I understand your point of view Steve, completely valid too, but we see thing from a different perspective to most folk. The BBC and RSPB ran a competion last year when the same thing was done. I can only assume it got families talking and children interested in birds, which can only be a good thing. I spoke to Amey the young girl who won the competition last year. It was an absolute joy to see her and to present her with prizes. She may grow up one day to be a serious birder/conservationist. It may have made a young girl isolated in her hobby feel more accepted. She would have gone back to school and I dare say been congratulated by her head teacher in front of the school and no doubt written her summer story to read to her class mates who no doubt would have talked to her about it. Her school may concentrate on wildlife issues just that bit more as I know some have. A couple of years ago I would have agreed with you. I am sure most will now, but I am prepared to accept the trade off without reservation, simply because I have seen the other side.
Besides the prog was not dumbed down they showed one of my peregrine pictures
Amongst my favourite nature films;-
Wild Britain....no naming of animals or birds....superb stuff!
Private Life of a Kingfisher ... no naming of birds, dated but good stuff. Peter Scott.
African wild dogs . The film featured a dog called Nukie or Nooky (what a name!)...absolutely cracking stuff and I wouldn't have wanted it done in a clinical style or scientific styleIn my view the film would not have achieved the emotional or the educational impact it had without the featured dog being named though others may disagree IMHO.
There was a good 10 mins on the Manchester peregrines, it was good, and 30 secs on the cattle egrets but i did miss the last 10 mins of the tour cause of a phonecall
but i did miss the last 10 mins of the tour cause of a phonecall