BBC Four & CBBC to close

[Torpido]

Put the cbbc programmes on bbc 2 in a similar way to rte 2 in Ireland if your going to close the channel not sure about sport however

[Andrew]

In all of this I feel sorry for the kids of the parents on Universal Credit who don’t have a phone or internet access and use the free kids channels, they lose out most from this.

On paper this is a good argument for a children's strand on one of the remaining linear channels.  However, 97% of the UK has internet access so I'm not sure it really stands up once you dive into the figures.  Also BT and Virgin offer heavily discounted broadband for those on Universal Credit.

And I bet the vast majority of that 3% are older people in their 80s+ who have no interest in getting the Internet rather than people with kids

[Newshound47]

Newsround should get a linear slot to ensure those children and schools without a decent internet connection can still watch the programme.

It’s also something I can’t imagine people stream.

[all new Phil]

In the nicest possible way there are some quite naive posters here that I feel need to look at the bigger picture.

• It’s not as simple as BBC 4 closing not saving much money so why bother - some current BBC 4 content (plus CBBC content no doubt) will I imagine move to BBC 2 (and 1) so there will be probably just as much saving from BBC 2, if not more. It’s about rationalising services and content across the board. 
  
• There won’t be a campaign to save any of these channels like we saw with 6 Music. Nobody really cares about BBC 4 in all honesty. CBBC viewers will be able to find their shows online easily enough. 6 Music is more like a ‘club’ that listeners are more engaged with. 
  

Overall I’m pretty pleased with today’s announcement - they seem to have finally done what they’ve needed to do for a long time and worked out what they should be providing and what can be better provided by other means than just sticking something on its own channel.

The changes to BBC News seem rational and will finally give it some certainty rather than the awkward kind-of-merging-but-trying-to-pretend-it-isn’t style they’ve been doing. I think it will be a better service for UK viewers. 

I think there is more still they can do. It won’t be popular here for understandable reasons, but I don’t understand how they can justify separate playout and announcers in the nations. Every single salary should be justified in terms of how many licence fee payers pay for it and what value they bring. Someone on a salary of 50k (as a ballpark and probably quite reasonable average) costs the licence fee of over 250 households. This same thought process needs to be made for every local radio station, every podcast, and anything that isn’t a core service. And if this sounds harsh - it’s what nearly every private company has to do. I’m really pleased that the person at the top seems to have this mindset too.

[Brekkie]

Newsround should get a linear slot to ensure those children and schools without a decent internet connection can still watch the programme.

I'd be surprised if CBBC didn't get an afternoon slot on BBC2 and probably weekend mornings too.

[BBCMeridian]

In the nicest possible way there are some quite naive posters here that I feel need to look at the bigger picture.

• It’s not as simple as BBC 4 closing not saving much money so why bother - some current BBC 4 content (plus CBBC content no doubt) will I imagine move to BBC 2 (and 1) so there will be probably just as much saving from BBC 2, if not more. It’s about rationalising services and content across the board. 
  
• There won’t be a campaign to save any of these channels like we saw with 6 Music. Nobody really cares about BBC 4 in all honesty. CBBC viewers will be able to find their shows online easily enough. 6 Music is more like a ‘club’ that listeners are more engaged with. 
  

Overall I’m pretty pleased with today’s announcement - they seem to have finally done what they’ve needed to do for a long time and worked out what they should be providing and what can be better provided by other means than just sticking something on its own channel.

The changes to BBC News seem rational and will finally give it some certainty rather than the awkward kind-of-merging-but-trying-to-pretend-it-isn’t style they’ve been doing. I think it will be a better service for UK viewers. 

I think there is more still they can do. It won’t be popular here for understandable reasons, but I don’t understand how they can justify separate playout and announcers in the nations. Every single salary should be justified in terms of how many licence fee payers pay for it and what value they bring. Someone on a salary of 50k (as a ballpark and probably quite reasonable average) costs the licence fee of over 250 households. This same thought process needs to be made for every local radio station, every podcast, and anything that isn’t a core service. And if this sounds harsh - it’s what nearly every private company has to do. I’m really pleased that the person at the top seems to have this mindset too.

I'm sorry but I respectfully disagree with you, I'm absolutely condemning this decision made by Tim Davie, the closure of BBC Four home to some of our favourite archive programmes such as Top of the Pops and home of the BBC Proms is unacceptable, and especially when it comes to the BBC News and World News Channels, you cannot have a merged BBC News Channel because, one of different time zones around the world and second how are they supposed to report a serious news story in the UK and another news story in another country, I hope Ofcom will reject Tim's proposals as it would have to be approved first before he can do what he likes.

[NancerOnTheLIVEForum]

I am absolutely not surprised that BBC Four is getting axed. It's arguably the least watched of the main 4 BBC channels, and the fact it became an archive channel doesn't help matters.

[DTV]

I am absolutely not surprised that BBC Four is getting axed. It's arguably the least watched of the main 4 BBC channels, and the fact it became an archive channel doesn't help matters.

Inarguably, BBC Three is the least watched of the main four BBC linear channels as recorded by BARB data.

[all new Phil]

In the nicest possible way there are some quite naive posters here that I feel need to look at the bigger picture.

• It’s not as simple as BBC 4 closing not saving much money so why bother - some current BBC 4 content (plus CBBC content no doubt) will I imagine move to BBC 2 (and 1) so there will be probably just as much saving from BBC 2, if not more. It’s about rationalising services and content across the board. 
  
• There won’t be a campaign to save any of these channels like we saw with 6 Music. Nobody really cares about BBC 4 in all honesty. CBBC viewers will be able to find their shows online easily enough. 6 Music is more like a ‘club’ that listeners are more engaged with. 
  

Overall I’m pretty pleased with today’s announcement - they seem to have finally done what they’ve needed to do for a long time and worked out what they should be providing and what can be better provided by other means than just sticking something on its own channel.

The changes to BBC News seem rational and will finally give it some certainty rather than the awkward kind-of-merging-but-trying-to-pretend-it-isn’t style they’ve been doing. I think it will be a better service for UK viewers. 

I think there is more still they can do. It won’t be popular here for understandable reasons, but I don’t understand how they can justify separate playout and announcers in the nations. Every single salary should be justified in terms of how many licence fee payers pay for it and what value they bring. Someone on a salary of 50k (as a ballpark and probably quite reasonable average) costs the licence fee of over 250 households. This same thought process needs to be made for every local radio station, every podcast, and anything that isn’t a core service. And if this sounds harsh - it’s what nearly every private company has to do. I’m really pleased that the person at the top seems to have this mindset too.

I'm sorry but I respectfully disagree with you, I'm absolutely condemning this decision made by Tim Davie, the closure of BBC Four home to some of our favourite archive programmes such as Top of the Pops and home of the BBC Proms is unacceptable, and especially when it comes to the BBC News and World News Channels, you cannot have a merged BBC News Channel because, one of different time zones around the world and second how are they supposed to report a serious news story in the UK and another news story in another country, I hope Ofcom will reject Tim's proposals as it would have to be approved first before he can do what he likes.

Which part of my post are you disagreeing with?

[stueyjm]

I am absolutely not surprised that BBC Four is getting axed. It's arguably the least watched of the main 4 BBC channels, and the fact it became an archive channel doesn't help matters.

BBC Four's viewing figures are a lot higher than BBC Three, there isn't any 'arguably' about it.

[Inspector Sands]

Yes I imagine that the old way of having CBBC content on BBC1 and 2 will come back, after all that's what happened when BBC 3 went online

[NancerOnTheLIVEForum]

I am absolutely not surprised that BBC Four is getting axed. It's arguably the least watched of the main 4 BBC channels, and the fact it became an archive channel doesn't help matters.

BBC Four's viewing figures are a lot higher than BBC Three, there isn't any 'arguably' about it.

My mistake. Though I'd also like to speculate if BBC Three will start broadcasting full time when CBBC shuts down?

[Newshound47]

In the nicest possible way there are some quite naive posters here that I feel need to look at the bigger picture.

• It’s not as simple as BBC 4 closing not saving much money so why bother - some current BBC 4 content (plus CBBC content no doubt) will I imagine move to BBC 2 (and 1) so there will be probably just as much saving from BBC 2, if not more. It’s about rationalising services and content across the board. 
  
• There won’t be a campaign to save any of these channels like we saw with 6 Music. Nobody really cares about BBC 4 in all honesty. CBBC viewers will be able to find their shows online easily enough. 6 Music is more like a ‘club’ that listeners are more engaged with. 
  

Overall I’m pretty pleased with today’s announcement - they seem to have finally done what they’ve needed to do for a long time and worked out what they should be providing and what can be better provided by other means than just sticking something on its own channel.

The changes to BBC News seem rational and will finally give it some certainty rather than the awkward kind-of-merging-but-trying-to-pretend-it-isn’t style they’ve been doing. I think it will be a better service for UK viewers. 

I think there is more still they can do. It won’t be popular here for understandable reasons, but I don’t understand how they can justify separate playout and announcers in the nations. Every single salary should be justified in terms of how many licence fee payers pay for it and what value they bring. Someone on a salary of 50k (as a ballpark and probably quite reasonable average) costs the licence fee of over 250 households. This same thought process needs to be made for every local radio station, every podcast, and anything that isn’t a core service. And if this sounds harsh - it’s what nearly every private company has to do. I’m really pleased that the person at the top seems to have this mindset too.

Making cuts to services in the nations is politically explosive and will be kept to a minimum I suspect.

[stueyjm]

I am absolutely not surprised that BBC Four is getting axed. It's arguably the least watched of the main 4 BBC channels, and the fact it became an archive channel doesn't help matters.

BBC Four's viewing figures are a lot higher than BBC Three, there isn't any 'arguably' about it.

My mistake. Though I'd also like to speculate if BBC Three will start broadcasting full time when CBBC shuts down?

It can't even fill a PT schedule, let alone a FT one - if I were the BBC then I would consider the option of a BBC 'extra' channel which combines CBBC, BBC Three and BBC Four programming - with the ability to use it as overflow for sport etc.

[Rex]

I am absolutely not surprised that BBC Four is getting axed. It's arguably the least watched of the main 4 BBC channels, and the fact it became an archive channel doesn't help matters.

BBC Four's viewing figures are a lot higher than BBC Three, there isn't any 'arguably' about it.

My mistake. Though I'd also like to speculate if BBC Three will start broadcasting full time when CBBC shuts down?

Like I said in the CBBC thread, probably not. I do believe I'm repeating this a fair bit.

Closing both BBC Four and CBBC negates the need for the BBC to have a fourth broadcast stream when there's nothing broadcasting there - also I don't think they're going to allow the extra capacity to lay to waste much like when CBBC was broadcasting up to 9pm and had that animated slide when it was off air. 

Additionally, BBC Three has £80m allocated to it, I cannot see them try to fill up the dead hours with a lot of repeated content when the iPlayer provides a cost-effective solution to this. Remember the one time it was extended to 24 hours in time for the Olympics in 2012 and the schedulers struggled to fill it with a couple of programmes? 

The most realistic scenario is moving CBeebies to the downtime hours of BBC Three and having both channels share the broadcast stream, when BBC Four and CBBC are culled in 2025 at the earliest.