I think you're better going for your home region as far as the BBC goes. I get far more feedback out of BBC Scotland than I do with the Writersroom.
BBC Writersroom Page 2
Quote: SlagA @ August 22, 2007, 11:15 PMI think I've explained my conspiracy theory behind all these 'new writing initiatives'.
Not come across your explanation before, please elaborate.
Quote: Pilot @ August 26, 2007, 8:16 PMNot come across your explanation before, please elaborate.
In the past traditional broadcasters were flooded by submissions to individual producers. What better way to isolate all those pesky submissions in one easy-to-fob-off place and yet still maintain an air of 'talent scouting' new writers? Open a writers' room or equivalent and get everyone to send there.
If the government mandate to the BBC to appear to hunt new talent as a part stipulation in exchange for the licence fee was removed, how long would the writers' room remain open? Seconds rather than minutes would be the answer.
BBC's ComedySoup - the staff there did a fantastic job uncovering some stunning comedy - and sod all was taken up by "all those Beeb producers trawling it for the cream of the crop". Oh, one show showed one sketch, apologies.
Re: C4 - exactly the same scenario. A brilliant peer website run by fantastic staff (Davina Chris et al) and the two amateur guys that got signed up to a massive deal went to ... Time Warner (SHOCK) not C4 and the 1000s of C4 execs apparently trawling their own site.
I personally treat all those 'buffer' sites as more a showcase to peers rather than a true insider shop window to the producers. Use the sites to maximise your coverage but treat initiatives with caution. If they were looking for talent they'd be using the traditional agent networks rather than scary new media.
Best bet is find an agent or target a producer. How else do you explain the commission of a show from a 1/2 page synopsis on A4 paper ... that and being a well-known actor?
Anyways I'm being way too cynical tonight, and I'm waiting for a bit of good news too ... for a change. 
Quote: SlagA @ August 27, 2007, 10:16 PMIn the past traditional broadcasters were flooded by submissions to individual producers. What better way to isolate all those pesky submissions in one easy-to-fob-off place and yet still maintain an air of 'talent scouting' new writers? Open a writers' room or equivalent and get everyone to send there.
If the government mandate to the BBC to appear to hunt new talent as a part stipulation in exchange for the licence fee was removed, how long would the writers' room remain open? Seconds rather than minutes would be the answer.
BBC's ComedySoup - the staff there did a fantastic job uncovering some stunning comedy - and sod all was taken up by "all those Beeb producers trawling it for the cream of the crop". Oh, one show showed one sketch, apologies.
Re: C4 - exactly the same scenario. A brilliant peer website run by fantastic staff (Davina Chris et al) and the two amateur guys that got signed up to a massive deal went to ... Time Warner (SHOCK) not C4 and the 1000s of C4 execs apparently trawling their own site.
I personally treat all those 'buffer' sites as more a showcase to peers rather than a true insider shop window to the producers. Use the sites to maximise your coverage but treat initiatives with caution. If they were looking for talent they'd be using the traditional agent networks rather than scary new media.
Best bet is find an agent or target a producer. How else do you explain the commission of a show from a 1/2 page synopsis on A4 paper ... that and being a well-known actor?
Anyways I'm being way too cynical tonight, and I'm waiting for a bit of good news too ... for a change.
Spot on, a neat and honest summary.
Yeah, echo that, thanks for taking the time to explain that.
I actually got something on Radio through the Writers room.It was during the last world cup and they were looking for world cup monologues for Johnny vegas to read out on radio 5 live and mine was picked so I have had a good experience with them. But I have heard other people say the same as you. The thing with the writers room is that they get loads of scripts sent to them and I dont think they have time to respond to them all, Keep trying is my advise It's a good recognised site.
Quote: Cameron Phillips @ August 22, 2007, 10:47 PMI sent them a radio script that was 30 pages long, they fired it back saying they would only read full length scripts.
I gave up after that.
Was it a one-off script or the pilot for a series? If it was the former than there are no half hour slots available and they would expect the writer to know that. If it was the latter, then was that clear? If it was clear then simply email the head of the writersroom and explain and he'll give it another read.
The BBC writersroom is the only network which accepts unsolicited scripts now, but giving up isn't really the answer, it's getting better.
They get about ten thousand scripts a year or 250-300 a week. That is tough competition and they can afford to pick the cream of the crop.
Each script has the first ten pages read (which is the same across most script reading departments all over the world) and if there is any sign of talent then the whole thing is read. Only 15% (1500) of those 10,000 gets a full read.
You might think it unfair that your script isn't read in full but I know from experience that you can tell within a few pages if the script is any good or not, sometimes from the first page. If a story hasn't started early, if the characters are clearly underdeveloped, if the dialogue is full of clichés or pointless banter then there's not much point in reading on. All those things suggest the writer isn't quite ready yet.
I have never read a script that has been rejected by the writersroom in the early stages that I would say was unfair - and I've read loads,. The latter stages - where you get encouragement and progress no further - *is* more subjective and so more likely to miss things but that's the same anywhere. People read scripts not robots, unfortunately.
So the first step, which the vast majority of us fail, is to get a script read in full. The next step is to get encouragement to send in your next script – that happens with 7% (105) of those 1500 scripts read in full.
The next hurdle is to have a good enough script so you're invited in to meet producers and script execs. That's 2% (30) of those 1500 scripts read in full. That's 30 out of 10,000.
I have reached that last stage so I know it's possible. I know people who started with the standard no comment rejection letters and then as they improved they got comments and then as they improved even more they got encouragement. A couple are writing for Doctors, one had a radio play on, etc.
My experience with the BBC WritersRoom was excellent. I submitted a full-length feature in September 2006, their site said not to expect a response for 4 months. I did receive a postcard with a dossier number.
At the end of January 2007 I had had no response - so I emailed them, quoted my dossier number and asked if they had read the script.
I got a reply the same day saying that my script could not be found and to re-send it by email (they usually do not accpet electronic submissions).
I received an email saying that the script had arrived safely and apologisong again for losing the original submission.
They asked me to wait for a month for a response.
Within three weeks I received a letter with very useful and positive feedback on the script. They did not want to proceed with that script but emphasised that they want to see any future work - and that when I submit I should mentioned that my script had been solicited by them.
This was very encouraging and 2 weeks ago I submitted my second feature-length screenplay - I now have verything crossed, and have started writing my third screenplay (and my first comedy).
Great to get some balance! I was starting to lose hope. I got readers comments on my first script from them and now am working on a few to send out, so I feel better...today anyway.
I got some very helpful reader's comments on my only submission to WritersRoom. They didn't, however, solicit a further script.
My acknowledgment postcard was unstamped and cost me £1.35 to retrieve from the mail depot. At the time I hoped this was a good omen!
Admittedly I was late in arriving to the Writers Room and the only thing I've done in regards to them is to submit 2 sketches to the Play and Record submission, both were accepted (although I only witnessed one being recorded, I can only imagine the other one (if recorded at all) was done in the edinburgh show).
So for me it's a 100% success rate, didn't enter the Red Planet submission but wish I had now.
What happens if something is read and it shows potential, but it's not a viable project in itself? Do they get a rejection too?
Quote: Seefacts @ September 5, 2007, 5:12 PMWhat happens if something is read and it shows potential, but it's not a viable project in itself? Do they get a rejection too?
No, they are looking for writers and basically act as an agent for the writer in the BBC. Your audience sitcom might be too similar to something in development but if it's good enough they'll encourage you to return with more ideas or offer you a chance at Grown Ups or a CBBC comedy.
While we all want our pet projects to be made, it's rare. Think of that script more as a calling card, to get prodcos and networks interested in you as a person and your talent. If you sell it then it's a bonus.
Quote: Robin Kelly @ September 5, 2007, 1:31 PMEach script has the first ten pages read and if there is any sign of talent the whole thing is read.
Totally respect your view Robin and it is very detailed (plus I'm familiar with your blog for a good while - excellent stuff).
The problem is when none of the many scripts sent to the Writers Room get into the next stage yet those SAME scripts sent to individual producers WITHIN the BBC get excellent comments, get into the next stage, and result in solicited requests for more.
Surely something is not right when the Writers Room can't spot what their own producers can?
I can only speak from personal experience, though.
Would it not be viable to have a mainstream sitcom (with experienced producers or show runners in charge) and have it written by a team of writers all of whom are new, and not some hacks who got their break 20 years ago on Weekending or Carrott's Lib?
Surely a sitcom with, say, 12 episodes per year, could be used as an apprenticeship for any writers who are spotted in the WR who have a bit of talent - but aren't ready to write 6 episodes of their own show.
That's my issue with the WR - even if it works there's no place for them to go. (And don't say Grown Ups or Two Pints because both of those are undeniably purile and probably do nothing to help nurture a writer to write clever plots, witty lines, good characters and the like. Just knob gags. Where's our Seinfeld?)