TVARK

[InsideUlster]

A-ha! Not long now guys

[Larry the Loafer]

A-ha! Not long now guys

What are you basing that on?

[InsideUlster]

A-ha! Not long now guys

What are you basing that on?

It'll be back for sure.

[JAS84]

Yeah, but based on past history, we can't be sure that there's "not long now". Could be months.

[Mike]

Yeah, but based on past history, we can't be sure that there's "not long now". Could be months.

or indeed years

[Inspector Sands]

Their social media and YouTube presence is still working fine. Which goes back to what I said when they first 'relaunched' the other year....why bother with the site if its going to be a continual problem? There are plenty of other platforms out there now that will get more traffic, be cheaper and won't go down for months on end

[AaronLancs]

Their social media and YouTube presence is still working fine. Which goes back to what I said when they first 'relaunched' the other year....why bother with the site if its going to be a continual problem? There are plenty of other platforms out there now that will get more traffic, be cheaper and won't go down for months on end

For me the main problem with social media (Facebook / Twitter / YouTube) is that there is so much wheat and chaff to do with television presentation that it is a headache trying to find what you are looking for, as I allude to with wheat and chaff. To have sites like TV Ark and TV Whirl still around in 2022 when a lot have given up on having a site altogether. I think one has to be somewhat grateful.

[Inspector Sands]

For me the main problem with social media (Facebook / Twitter / YouTube) is that there is so much wheat and chaff to do with television presentation that it is a headache trying to find what you are looking for, as I allude to with wheat and chaff. To have sites like TV Ark and TV Whirl still around in 2022 when a lot have given up on having a site altogether. I think one has to be somewhat grateful.

There shouldn't be any chaff to sort through, social media is divided up into accounts or channels. If they just used (for example) YouTube, they just have an account of their videos and that's where the visitors go. You don't have to go through everyone else's rubbish to get to that.

Curated sites still have their place, but only if they work. The Internet has moved on and people's habits have too. TV Ark has lost so much time and momentum and goodwill by being a semi-permanant presence. Utilising efforts on unnecessary stuff like propietry video players and teletext simulation hasn't helped

[Brekkie]

The trouble with TV Ark is even after it's relaunch it was very much an analogue relic in a digital world and a slow and clunky experience compared to the likes of Ident Gallery and TV Live, whilst the rearrangement of some menu areas was not as logical as previously - i.e. think sport was switched to A-Z instead of by sport or broadcaster.

There are absolute benefits to hosting content independently on your own site rather than relying on the will of the copyright gods on YouTube but it's no good having the content if the back end doesn't provide a user friendly front end experience.

[VMPhil]

Guess I'm in the minority then. I loved the redesign, regularly browsed the site and appreciated the vast amount of content not available anywhere else (certainly not YouTube). Hoping it comes back soon.

[James2001]

I still appreciate sites like TV Ark, as you have things categorised and put in chronological order, so if you're looking for something it's easy to find, along with the historical informaiton attatched to the videos, compared to sites like YouTube.

[Colm]

Post-YouTube, presentation websites are a welcome complement.

There's also the legacy sites have gained in the industry - astute researchers should, more likely, use TV Ark as one of multiple sources, rather than hedge their bets on one solo YT video.

Which may turn out to be one uploaded in the wrong aspect ratio.

Or be dated incorrectly.

Or be a 15-minute musical interval broadcast between programmes on ITV or Channel 4, passed off as factual content.

I doubt the entire media industry would react negatively to TV Ark's technical problem - if anything, I'd anticipate sympathy and tolerance while the issues are resolved.

[James2001]

Or be a 15-minute musical interval broadcast between programmes on ITV or Channel 4, passed off as factual content.

Oh good lord yes, the amount of times I come across them when searching for presentation videos... and accidentally open one without noticing who posted it. Plenty of people would think they were real as well who aren't as clued up on the person who makes them. Quite often there's more cwilliams videos in a search then genuine footage. There must be some people out there who think TV before the 90s broadcast nothing but intervals because of him.

[Steve in Pudsey]

I think having their own site avoids Youtube copyright strikes etc

[Larry the Loafer]

I think having their own site avoids Youtube copyright strikes etc

They still can't host any ITV Sport presentation though, can they?