NL
Why do you say that? Without the benefit of hindsight, would you have reacted any differently?
Everybody dies, Cooper's time came to a close in an unfortunately public manner, but I find it hard to criticise either the audience or any of the broadcast team for reacting the way they did as none of them would have been expecting what actually happened, and the nature of his act would introduce plenty of doubts as to what was going on. Because we know what is actually happening, the delays for people to react seem huge, but if you were side of stage would you really walk out and interrupt his act straight away? With hindsight, of course, but on the night?
There have been many examples of people being seriously injured and even dying on live television, in some cases with the production team making obvious (even at the time) decisions in what to show (Senna). I don't think this was one of them, therefore I don't think we can say this was an awful part of history because the same thing could easily happen today and still be acceptable.
There was no way that anyone could have known what would happen. Yes Tommy Cooper's death in itself was a tragic event and the fact that it happened live in front of millions of people watching (myself included) just enhanced it.
The fact is that no-one knows how live coverage of any event will turn out, yes there can be preperations and back up plans but there is always the risk of something serious happening. Cooper and Senna are two examples as was the Hillsborough tragedy (although I don't remember if it was shown live on the BBC).
There is an inherent uncertainty over live events and nothing is foolproof.
Just an awful part of history tbh.
Why do you say that? Without the benefit of hindsight, would you have reacted any differently?
Everybody dies, Cooper's time came to a close in an unfortunately public manner, but I find it hard to criticise either the audience or any of the broadcast team for reacting the way they did as none of them would have been expecting what actually happened, and the nature of his act would introduce plenty of doubts as to what was going on. Because we know what is actually happening, the delays for people to react seem huge, but if you were side of stage would you really walk out and interrupt his act straight away? With hindsight, of course, but on the night?
There have been many examples of people being seriously injured and even dying on live television, in some cases with the production team making obvious (even at the time) decisions in what to show (Senna). I don't think this was one of them, therefore I don't think we can say this was an awful part of history because the same thing could easily happen today and still be acceptable.
There was no way that anyone could have known what would happen. Yes Tommy Cooper's death in itself was a tragic event and the fact that it happened live in front of millions of people watching (myself included) just enhanced it.
The fact is that no-one knows how live coverage of any event will turn out, yes there can be preperations and back up plans but there is always the risk of something serious happening. Cooper and Senna are two examples as was the Hillsborough tragedy (although I don't remember if it was shown live on the BBC).
There is an inherent uncertainty over live events and nothing is foolproof.