Most viewers still get their news from the BBC from the mainstream BBC One bulletins, so if it's a choice of a radio phone-in (which in itself is an odd show to simulcast, when you have Today and PM which are more suitable) or shredding staff from the 6 and 10, then it's the least worst option.
Personally I doubt I'll watch as much of the NC as I do currently. The commercial sector will continue to provide domestic rolling news through Sky News or radio station LBC News for those who want it.
I've sat on this for a while now, particularly as the cuts proposed will ripple dangerously close to 'my' area.
That said, I think there needs to be a recognition that the BBC is in a perilous position. The proposal - to merge World News and UK - were considered only a few years ago and judged inappropriate. To be in the situation we are today is entirely a reflection of how dangerously and recklessly the Culture Secretary (and govt) are handling the BBC's very existence.
In that context, these changes, for me, represent a practical (but ghastly) solution. To be frank: better to have a form of BBC News rather than none at all.
As for some of the comments in terms of editorial policy, I really don't think that will come to pass. I certainly don't think the likes of GB News will 'hoover' up viewers, if purely because the BBC still represents the very best in class in terms of standards, accuracy, and reliability. I'm not sure Dan Wooton et al making stuff up via web cams will quite cut it. The proposals, as they stand, seem appropriate - and allow for a UK focus if there is a rolling UK-centric story.
Personally, one of the more interesting proposals has been this concept of visualising radio content. If Today and PM, for example, can be formatted in a sustainable way (not simply dumping a camera in a studio as now is the case) then there is suddenly quite a range of content across different mediums. It's interesting but I do worry that it'll end up being a case of producers trying to re-image radio content for TV with none of the underpinning thoughts about practicality.
As for timelines, I suspect Spring 2023 is rather optimistic. There's not just the usual consultations (and let's be frank, the atmosphere is already fairly toxic) but then the inevitable new positions, tech set up, trial and error - and some form of graphic relaunch to boot too.
(15-07-2022, 01:03 PM)Matrix Wrote: [ -> ]Personally, one of the more interesting proposals has been this concept of visualising radio content. If Today and PM, for example, can be formatted in a sustainable way (not simply dumping a camera in a studio as now is the case) then there is suddenly quite a range of content across different mediums. It's interesting but I do worry that it'll end up being a case of producers trying to re-image radio content for TV with none of the underpinning thoughts about practicality.
Visualising audio content is certainly one of the more interesting things about the proposal, but I think the BBC has got good experience getting it right with things like Newscast and some of the Radio 5 Live feeds (Kermode and Mayo always used a multi-camera feed well, including incorporating video clips that worked for both mediums). I expect that the choice of one show first, with others to follow, will be used as an opportunity to learn and get it right in one studio, before rolling it out wider. I expect if they moved onto more bulletin programmes like Today or PM, reporters would produce multi-media reports that simply show visuals over a radio report.
(15-07-2022, 12:56 PM)DTV Wrote: [ -> ] (15-07-2022, 11:29 AM)BBCMeridian Wrote: [ -> ]Yes, merging the News and World Channels, is the biggest mistake the BBC is making, and I wouldn't be surprised if many people switched off because they don't get the UK News stories that they need.
I just hope that Ofcom, the staff and trade unions who are in charge of the consultation will reject the BBC's plans and not allow for it to go ahead, the fact of the matter is, a merged News and World News Channel is never going to work.
Well it's fine to think it's a mistake, but then what's your alternative. BBC News may have been in a near-continuous state of cutbacks since around 2005, but things are now reaching a critical mass where you've only got the big building blocks left - what are you prepared to lose, because the cuts are happening, like them or not.
- You could save the BBC News channel, but what services are you prepared to cut instead? Newsnight? Regional News?
- Or do favour saving services but cutting journalist numbers - that route you're looking at way more job losses and will only have bare bones services left.
- Or do you merge the news channels, but favour the UK route. Fine, but you're imperilling BBC World News's advertising revenue - if that £8-10m profit goes, you're looking at more budget cuts and, if it becomes unprofitable, you are looking at losing the service altogether as licence payers can't subsidise the service. If you lose BBC World News, you also lose a significant chunk of the News channel's output and you are likely left with no news channels (as well as leaving millions of international viewers without a trustworthy TV news provider).
This plan leaves World News largely unscathed and, when additional radio simulcasts are added, doesn't lead to much reduction in the number of 'UK-only' hours on the News channel (even with just Nicky Campbell, the loss in exclusive content hours is roughly the same as the 2015 cuts). It's pretty much the best plan available given the circumstances that BBC News is in. These changes aren't being made maliciously, but reluctantly. I'm sure that the people making these cuts don't want to lose good staff or be in this position at all, but the position they are in necessitates difficult choices like these.
Well I'm prepared to cut CBeebies and put all of its programmes onto the CBBC Channel, because the truth of the matter is before 2002 there was no CBeebies, only CBBC, now I know some people say it won't work but I think it could.
For example you could have CBBC programmes including Newsround from 7am to 9am, then have CBeebies programmes air from 9am till 3pm, have CBBC Programmes including Blue Peter from 3pm till 6pm then have the bedtime hour from 6pm till 7pm, and you can have the presenters that suit their age.
As for the bitesize slot, why not move it to BBC Two considering all they show in the morning is BBC News until Politics Live.
(15-07-2022, 01:03 PM)Matrix Wrote: [ -> ]Personally, one of the more interesting proposals has been this concept of visualising radio content. If Today and PM, for example, can be formatted in a sustainable way (not simply dumping a camera in a studio as now is the case) then there is suddenly quite a range of content across different mediums. It's interesting but I do worry that it'll end up being a case of producers trying to re-image radio content for TV with none of the underpinning thoughts about practicality.
The French already do this so well by simulcasting the RMC Radio breakfast show, but instead of just sticking cameras in a radio studio, they have a television studio which still has a radio desk for the presenter to play jingles etc, but they also have a video wall for the bulletin reader to illustrate stories to tv viewers.
British broadcasters are well behind on making radio on tv work as seen on TalkTV.
(15-07-2022, 01:17 PM)BBCMeridian Wrote: [ -> ]Well I'm prepared to cut CBeebies and put all of its programmes onto the CBBC Channel, because the truth of the matter is before 2002 there was no CBeebies, only CBBC, now I know some people say it won't work but I think it could.
For example you could have CBBC programmes including Newsround from 7am to 9am, then have CBeebies programmes air from 9am till 3pm, have CBBC Programmes including Blue Peter from 3pm till 6pm then have the bedtime hour from 6pm till 7pm, and you can have the presenters that suit their age.
As for the bitesize slot, why not move it to BBC Two considering all they show in the morning is BBC News until Politics Live.
I wasn't particularly aware that CBeebies came out of the BBC News budget. Judging by the budgets outlined in the BBC Annual Report, I'm also not sure that it would even be enough to save the BBC News channel anyway even if losing CBeebies as an independent channel/brand was seen as desirable.
Also, and this is directed more broadly, can members please trim quotes to only include the relevant passages - long quotes make pages very unreadable. (Although there is also a bug that introduces additional line spaces when quotes are cropped).
It's a real shame, hope it can be avoided but given the funding situation I very much doubt it. At least a complete overhaul from scratch will hopefully be a better solution than just continuing to increase the fudged daytime simulcast hours as they are at present. Unfortunately I can imagine myself watching a lot more Sky News in future, though.
It does make me think about how we didn't realise just how good we had it in the 2000s, with digital channels putting out many hours of original content and a fully-fledged, well-resourced domestic news channel from the BBC.
(15-07-2022, 01:17 PM)BBCMeridian Wrote: [ -> ]Well I'm prepared to cut CBeebies and put all of its programmes onto the CBBC Channel
Not this again, please!
The statement on the BBC news merger, mentions that during UK daytime hours, the channel will broadcast from London..
The question is what is classed as daytime hours, in broadcasting, is it 6am to 6pm or is it flexible and / or is mirrored against the UK daylight schedule.
If it was fixed time, would have thought the BBC statement would have mentioned those hours.
(15-07-2022, 09:36 AM)valley Wrote: [ -> ]I'm not surprised to see the BBC making this decision based on the funding situation they are currently in. It certainly sounds like there will eventually be a significant reduction in staff which will be sad for many, and I hope that they get suitable alternate employment without delay.
(15-07-2022, 01:31 AM)headliner101 Wrote: [ -> ]One advantage of SkyNews and GBN (yup, I can't believe I'm praising them) is you do not need to be in the UK to watch them. So if you need UK-focused stories whilst outside, they are available with the full lineup and you do not have to jump hoops to access. And they're free (no need to feel guilty about licence fee payments for these).
Then again I question how does Sky and GBN make money by making its news channel FTA (probably covered in the relevant threads).
Sky News makes money through selling advertisements in the UK and Ireland, and through element sponsorship - currently weather by Qatar Airways, sport by Vitality and stocks by Interactive Investor - there are also occasional international ads too for multinational companies like DHL. International broadcasters also pay Sky to carry the channel on their own network - hence why the YouTube live stream is blocked in some regions.
I hope the dismissed staff will find a future in these other outlets. Sky is a decent alternative when it comes to news. Obviously owing to the ads that air, the time spent on actual news or even general programming is considerably shorter than News 24, but as Comcast is its owner, it does not sound too right-wing and you certainly can't see it be left-wing. It's certainly not as politically charged as its Australian cousin (based on what I hear) so it should be an employer worth watching for the those who get the pink slip from Auntie.
I know this is not related, but by any chance, isn't Sweden one of those countries where Sky's free YouTube stream is blocked? I know CNNI's audio stream is blocked there even though it is free-to-stream in Britain.
(15-07-2022, 02:12 PM)The_IT_Technician Wrote: [ -> ]The statement on the BBC news merger, mentions that during UK daytime hours, the channel will broadcast from London..
The question is what is classed as daytime hours, in broadcasting, is it 6am to 6pm or is it flexible and / or is mirrored against the UK daylight schedule.
If it was fixed time, would have thought the BBC statement would have mentioned those hours.
I suspect daytime means post-Breakfast (which comes from Salford anyway) and before the Six.
But I agree with what one of the posters is speculating here - that given how trade unions see this move, there might be an hour or so (maybe even just a half-hour) of original programming from London in the evening more than originally planned.
Can we not just have a minute of ads an hour to find the uk station?....
(15-07-2022, 02:12 PM)The_IT_Technician Wrote: [ -> ]The statement on the BBC news merger, mentions that during UK daytime hours, the channel will broadcast from London..
The question is what is classed as daytime hours, in broadcasting, is it 6am to 6pm or is it flexible and / or is mirrored against the UK daylight schedule.
If it was fixed time, would have thought the BBC statement would have mentioned those hours.
I would expect 'daytime' hours would roughly correspond to the 'European breakfast' shift through to the 'European evening' shift, so around 05:00 to 20:00 UKT or roughly the time that BBC World News would have historically used the daytime backdrop, plus Outside Source (which I really can't see being axed). I expect that the lack of specificity in hours is because plans haven't been finalised and they may want to keep a shift or two on the table for negotiations.
(15-07-2022, 03:29 PM)GraemeT Wrote: [ -> ]Can we not just have a minute of ads an hour to find the uk station?....
I presume you mean 'fund'?
If so, and putting aside the intellectual gymnastics you would have to do to get to stage of adverts on the BBC, a 'minute of ads an hour' would be a drop in the ocean compared with what the BBC requires to run a news operation of its current size and shape.
At least Nadine Dorries and the Daily Mail will be happy.
(15-07-2022, 12:59 PM)Keith Wrote: [ -> ] (15-07-2022, 11:08 AM)TheJarv Wrote: [ -> ]A report on the News Channel about the future of the News Channels said pilots will start in the Autumn, wonder if we will see a gradual evolution rather than a completely new service starting on a given date?
It wouldn't surprise me if the 'overnight' 12am to 6am programming change first. As far as I'm aware both channels simulcast during this time, so there's minimal worries about UK opt-out, apart from a couple UK specific items during ad breaks. In addition 12-2am already comes live from Singapore (from 11pm on World News), with Newsday in the front half hours. If 2-6am also came from Singapore I doubt many people in the UK would notice the difference, especially if the content of that timeslot was the same (at least for now).
I'm guessing 2am onwards will come from Washington if I'm reading the press release right, which partly explains the extra 20 jobs there. Seems odd not to have anyone on duty in the UK should news break overnight though - would be the first time since N24 launched.
What is actually produced in Washington nowadays? The listings only seem to list World News America at 10pm/5p ET for half an hour but I thought they produced an hour long version for some PBS stations too.