27-02-2023, 09:19 AM
(26-02-2023, 06:13 PM)DTV Wrote:(26-02-2023, 08:29 AM)LDN Wrote: *record scratch*Apologies LDN, you're absolutely right. TV programmes should never be named for innocuous insider phrases that the average viewer will not be particularly familiar with.
Got to stop you right there. Outside Source is a terrible, terrible name for a news programme. It means absolutely nothing to 99% of those who watch it.
Rather than go for something with a slight bit of thought behind it, everything should just be given the blandest name possible lest anybody be accused of cleverness.
Should we call this programme GMT? No, what if the viewer doesn't get the reference to the fact it's a programme broadcast from London at noon-GMT. On the Record? Line of Duty? The West Wing? This is all just jargon that is utterly meaingless to the average viewer, it would be a mistake to name a programme after it.
Everything would be so much better if we just stuck to utterly descriptive names - because that's what branding is - it doesn't matter if the name is catchy or stands out; what matters is that the viewer has a full etymological understanding of where the name comes from. This is why it would be better if all live programmes were simply just '<time of broadcast> Live'.
*sigh*
It's never a good sign when someone comes back at you with an apology, telling you that "you're absolutely right", before wilfully misrepresenting the points you were trying to make. It's not just eye-rollingly tedious; it also says a lot about that person's emotional intelligence, and their capacity to engage in rational discussion.
As another member quite rightly pointed out, it's plainly nonsense to claim that "GMT", "on the record", "line of duty", and "the West Wing" are "all just jargon that is utterly meaningless to the average viewer". All of these phrases are either part of everyday language, or part of the wider zeitgeist, in a way that "outside source" so very, very, VERY obviously isn't. So.... what was your point again?
By the way, that same member also described your response above as a "strop", and that's exactly how your reaction comes across: an embarrassing, rambling, adolescent strop.
I'm embarrassed for you!