Medals Ceremonies: A Step by Step Lesson for ABC
Roaz
so you can get it right next time.
1. Remember the medals ceremony is not just the national anthem. You should
start with the ladies standing on the podium, sans medals.
2. Depict the awarding of the medals...the medals being placed around the
ladies' necks, the handshake, etc.
3. When depicting the National Anthem, the points of interest are the rising
flags and the image of the three ladies on the podium with their medals and
flowers. While some people might get excited about the ladies' and Canadian
Mounties' backs, such people are probably in the minority.
4. I may be in the minority but I'm not that keen to be reassured that there
are no gaps between Sarah Hughes' teeth or that Irina Slutskaya's mouth
twitched to the left as she tried to disguise her disappointment at being
second. I don't need to count Michelle Kwan's eyelashes today. In other
words....cut down on the super-closeups, OK?
5. To see how to do a medals ceremony the right way, watch the 1994 ladies
singles medals ceremony from the Nagano Olympics.
Better job next year, fellas and fellettes.
DesertRoaz
In the United States of America a child was sentenced to life in prison without
the possibility of parole.
rollerblade
Roaz <deser...@aol.committed> wrote in message
news:20010325144407...@ng-ci1.aol.com...
> 3. When depicting the National Anthem, the points of interest are the
rising
> flags and the image of the three ladies on the podium with their medals
and
> flowers.
yeah, that was so dumb. if they can't change the flags position, they could
at least improvise on the placement of the blocks.
> 5. To see how to do a medals ceremony the right way, watch the 1994
ladies
> singles medals ceremony from the Nagano Olympics.
oops!! <g>
OperettaJK
deser...@aol.committed (Roaz) writes:
>1. Remember the medals ceremony is not just the national anthem. You should
>start with the ladies standing on the podium, sans medals.
>
>2. Depict the awarding of the medals...the medals being placed around the
>ladies' necks, the handshake, etc.
Amen! You tell them! :-)
Jas
MarleneKoenig
(EST), and ABC's program had already ended ..
Erin White
for heeding our pleas and showing any of the medal ceremonies at all.
Thank you, ABC!
Tink *~*~*
SKHazen
marlen...@aol.comiluvbill (MarleneKoenig) writes:
>the medal ceremony could not be shown like because it occured after 11 pm
>(EST), and ABC's program had already ended ..
Simplistic and not particularly relevant. I have seen the extraordinarily
detailed (yes, it's in seconds) time schedule for events such as Worlds --
prepared under the supervision of the Technical Representative (the
International competition equivalent of the Chief Referee in USFSA events) and
with his/her approval, but essentially prepared by the TV Producer. And I have
had the unplanned experience of taking over the Technical Representative's
headphones on one occasion in a Grand Prix event and know exactly who at a
televised event actually controls the time schedule of it.
Yes, the Medals Ceremonies took place *after* the end of the ABC telecast.
That was the plan. A bad one, IMHO.
Respectfully (and particularly to the Tech Rep who gave me that experience),
Steven
Ruth Lafler
SKHazen wrote:
> In article <20010325183102...@ng-mk1.aol.com>,
> marlen...@aol.comiluvbill (MarleneKoenig) writes:
>
> >the medal ceremony could not be shown like because it occured after 11 pm
> >(EST), and ABC's program had already ended ..
>
>
> Yes, the Medals Ceremonies took place *after* the end of the ABC telecast.
> That was the plan. A bad one, IMHO.
>
> Respectfully (and particularly to the Tech Rep who gave me that experience),
> Steven
May I respectfully disagree? The medal ceremony takes a long time, and if they are
timing the competition for a live broadcast (which I think we can all agree we
prefer), I'd rather not have all that time taken up by an *unedited* medal
ceremony.
To explain more fully: Even though they start preparing for the ceremony the minute
the last competitor leaves the ice, it still takes several minutes to lay out the
carpets and assemble the podium. Then the officials are announced. Then the skaters
are introduced individually, skate to the center, bow, etc., climb the podium,
greet (shake hands, embrace, whatever) the other medalists. Then they present the
medals, shake hands, kiss both cheeks. Then they present flowers, shake hands, kiss
cheeks. Then they introduce the referee (and the assistant?) and they shake hands,
kiss cheeks, etc. Finally, they raise the flags and play the anthem (and as was
mentioned elsewhere, the Russian anthem goes on forever ... much too long for a
skater to stand there looking dignified and patriotic, especially since there
aren't even any words to sing along). Elapsed time: about 20 minutes.
Still want to use precious live broadcast time?
Still, sometimes you do see something interesting:
Averbukh appeared to have a longer conversation with Anissina (his former partner)
than just congratulations.
Todd embraced Yagudin rather warmly, but only shook hands with Pluschenko.
Maurizio Margaglio sang along with his anthem joyously (including bum-ba-duming an
instrumental riff) and at one point tilted his head back and closed his eyes in an
expression of ecstasy.
Finally, it was hard to watch Irina, who had obviously been crying, choking back
sobs as they presented her medal and flowers.
--Ruth
Trudi Marrapodi
[snip. re: using TV time to show medals ceremonies]
> Still want to use precious live broadcast time?
[snip]
Of course they do, Ruth. If the medal ceremonies aren't shown, how will
some people ever be able to criticize the skaters for their behavior on
the podium by hyperanalyzing their facial expressions and reading all
sorts of negative emotions into them? ;-)
--
Trudi
Skating Is Not Dance. Paul Wylie Should Be Doing Whatever He Wants to Do.
This Sig Deliberately Kept Politics-Free For Your Enjoyment.
Robert Dister
tru...@clarityconnect.com (Trudi Marrapodi) wrote:
> In article <3AC1820A...@home.com>, Ruth Lafler <rlaf...@home.com>
> wrote:
>
> [snip. re: using TV time to show medals ceremonies]
>
> > Still want to use precious live broadcast time?
>
> [snip]
>
> Of course they do, Ruth. If the medal ceremonies aren't shown, how will
> some people ever be able to criticize the skaters for their behavior on
> the podium by hyperanalyzing their facial expressions and reading all
> sorts of negative emotions into them? ;-)
Hmmm, I think now that I might have overanalyzed Surya Bonaly's facial
expressions and read some non-existent negative emotions back at the
1994 Worlds ladies' medal ceremony. She was actually too humble to
advertise her skating prowess by displaying a gaudy, vulgar silver medal
in front of a world-wide audience. Bravo! ;)
Carla Hashman
expressions and read some non-existent negative emotions back at the
1994 Worlds ladies' medal ceremony. She was actually too humble to
advertise her skating prowess by displaying a gaudy, vulgar silver medal
in front of a world-wide audience. Bravo! ;)>>
I do not agree. Surya let everyone know EXACTLY how she felt about
the "unfair" judging. She thought she deserved gold because she had
accomplished the most difficult combinations. Yet, the panel of 9--and
judge 14--insisted that Yuka Sato beat her on the issue of straightline
footwork.
Surya accepted the silver medal grudgingly, at best.
Carla
Robert Dister
der...@webtv.net (Carla Hashman) wrote:
> I do not agree. Surya let everyone know EXACTLY how she felt about
> the "unfair" judging. She thought she deserved gold because she had
> accomplished the most difficult combinations. Yet, the panel of 9--and
> judge 14--insisted that Yuka Sato beat her on the issue of straightline
> footwork.
And on everything else besides the jump combination.
> Surya accepted the silver medal grudgingly, at best.
I guess "grudgingly" would be one way to put it. Anyway, this was one
instance where you couldn't really appreciate the competition without
viewing the medal ceremony. Sometimes a tape-delayed broadcast can be a
blessing.
SKHazen
[quoting a post by the undersigned]:
>> Yes, the Medals Ceremonies took place *after* the end of the ABC telecast.
>> That was the plan. A bad one, IMHO.
>May I respectfully disagree?
No problem. It might help if you would clarify as to with what you have
disagreement: that the Medals Ceremony taking place after the broadcast was
the plan, or that the plan was a bad one. The remainder of the post, albeit
interesting, is in fact not specifically germane to either (as noted below).
>The medal ceremony takes a long time, and if they are
>timing the competition for a live broadcast (which I think we can all agree
>we prefer),
So, exactly which of the ABC viewers who received the "benefit" of that? The
folks on the East Coast (excluding the DC area, of course) might appropriately
say they prefer what they got in that regard, but otherwise the postulated
preference is somewhat beside the point. And, actually, what *I* would prefer
is a minor (about 20 minutes max would do it) tape delay broadcast
simulaneously throughout the entire country -- a matter of relative
technological ease, and considerably easier than an actually "live" broadcast
which, in any event, completely (and intentionally) misses the apogee of
sporting contest: the athletes repeating the reward for their effort.
>I'd rather not have all that time taken up by an *unedited* medal
>ceremony.
By no means a requirement.
>To explain more fully: Even though they start preparing for the ceremony the
>minute
>the last competitor leaves the ice, it still takes several minutes to lay out
the
>carpets and assemble the podium. Then the officials are announced. Then the
>skaters are introduced individually, skate to the center, bow, etc., climb the
>podium,
>greet (shake hands, embrace, whatever) the other medalists. Then they present
>the
>medals, shake hands, kiss both cheeks. Then they present flowers, shake
>hands, kiss
>cheeks. Then they introduce the referee (and the assistant?) and they shake
>hands,
>kiss cheeks, etc. Finally, they raise the flags and play the anthem (and as
was
>mentioned elsewhere, the Russian anthem goes on forever ... much too long for
>a
>skater to stand there looking dignified and patriotic, especially since there
>aren't even any words to sing along). Elapsed time: about 20 minutes.
Only about 3 minutes of which are actually dedicated to, and focused on, the
athletes. The medals ceremony as described (quite accurately, of course) was
designed both for an earlier day when TV broadcast was not an issue and for a
certain amount of "celebrating" by the sports federation basking in the
limelight.
>Still want to use precious live broadcast time?
Actually, I do not recall ever suggesting that "precious live broadcast time"
be used for that purpose -- which is why (without any animus, I should note) I
originally suggested that the reply was, in fact, not specifically germane to
the points being made in the post.
The simple (and perhaps in this day and age inexorable) fact is that what the
US viewing public gets in the way of TV coverage of this sport is heavily
packaged. If that is the way it must be, there is no legitimate explanation
for *not* including the medals presentation in the package. Which was the
point of the original message.
Respectfully,
Steven
Ruth Lafler
SKHazen wrote:
> In article <3AC1820A...@home.com>, Ruth Lafler <rlaf...@home.com> writes
> [quoting a post by the undersigned]:
>
> >> Yes, the Medals Ceremonies took place *after* the end of the ABC telecast.
> >> That was the plan. A bad one, IMHO.
>
> >May I respectfully disagree?
>
> No problem. It might help if you would clarify as to with what you have
> disagreement: that the Medals Ceremony taking place after the broadcast was
> the plan, or that the plan was a bad one.
Sorry! To clarify, I meant that I disagreed that it was a bad plan that the medal
ceremony took place after the broadcast.
> The remainder of the post, albeit
> interesting, is in fact not specifically germane to either (as noted below).
>
> >The medal ceremony takes a long time, and if they are
> >timing the competition for a live broadcast (which I think we can all agree
> >we prefer),
>
> So, exactly which of the ABC viewers who received the "benefit" of that? The
> folks on the East Coast (excluding the DC area, of course) might appropriately
> say they prefer what they got in that regard, but otherwise the postulated
> preference is somewhat beside the point. And, actually, what *I* would prefer
> is a minor (about 20 minutes max would do it) tape delay broadcast
> simulaneously throughout the entire country -- a matter of relative
> technological ease, and considerably easier than an actually "live" broadcast
> which, in any event, completely (and intentionally) misses the apogee of
> sporting contest: the athletes repeating the reward for their effort.
>
First, ABC wasn't the only network broadcasting it live. CTV was also. In fact,
there were complaints about CTV not showing S&P's medal ceremony because they
wanted to show "Law and Order" on time.
I agree that it would be nice if medal ceremonies (edited to take out all the parts
not "dedicated to, and focused on, the
athletes") could be shown. I guess I'm not convinced that short-time tape-delays
(including substantial editing) are as technologically feasible as you seem to
think they are. I'm not aware that it has ever been done. But I would certainly
defer to someone with actual knowledge/experience of such
> >I'd rather not have all that time taken up by an *unedited* medal
> >ceremony.
>
> By no means a requirement.
No. But given the choices we've been given: live broadcast without medal ceremonies
or substantial tape delay, I'll happily take the former. Furthermore, I'm not sure
that given the choice, people would trade *any* tape delay for seeing medal
ceremonies.
> >To explain more fully: Even though they start preparing for the ceremony the
> >minute
> >the last competitor leaves the ice, it still takes several minutes to lay out
> the
> >carpets and assemble the podium. Then the officials are announced. Then the
> >skaters are introduced individually, skate to the center, bow, etc., climb the
> >podium,
> >greet (shake hands, embrace, whatever) the other medalists. Then they present
> >the
> >medals, shake hands, kiss both cheeks. Then they present flowers, shake
> >hands, kiss
> >cheeks. Then they introduce the referee (and the assistant?) and they shake
> >hands,
> >kiss cheeks, etc. Finally, they raise the flags and play the anthem (and as
> was
> >mentioned elsewhere, the Russian anthem goes on forever ... much too long for
> >a
> >skater to stand there looking dignified and patriotic, especially since there
> >aren't even any words to sing along). Elapsed time: about 20 minutes.
>
> Only about 3 minutes of which are actually dedicated to, and focused on, the
> athletes. The medals ceremony as described (quite accurately, of course) was
> designed both for an earlier day when TV broadcast was not an issue and for a
> certain amount of "celebrating" by the sports federation basking in the
> limelight.
Good point. It seems to me it would be easier to change the medal ceremony than to
try to mess with short-term tape delay. There's no reason why they couldn't have a
podium area set up (like the Kiss and Cry), and do the medals/anthems first and
then let various officials parade themselves out to present flowers, etc. Except,
as you seem to be suggesting obliquely, the powers that be have no interest in
giving up or minimizing their chance to bask in the limelight.
I don't know what we can do about the length of the Russian anthem, either <g>.
--Ruth
SKHazen
skh...@aol.com2qv.org (SKHazen) writes [yes, quoting myself]:
>preference is somewhat beside the point. And, actually, what *I* would prefer
>is a minor (about 20 minutes max would do it) tape delay broadcast
>simulaneously throughout the entire country -- a matter of relative
>technological ease, and considerably easier than an actually "live" broadcast
>which, in any event, completely (and intentionally) misses the apogee of
>sporting contest: the athletes repeating the reward for their effort.
**********
Errmm. Yes, that *would* be "reaping". Even though relatively infrequent, my
posts apparently could use an independent proof-reader before they are sent.
Any volunteers?
Respectfully,
Steven
Dave Amorde
>
> In article <20010329225823...@nso-ba.aol.com>,
> skh...@aol.com2qv.org (SKHazen) writes [yes, quoting myself]:
>
> posts apparently could use an independent proof-reader before they are sent.
> Any volunteers?
>
Nape
-Dove-