”
Which is more “open”? Virtual Revolution or R&D TV?
What impact or influence does being “open” have on the finished product in each case? If they had been not “open” would this have made any difference?
What are the benefits and disadvantages of being open?
This blog is not Harry Hill’s TV Burp (if only) so this is not a “fight”…