David Baddiel to tell us about online abuse

[lb99]

That and they most belong to the same two or three agencies, who in themselves only belong to that agency because they fit certain audience demographics and not primarily because of their talent. So the guy is really complaining that the only agencies they use have a mediocre pool of talent, without joining the dots as to why or considering the alternatives.

No that's not it. It's because only a certain type of comedian can do it well, because it's very hard. Producers book the comedian not the agency.

[phantom_power]

Producers book comedians through agencies

[gilbertharding]

Regardless, if someone hasn't prepared they shouldn't be invited back and should be getting their arses kicked by their agent. Yet apparently this is no guarantee, you see them smugly consuming the oxygen week after week while offering very little.

I know he's not a comedian (except in the loosest sense) but I've noticed Harry Fucking Redknapp on a couple of things recently (Saturday Kitchen and that Mel Giedroyc vehicle on Dave) and he is the worst.

[lb99]

Producers book comedians through agencies

They do, but the thought process is "who would be good on this panel?", not "who has this agency got that I can book?". The agency the comedian is with is secondary.

[notjosh]

No that's not it. It's because only a certain type of comedian can do it well, because it's very hard. Producers book the comedian not the agency.

I can't agree with that. One major factor is that a lot of talent shows are made by the production arm of a talent agency, who will naturally fill it with their own clients:
https://www.chortle.co.uk/news/2013/02/03/17105/how_tv_producers_book_their_own_comics

Another is that channels will often have some oversight on booking and will be nervous if they're not being given tried and tested names.

And producers themselves often prefer to play it safe and book people they know will do a job rather than take a risk on a newcomer and not have enough material for the edit. I also think it's hit and miss whether a comedy producer's interest in comedy will actually extend to them going to see live stand-up, or whether they just book names they've seen/heard on other shows.

[phantom_power]

They do, but the thought process is "who would be good on this panel?", not "who has this agency got that I can book?". The agency the comedian is with is secondary.

I am not sure that is true. It makes sense for a producer to go to an agency for various comedians rather than various agencies. I know Avalon used to hold a lot of sway with producers. I don't know if that is still the case

[Lisa Jesusandmarychain]

Producers book comedians through agencies

Toilet graffiti writer considers rewrite.

[MoreauVasz]

Given how much the BBC relies on panel shows,  you would expect them to have some kind of commitment to bringing people on, maybe letting new talent onto the radio ones, giving them a chance to find their feet, and then moving them up through the shows.

Nobody is born a panel show comedian...it's just that some people got onto that circuit longer ago and have developed those chops. Phil Jupitus is a great example of that phenomenon, he's not a particularly funny man but he knows how to laugh at other people's gags and is a safe pair of hands who knows how to deliver the pre-written stuff and can add a few ad libs here and there.

This is also a diversity issue as the people who manage to wedge themselves into the circuit are all white men. Saying you can't hire anyone new or different because Phil Jupitus is just too damn good at his job is just someone washing their hands of one of their professional responsibilities.

I suspect this has got worse as more and more power has been devolved to independent production companies. BBC light entertainment or comedy might decide that they need to broaden the talent pool but what insentives are there for individual producers to take risks or bring on new people?

[Brundle-Fly]

It's true Off The Kerb and Avalon represent a lot of these people but let's take a top ten of stalwart panelists. 

David Mitchell -  MMB
Jimmy Carr - Hannah Chambers
Romesh Ranganathan - Off The Kerb
Josh Widdecombe - Gordon Poole
Bob Mortimer - PBJ
Katherine Ryan - United Artists
Johnny Vegas - Curtis Brown
Mel Giedroyc - Independent
Jo Brand - Vivienne Clore
David Baddiel - Avalon
Rhod Gilbert - Blue Jeans

[MoreauVasz]

Christ. No wonder I don't watch panel shows any more.

The more I think about it, the more I realise that Taskmaster's success lies in breaking out of that creative ghetto and getting in some different people.

[jobotic]

Is James Acaster not in the top ten?

Sublime stand up but appears on any old panel show drivel.

[lb99]

I can't agree with that. One major factor is that a lot of talent shows are made by the production arm of a talent agency, who will naturally fill it with their own clients:
https://www.chortle.co.uk/news/2013/02/03/17105/how_tv_producers_book_their_own_comics

Another is that channels will often have some oversight on booking and will be nervous if they're not being given tried and tested names.

And producers themselves often prefer to play it safe and book people they know will do a job rather than take a risk on a newcomer and not have enough material for the edit. I also think it's hit and miss whether a comedy producer's interest in comedy will actually extend to them going to see live stand-up, or whether they just book names they've seen/heard on other shows.

I'm just talking from experience as a producer who used to book panel shows that this thing where it's assumed that Avalon and Off The Kerb have a huge sway in who appears on panel shows isn't true. Despite what Stewart Lee said about ten years ago.

i was originally replying to:

So the guy is really complaining that the only agencies they use have a mediocre pool of talent, without joining the dots as to why or considering the alternatives.

Where it's implied that producers go to an agency and ask the agency for suggestions.

Of course the channel has some oversight, and yes both producers and the channels will want tried and tested acts but will hopefully book a newcomer or two as well. The initial thought though is not to ring up an agency and ask them who they've got.

And yes producers do go to stand-up night to scout for new acts, I see them there all the time. They also hold tryouts to test new acts out as well.

[BeardFaceMan]

Of course the channel has some oversight, and yes both producers and the channels will want tried and tested acts but will hopefully book a newcomer or two as well.

I think the point is that in a lot of cases the producers are also the agents and so book their own clients and don't go far outside of that.

[phantom_power]

Panel shows are pretty much the ultimate in lazy TV so it stands to reason they would be lazy in getting in comedians

[lb99]

I think the point is that in a lot of cases the producers are also the agents and so book their own clients and don't go far outside of that.

Sometimes the agency is the same company as the production company, but there's far more money to be made having a successful show than just stacking a panel show with the comedians from the agency and it not working.

I know it's more fun to assume that these agencies have a stranglehold on panel shows, but it's not true. Not to the extent that this board portrays it to be.

[Brundle-Fly]

I suspect this has got worse as more and more power has been devolved to independent production companies. BBC light entertainment or comedy might decide that they need to broaden the talent pool but what insentives are there for individual producers to take risks or bring on new people?

Diversity on panel shows is being addressed now though, isn't it? I should've said that the conversation I had with my BBC producer friend was about twelve years ago.

[ProvanFan]

The Cabinet's all Avalon clients as well innit?

[Brundle-Fly]

Panel shows are pretty much the ultimate in lazy TV so it stands to reason they would be lazy in getting in comedians

That's unfair. True, it's a hell of a lot cheaper than making a sketch show but it's not lazy programme making when it's done well. A load of research and work goes into them. Some of my biggest belly laughs have come from these type of shows.

Disclaimer: I am not a producer of panel shows but know people who have worked on them.

[phantom_power]

I do like some panel shows but when compared to any other type of show they are pretty lazy. Look at Would I Lie To You. Some researcher gets a few stories from the guests and makes up a few lies and there's the show. It doesn't stop it being funny with the right guests but from a production perspective it is a piece of piss

[gilbertharding]

Not to mention that Taskmaster is, strictly speaking, a panel show.

Speaking of which - and on the issue of diversity in panel show bookings - I found this absolute dogshit article from the "i" website which seems to want to divide women into Stand Up Comedians and Others for some reason - presumably to enable the writer to lay into a show which, after a slow start, is doing better than a lot of shows (I think).

https://inews.co.uk/culture/television/taskmaster-line-up-women-comedians-panel-shows-channel-4-919648

Since the show debuted on Dave in 2015, 55 acts have appeared as contestants on the show: 35 men and 20 women. Of those 35 men, 31 have been stand-up comedians. Of the 20 women, there have been just 11 stand-ups. Almost three times more male comedians appear to have had the opportunity to join Taskmaster than women who do the same job.

[lb99]

I suspect this has got worse as more and more power has been devolved to independent production companies. BBC light entertainment or comedy might decide that they need to broaden the talent pool but what insentives are there for individual producers to take risks or bring on new people?

Power hasn't been devolved to independent production companies - what is broadcast is still the broadcasters responsibility and they have a say on the line-ups on their panel shows.

[Brundle-Fly]

I do like some panel shows but when compared to any other type of show they are pretty lazy. Look at Would I Lie To You. Some researcher gets a few stories from the guests and makes up a few lies and there's the show. It doesn't stop it being funny with the right guests but from a production perspective it is a piece of piss

If we're talking comedy, what 'other type of show' are you talking about though? Sit-com? Sketch show? Mock docs? All are entirely different propositions; difficult and expensive to make. Clip shows? Somebody watches a load of old TV and takes the piss. Lazier than panel shows? Stand-up shows? That's just pointing a camera at a person on stage. Even lazier? I can't think of anymore. Puppets?

What does it matter how labour intensive a show is to produce as long as it's funny. Sometimes the simplest ideas are the best. Crucially, it's coming up with that hit idea in the first place to capture lightning in a bottle. To get the right people involved is alchemy.

[BeardFaceMan]

I think it's not so much the shows that are lazy, it's the people who appear on them, not bothering to do any kind of prep and treating every panel show like "I can just turn up and be funny or shoehorn in a bit of my stand-up act". It's that attitude to appearing on them that's the lazy bit, not the format.

[Brundle-Fly]

Arrogance more than laziness, perhaps?

[BeardFaceMan]

It's definitely a mixture of both, I'd say. But then you could say that the reason producers like making these shows so much is that they only have to think of a format, a hook to hang some jokes on, and then the invited guests will bring their own material, so it's easier (some might say lazier) to produce. I know that they used to have writers on panels shows that would give jokes to guests, does that still go on?

[Brundle-Fly]

The other aspect that should also be taken into account is how much material gets snipped in the final 27-minute long show. There are plenty of stories of comics getting really funny stuff cut for all kinds of reasons and then viewers think they're being a bit shy or crap.

[Ignatius_S]

Not to mention that Taskmaster is, strictly speaking, a panel show.

Speaking of which - and on the issue of diversity in panel show bookings - I found this absolute dogshit article from the "i" website which seems to want to divide women into Stand Up Comedians and Others for some reason - presumably to enable the writer to lay into a show which, after a slow start, is doing better than a lot of shows (I think).

https://inews.co.uk/culture/television/taskmaster-line-up-women-comedians-panel-shows-channel-4-919648

I've found this site has a lot of interesting data for panel shows - https://www.strudel.org.uk/panelshows/index.html

[lb99]

I think it's not so much the shows that are lazy, it's the people who appear on them, not bothering to do any kind of prep and treating every panel show like "I can just turn up and be funny or shoehorn in a bit of my stand-up act". It's that attitude to appearing on them that's the lazy bit, not the format.

Who said they're not doing any prep? Apart from it seeming like Baddiel did no prep that time mentioned up thread. I'd say by and large, they all prep - they all spend time writing jokes/ work with writers on material beforehand. You'd be hard pushed to find anyone that just turns up.

I'm definitely not saying that panel shows are comedy gold, I'm just saying that saying the producers/ performers are lazy and only do the bare minimum on a show largely isn't true. Of course you get lazy producers and comedians, but they are in the minority.

[BeardFaceMan]

Who said they're not doing any prep? Apart from it seeming like Baddiel did no prep that time mentioned up thread.

Well, to give another instance mentioned in the thread, Jamali Maddix. And I think someone else mentioned that there have been other Taskmaster contestants who have been on the show without watching it or really knowing what it is. Or people going on HIGNFY and saying "I didn't read the papers this week".

I'd say by and large, they all prep - they all spend time writing jokes/ work with writers on material beforehand.

By 'working with writers', do you mean 'turn up and a writer hands them jokes'? I don't think appearing on a panel show is the big collaborative process you make it out to be.

[lb99]

Well, to give another instance mentioned in the thread, Jamali Maddix. And I think someone else mentioned that there have been other Taskmaster contestants who have been on the show without watching it or really knowing what it is. Or people going on HIGNFY and saying "I didn't read the papers this week".

I'm talking about regular panel shows not Taskmaster. I have no experience of that.

By 'working with writers', do you mean 'turn up and a writer hands them jokes'? I don't think appearing on a panel show is the big collaborative process you make it out to be.

No I don't mean that.

I have no skin in the game at all, I'm just sharing my experiences of when I used to work on them a few years ago. Yes you'd get the occasional lazy performer, but on the whole they care about how they appear and write stuff/ work with writers on material or do their research. Whether viewers think that after the effort the performers put in they're actually funny or not, is another story.

It's definitely more fun believing panel shows are made the way you think they're made, but it's not like that in real life.