27-05-2022, 03:49 PM
(This post was last modified: 27-05-2022, 03:50 PM by BBCMeridian.)
(27-05-2022, 09:08 AM)W. Knight Wrote:I'm sorry but the guardian is wrong on this, it was a downhill for children's programmes on the BBC, Nigel Pickard damaged the children's brand on the BBC and I still stand by it, I still believe that younger and older children's audiences need to come together and I still believe that separating CBBC wouldn't happened if Nigel Pickard hadn't joined the BBC, another reason why I don't like the brand names and the logo was that when CBBC was last merged in 2001, it used corporate branding like they used the BBC One and BBC Two logos but added the C in front of them, and to be honest they could've still used the corporate logo and have the strand on One and Two known as C BBC, even if that means still launching two children's channels but instead of calling them CBBC and CBeebies, I would call them BBC Kids and BBC Junior, that's why I don't like the names of the channels and the fact that they're separated, never have and never will. Nobody has to agree with me but that's what I think.(27-05-2022, 07:44 AM)BBCMeridian Wrote: Erm all the links were presented in the same style before the split in 2002, like for example these clips.Quoting the Guardian article on CBBC and CBeebies' launch:
Maggie Brown Wrote:One crucial change is that, for the first time, BBC children's programmers have the freedom to target two distinct age groups (instead of lumping them together) and tailor the services appropriately.Although I can't watch either channel from where I am, I agree with this approach. Stuck with one major English channel, I often found my early teenage self not being able to choose what to watch, as the 'children's TV' timeslot are often preschool programming on learning alphabets, than cartoons and teenage sitcoms. Like what others have repeatedly said, kids at different age have different needs, even if they're represented by the same faces.
Mr [Nigel] Pickard was recruited from the commercial sector two years ago when only one digital service was proposed: he successfully argued the television needs of a four-year-old were quite different to those of a 12-year-old.
"But they can choose what they want to watch online, it's much more convenient" - but I'd argue children's TV (strand or channel) is curated more carefully than, say, Youtube or TikTok algorithms. We've heard about terrible consequences led by online challenges, or NSFW content on a supposedly kids-friendly platform. With uncontrollable schedules, it's much easier for kids to be led astray by random content they consumed, especially in forms like autoplay.
Moving on to other aspects in the proposal, I'm not surprised with BBC4 closing, as their focus has shifted from the initial inspiring elements to whatever the BBC archive has. I think it can actually reposition the remaining channels: BBC1 as the place to be for fresh general entertainment, BBC2 is where you'd catch up your old-but-gold classics, and BBC3 is for the teens.
Some raise the necessity for BBC Scotland. I'm not too familiar with British politics, but to me it represents the viewers there better, when it has a separate identity. One thing I might change instead is BBC Alba: Can the two channels be broadcasted under the BBC Scotland banner? I mean, S4C used to do English/Welsh broadcasting, and RTE1 is a mix of English and Irish, maybe BBC Scotland can use the two languages concurrently as well?
