BBC Four & CBBC to close

[Keith]

...Consolidating the news channel and BBC World News (though preserving the ability for the UK to opt out) is hardly a surprise...

Cue weekly "BBC pays journalists and technicians MILLIONS to SIT AROUND DOING NOTHING WAITING FOR BREAKING NEWS" stories. To have the true ability to opt out any time, you still need a presenter, producer, entire gallery and studio crew, makeup artists, etc etc etc - as well as a maintained, functioning, turned on studio - on standby. You may as well utilise those resources to, err, broadcast a separate channel. Unless there will be UK focused opt outs at specific, regular times of the day - which still requires scheduled crews, talent and studios to be paid for, and reduces you ability to cover the news outside of those scheduled hours. 

How do BBC World News handle the programmes that are currently shown in the back half hours during weekday daytime? It's possible that some of the UK opt-outs could happen during this time, whereby we get 30 minutes of UK news instead of a pre-recorded programme (e.g. at 9.30am instead of HARDtalk, based on today's schedule). For these opt-outs then potentially the same presenter and crew could be utilised that provided the first half hour of 'world' news. Currently 6am to 9am is a simulcast with BBC One with signing, and I wouldn't be surprised if that stays and also counts towards the UK opt-outs.

[W. Knight]

I tell you what let’s go even further back and Just dump everything on one BBC TV channel shall we. We will go back to an hour at 4 o clock for kids programs then certain posters might be happy then.  

Merging CBBC and CBeebies is a big no. Do you really expect to go back to the days of In the night garden followed by Blue Peter it don’t work. Even before they split in 2002 they were had split links for the pre school shows.  Same with merging Three and Four together a 1993 repeat of top of the pops followed be live in the flesh simply wouldn’t work.

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:

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.

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.

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.

"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?

[Rob]

As a side note, can people please learn to edit quotes - you only really need to include the relevant parts of the most recent quote you are referencing.

I concur, this thread is becoming a headache to read.

Could we all also calm down a bit please? You're entitled to have your say, but there's no need for the amateur dramatics that are emerging.

Thanks.

[Inspector Sands]

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?

S4C was only bilingual through necessity - there was only one analogue TV channel to put both services on. RTE I think is all English except its Gaelic language radio station. TG4 is the Gaelic language TV channel in Ireland

So it's not really done anywhere else and in Scotland there's the issue that BBC Alba is part owned by MG Alba (Scottish Gaelic Media Service) which is funded by the Scottish and UK governments. So most of BBC Alba is not license fee funded and the provision of Gaelic programming is mandated by law. Suddenly merging it with an English language channel just isn't going to happen

[James2001]

So the solution here appears to be “Bring back my childhood”.

Elements of the past can work, though that sort of approach is at best unhealthy.

Though it's the same way the government's been running the country as well, and that's been a massive success...

....oh, wait...

---

TG4 is the Gaelic language TV channel in Ireland

Won't be any vampires watching then...

I think TG4 do show English language films and imports though, just not any English original programming.

[Kunst]

"Ho letto meglio articoli e opinioni in rete.

Ciò accadrà nel 2025, e è più che comprensibile e giustificato:
la BBC deve tagliar un sacco di rami secchi se vuol rimanere competitiva e in forma, BBC Four non produce quasi più nulla e vive di repliche e qualche acquisizione; il target di CBBC in UK e non solo s'è mosso online, CBeebies ha molto più successo e il suo target è più affezionato alla TV lineare.... questa volta, salvano un'intera frequenza (quella occupata da BBC Four/CBeebies), ergo, a differenza della scellerata decisione di chiuder BBC Three in partenza (lasciando del tempo inutilizzato), questa ha più senso.

E poi fin al 2025 ci sarà tanto tempo; la TV si muoverà molto più verso lo streaming, e internet sarà ancora più accessibile... è una scelta per il futuro, non imminente, e più che comprensibile, se vogliono rimanere competitivi e un punto di riferimento per il mondo2

https://www.digital-forum.it/showthread....est/page28

I'll translate what I've stated on Digital Forum, with some small additions

While I was a bit shocked at first, this news is more than understandable for the BBC.
The BBC has to cut a lot of useless "departments" and stay competitive in shape, BBC Four doesn't produce anything and lives on repeats and a small amount of acquisition; CBeebies is much more successful as a linear channel, and its younger audience is justifiably more attached to linear TV... and this time, they remove an entire frequency, which makes more sense compared to last time which left a strange BBC Three void from 9pm to 6am (and BTW BBC Three produces a lot more stuff than Four).

And until 2025 you have a lot of time, TV will be moving towards streaming more and more, more channels will shut down; internet will be more accessible... it's something for the future, if they want to stay competitive and stay as an important reference for the rest of the world (no doubt similar cuts will happen elsewhere on other public TVs, too)

[Roger Darthwell]

"Ho letto meglio articoli e opinioni in rete.

Ciò accadrà nel 2025, e è più che comprensibile e giustificato:
la BBC deve tagliar un sacco di rami secchi se vuol rimanere competitiva e in forma, BBC Four non produce quasi più nulla e vive di repliche e qualche acquisizione; il target di CBBC in UK e non solo s'è mosso online, CBeebies ha molto più successo e il suo target è più affezionato alla TV lineare.... questa volta, salvano un'intera frequenza (quella occupata da BBC Four/CBeebies), ergo, a differenza della scellerata decisione di chiuder BBC Three in partenza (lasciando del tempo inutilizzato), questa ha più senso.

E poi fin al 2025 ci sarà tanto tempo; la TV si muoverà molto più verso lo streaming, e internet sarà ancora più accessibile... è una scelta per il futuro, non imminente, e più che comprensibile, se vogliono rimanere competitivi e un punto di riferimento per il mondo2

https://www.digital-forum.it/showthread....est/page28

I'll translate what I've stated on Digital Forum, with some small additions

While I was a bit shocked at first, this news is more than understandable for the BBC.
The BBC has to cut a lot of useless "departments" and stay competitive in shape, BBC Four doesn't produce anything and lives on repeats and a small amount of acquisition; CBeebies is much more successful as a linear channel, and its younger audience is justifiably more attached to linear TV... and this time, they remove an entire frequency, which makes more sense compared to last time which left a strange BBC Three void from 9pm to 6am (and BTW BBC Three produces a lot more stuff than Four).

And until 2025 you have a lot of time, TV will be moving towards streaming more and more, more channels will shut down; internet will be more accessible... it's something for the future, if they want to stay competitive and stay as an important reference for the rest of the world (no doubt similar cuts will happen elsewhere on other public TVs, too)

Well what a very bleak future it is then.......

[Rob]

Though it's the same way the government's been running the country as well, and that's been a massive success...
....oh, wait...

The discussion of political issues is not allowed on the forum, unless it has something to do with television presentation; for example, coverage of general elections. You are to keep your thoughts on politicians and political parties to yourself.

Any further political opinions will result in warnings, and that message is for everyone.

[Kunst]

Well what a very bleak future it is then.......

If you're very into presentation and linear TV, yes, but we are quite a minority, in the grand scheme of things .

Everything else is inevitable, especially once we remove the rose tinted glasses.. of course, linear TV will still be needed and will still be a lot watched, but overall, I can't see many minor channels, especially on pay TV, surviving too well

[Roger Darthwell]

If you're very into presentation and linear TV, yes, but we are quite a minority, in the grand scheme of things .

Everything else is inevitable, especially once we remove the rose tinted glasses.. of course, linear TV will still be needed and will still be a lot watched, but overall, some minor channels, especially on pay TV, will be reduced

I can understand pay TV, but can you explain why, if everything is inevitable, that there has been such an outcry over here over the closure of all these channels?

[Kunst]

I can understand pay TV, but can you explain why, if everything is inevitable, that there has been such an outcry over here over the closure of all these channels?

Well, BBC Three wasn't exactly a "small channel from a small company"  .
They were losing some visibility by just staying as a streaming service, especially when it comes to newer produced programming.

BBC is influential in whatever they do, it's understandable there's an outcry and all that stuff, but I like to stay realistic too 
BBC Four's budget and role has been greatly reduced, and the CBBC audience is quite technology-savvy.

CBeebies is kind of an accompaniment (as many preschooler channels are) for parents that want to leave their children stuck in front of a TV; and it doesn't have annoying adverts and it's much more education than the commercial counterparts like Nick Jr and Tiny POP, so it's understandable and its closure would be very controversial

---

Oh, and merging CBBC and Cbeebies would never ever work; completely different audience, audiences which have been quite split and catered for a long time

[tellyblues]

Closing CBBC and BBC4 won't make much of a difference cost-wise when very little new content is produced for these channels and it'll simply go online, although some provisions have to be made for viewers that can't access it and putting children's programming on existing linear channels is the only way to do this. Yes, it might not rate well but it won't because it's not aimed at a general audience.

There have been many explanations given as to why the CBBC block wasn't rating well in the end including "kids don't watch linear TV" and "they have other things to do" which are both partly true, but the BBC faced more competition in later years from Sky etc and lost branded content which is the type of stuff kids talk about with their friends and want to watch to feel included plus it is seen as more exciting than stuffy BBC shows. Another thing is that the likes of Byker Grove and Grange Hill weren't replaced but the same excuses were made yet again, this time for teenagers. How about that what the BBC was providing for young people overall wasn't appealing enough?

Which brings me to this need for the BBC to get viewers online. Programmes are already online. People know about iPlayer. Maybe it's the case they choose not to use it more than they already do because they don't like it? What exactly is the content that is going to make iPlayer use go through the roof? The shows that attract the most viewers every year are event TV, big dramas and live sport which cost serious money and are unrepresentative of the BBC's output on the whole. There isn't the budget for more of it.

Trying to convert linear viewers is also counterproductive if they miss key PSB content such as news because they binge-watch other stuff on the iPlayer. Then once they have ploughed the archive and rely on dribs and drabs, much like what has happened with Netflix, people will question what they are actually paying for.

[Col87]

The problem is I don’t think streaming is the proper solution or the future like people predict. Look at last year when Sky had a massive change. If streaming is good and the future then why didn’t they close channels down. Instead they actually launched more channels not less.

ITV and Channel 4 could save money by closing channels if streaming is so good especially with younger audiences. They could easily move ITV2/Be E4 online only. They haven’t though have they. The BBC themselves have already proved with BBC Three that closing down channels and making them online only is a great way to lose that target audience and very difficult to get back. I think they are going to make the same mistake by losing the CBBC audience completely if it goes Iplayer only. They should actually be building on the branding not getting rid of it by hiding it on Iplayer.

There is also one advantage linear has over online as well. The internet can and does go down occasionally. Other than very rare things like the Billsdale transmitter fire last year linear TV will always be available and ( other than the TV license) does not cost anything. To get CBBC in future that’s households needing to buy both a tv license and then paying for broadband which can be very costly especially if families are poor which at the moment a lot are. The BBC need to get rid of this idea of digital first and really concentrate on what they should be doing providing PSB content for everyone. The Iplayer and linear can happily co exist.

[Kunst]

These channels do well mostly with an older audience than they're supposed to, except for some big hits; or for those people that keep having the channels as a background too!
They're commercial operations, they can easily spend less money on them than the BBC

As for Sky, the channels are just a kind of accompaniment for streaming, in order to make people aware of these "brands".

Whether you like it or not, whatever perspective you might take it, linear TV is in decline, or not as healthy as it was.
I agree it might be an excuse for spending less money on CBBC too, but you couldn't really think BBC in its current form could last forever

[XIII]

It’s daft people are suggesting the BBC should abandon digital first, given how connected people are these days, going back to linear and abandoning iPlayer would be extremely stupid