Am I allowed to question how genuine the results might be? With it probably being partly a marketting gimmick, I'm wondering how likely it is that the results aren't somehow rigged to some extent. Although this might be a totally incorrect idea.
I was looking at the list the other day and thinking how there seems a good representation of a lot of writers, actors etc. Yet not an extreme overdose of anyone. I think some gems had been forgotten, but 'the age of copious DVDs releases of old stuff and anniversary celebrations' might jog people's memories of more of the older stuff if they did the survey today.
If they do it again then some of the stuff that made it merely because it was recent but not particularly great will probably go. And some stuff that has been returned to the forefront of people's minds might make the list or move higher up the list (like 'Fawlty Towers'). I was suspicious when I saw no 'Brush Strokes' on the list - which was a big hit in its day. Also, I was amazed in a way that 'Ever Decreasing Circles' (also big in its day) didn't make the list - which I think was Richard Briers' best sitcom performance and as a sitcom was up there with Fawlty Towers and One Foot In The Grave in terms of brilliance and quality. And yet some less quality old stuff seem to be better remembered.
I'm just wondering if they wanted 50 that represented a balance - Brush Strokes and Ever D C might have been too much Richard Briers and too much Esmonde and Larbey on the list.
