BBC News and BBC World to merge

[Kojak]

I think it has a better chance when they treat is as a new channel where the plan from day one is for it to be a largely merged operation. The trouble in it's existing arrangements is it's been so ad-hoc over the years and so much switching from being UK led to World led is they don't quite know how to do it. Also worth noting that already they switch from one focus to another within an hour at points in the schedule - switching from World News America to an Asian focused Newsday an hour later for example.

I personally think a merged 24/World could easily work - but they must be creative about it. As has been mentioned, Domestic and World going their separate ways during programmes like Breakfast and the Six would make sense (though if they're going to simulcast the Six and the Ten, they really should be signed, imo).

One other thing they could do is to bring back something like UK Today, and show that on Domestic when World goes to India Business Report or similar - that would be a good way of ensuring some UK-focused coverage remains on the new channel. Or maybe they could set aside certain hours to be UK-focused, and others to be internationally-focused?

[headliner101]

Although surely as such things are often done for the benefit of Americans you'd think Secretary would make more sense considering their equivalent term is usually "Secretary of... " Indeed I don't think the US use the term Minister at all

In my view you should generally use the title they hold in the country - Angela Merkel was always referred to as Chancellor for example rather than President or Prime Minister.

Well using the term Foreign Secretary in referring to your Foreign Minister may be more understandable for the rest of the world. It’s potato potatoe. BBC WN put monetary figures is $USD, they use American English for a lot of things.

World also uses metric units for references, as well as the 24-hour clock more often than News 24. It’s going to be admittedly weird to hear ‘foreign’ terms used habitually for News 24 audiences more often.

Even the term for prime minister is debatable. In the Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland, they use Taoiseach to refer to the Irish head of government but elsewhere we just use prime minister. And Spain uses presidente del gobierno but english countries refer to him simply as the Spanish prime minister. And even the term Justice Secretary and Attorney General. They are both used in the UK but refer each to different posts (the US they are the same officeholder).

Point is if the merged channel needs to bring these posts up for international audiences for whatever reason, it will make for a lively editorial debate.

[Brekkie]

In theory where they're just being referred to in astons could they generate different astons for UK/World?

[JamesWorldNews]

I’ve watched two successive simulcasts today (Shaun Ley) and on each occasion, he’s had to interrupt an ongoing LIVE interview to say goodbye to international viewers. And, on one occasion, not even looking at the camera to do it. But continuing to look at his guest on the screen nearby.

Anyway, the point I came to make: surely the timing and positioning of planned DTLs during a fixed bulletin could be improved so as not to have the need to halt the interview to allow us to opt away?

[Robinho02]

My view on this is clear: they have to choose - either broadcast BBC World News in the UK or broadcast the BBC News Channel around the world. 

I would favour the latter, with an increase in world stories eg. Could have a segment in back half hour along with sport and business. 

At the moment it is so confused and a mess! If you’re a viewer in the UK today, you’ll be wondering why on earth the BBC are leading on Sri Lanka, if you’ve been watching World News this week you might well be very confused by why they’ve been so focussed on Westminster. Every hour is a different mix of headlines dependent on where the programme is broadcast - rubbish for the average viewer who doesn’t know that. 

Would a globally broadcast BBC News Channel do less well than BBC World News? Certainly if I’m abroad I would prefer to see the BBC News Channel to understand what’s happening in the UK. Is there really much of a market for a world news channel? Sky News broadcasts in other countries so there must be a market for UK focussed news globally.

[Moz]

My view on this is clear: they have to choose - either broadcast BBC World News in the UK or broadcast the BBC News Channel around the world.

Totally agree! And it should be the latter.

It's a British organisation and shouldn't be ashamed of that. I very much doubt someone in Sierra Leone would get confused as to *which* Prime Minister the BBC is referring to when they refer to just "the Prime Minister".

[harshy]

My view on this is clear: they have to choose - either broadcast BBC World News in the UK or broadcast the BBC News Channel around the world.

Totally agree! And it should be the latter.

It's a British organisation and shouldn't be ashamed of that. I very much doubt someone in Sierra Leone would get confused as to *which* Prime Minister the BBC is referring to when they refer to just "the Prime Minister".

Then it will be boring bbc news red 24/7 it needs to be like world news with multicoloured studio b.

It won’t work anyway this idea…

[Brekkie]

I guess the changes are predominantly 11am - 7pm weekdays anyhow - outside these hours apart from the odd hour isn't it largely simulcast anyway?

[Steve Williams]

Then it will be boring bbc news red 24/7 it needs to be like world news with multicoloured studio b.

It's the news. News is boring, whatever the colour of the set is.

[harshy]

Then it will be boring bbc news red 24/7 it needs to be like world news with multicoloured studio b.

It's the news. News is boring, whatever the colour of the set is.

Yeah but bbc world news viewers aren’t used to that.

[AJB39]

Then it will be boring bbc news red 24/7 it needs to be like world news with multicoloured studio b.

It's the news. News is boring, whatever the colour of the set is.

I find news depressing but I rarely find it boring.

[DTV]

My view on this is clear: they have to choose - either broadcast BBC World News in the UK or broadcast the BBC News Channel around the world. 

I would favour the latter, with an increase in world stories eg. Could have a segment in back half hour along with sport and business. 

Would a globally broadcast BBC News Channel do less well than BBC World News? Certainly if I’m abroad I would prefer to see the BBC News Channel to understand what’s happening in the UK. Is there really much of a market for a world news channel? Sky News broadcasts in other countries so there must be a market for UK focussed news globally.

God I'm bored of this parochialism on here. Fundamentally, there is value in an international oriented news channel in the UK, there is next to no value in a UK oriented news channel internationally. In addition, the fact that BBC World News is a money-making enterprise and the BBC News channel isn't means that there shouldn't really be a debate over whether which path was best. Though, of course, this doesn't mean it'll be the path the BBC follow.

And I know what people are going to say 'what about UK people who are abroad' and 'people tune to the BBC because they want British news'. Just wrong and wrong. BBC World News gets around 120-130m viewers per week, while a tiny slither of that audience might be Brits abroad and some people will tune in particularly for UK news stories, the main reason that BBC World News has been such a success is that, historically, it was always good at delivering a balanced international news agenda that prioritises stories based on their global importance.

Frankly, if you believe that the BBC's large audiences in India and Africa are tuning in because of a desire to hear about UK stories, you are delusional. This is why attempts to replicate this imagined view of BBC World News, such as France 24 and DW, have nowhere near the same audience. On a day like today, the BBC's international viewers are far more interested in the Sri Lanka crisis than the Conservative leadership contest. If the BBC went down the 'broadcast the domestic News channel globally' route, I suspect many of those international viewers would switch over pretty quickly (which would, of course, mean less money for the BBC).

[AaronLancs]

My view on this is clear: they have to choose - either broadcast BBC World News in the UK or broadcast the BBC News Channel around the world. 

I would favour the latter, with an increase in world stories eg. Could have a segment in back half hour along with sport and business. 

Would a globally broadcast BBC News Channel do less well than BBC World News? Certainly if I’m abroad I would prefer to see the BBC News Channel to understand what’s happening in the UK. Is there really much of a market for a world news channel? Sky News broadcasts in other countries so there must be a market for UK focussed news globally.

God I'm bored of this parochialism on here. Fundamentally, there is value in an international oriented news channel in the UK, there is next to no value in a UK oriented news channel internationally. In addition, the fact that BBC World News is a money-making enterprise and the BBC News channel isn't means that there shouldn't really be a debate over whether which path was best. Though, of course, this doesn't mean it'll be the path the BBC follow.

And I know what people are going to say 'what about UK people who are abroad' and 'people tune to the BBC because they want British news'. Just wrong and wrong. BBC World News gets around 120-130m viewers per week, while a tiny slither of that audience might be Brits abroad and some people will tune in particularly for UK news stories, the main reason that BBC World News has been such a success is that, historically, it was always good at delivering a balanced international news agenda that prioritises stories based on their global importance.

Frankly, if you believe that the BBC's large audiences in India and Africa are tuning in because of a desire to hear about UK stories, you are delusional. This is why attempts to replicate this imagined view of BBC World News, such as France 24 and DW, have nowhere near the same audience. On a day like today, the BBC's international viewers are far more interested in the Sri Lanka crisis than the Conservative leadership contest. If the BBC went down the 'broadcast the domestic News channel globally' route, I suspect many of those international viewers would switch over pretty quickly (which would, of course, mean less money for the BBC).

Here here, DTV. Thinking along similar lines. You don't have people suddenly wanting BBC World Service - if Rob doesn't mind me bringing a radio perspective into it - into a BBC News Radio Service for the UK 'market' to use the turn of phrase.

Plus also, one thing with - as it was known for a good proportion of its time - BBC World is that audiences internationally who trust that "friend" - if one could call it it - would feel betrayed if all of a sudden it were to spout UK focused stories and neglect the international audience that it has built up.

Most of us here in the Purple Place and in the previous Blue Place are mainly predominantly based in the UK in the main. One thing that we have to bear in mind is that in some countries the BBC is the last resort of proper trusted news and information that citizens can access that isn't tarnished with that countries political bias.

[headliner101]

on the issue of

. If the BBC went down the 'broadcast the domestic News channel globally' route, I suspect many of those international viewers would switch over pretty quickly (which would, of course, mean less money for the BBC).

Which begs the question: though the BBC owns World and other international service, how much of the profits can the BBC use from there to reinvest in its domestic operations? My belief is it couldn’t but please confirm.

[DTV]

on the issue of

. If the BBC went down the 'broadcast the domestic News channel globally' route, I suspect many of those international viewers would switch over pretty quickly (which would, of course, mean less money for the BBC).

Which begs the question: though the BBC owns World and other international service, how much of the profits can the BBC use from there to reinvest in its domestic operations?  My belief is it couldn’t but please confirm.

The BBC are allowed to invest commercial money into domestic services, with the purpose of most of their commercial enterprises being to supplement their licence income. Historically there was a lot of kerfuffle about sharing between BBC News and BBC World - particularly before BBC World was profitable (around 2006). IIRC, back then there was a lot of the two channels having to pay each other to use each other's content purely so that domestic BBC News could not be seen to be unfairly subsidising a commercial enterprise - things like the 09:30 BBC World News bulletin on News 24 unofficially existed so that BBC News could give BBC World money for a legitimate reason.

This split between the two channels is far more relaxed these days, particularly since the 2015 cutbacks to BBC News. I'm not sure if they still have to do the shifting money between the two, but the attitude seems to be that it all goes into one big BBC News pot and everything is fine so long as licence money doesn't pay for international exclusive content and adverts don't appear on UK content.