BBC News Channel/BBC World News Merger - Printable Version

+- Pres Café (https://pres.cafe)
+-- Forum: Pres Café TV and Radio Forums (https://pres.cafe/forumdisplay.php?fid=1)
+--- Forum: News and Sport Presentation (https://pres.cafe/forumdisplay.php?fid=3)
+--- Thread: BBC News Channel/BBC World News Merger (/showthread.php?tid=103)

---

RE: BBC News Channel/BBC World News Merger - DTV - 11-03-2023

(11-03-2023, 11:38 AM)James2001 Wrote:  How long do we think before there's some sort off reversion?

Given this somewhat confused mess was months in the planning, I wouldn't hold my breath about it being any time soon, even if they decided to go down that route. (Plus, as ever, it's important to remember we should wait until the full merged service launches before signing the death warrant, etc.).

More seriously, though, some kind of 'reverse' is obviously possible, but it's really a question of money and what kind of service would be acceptable. We know that the licence fee contribution to the new channel is about £35m (down from £60m for the old BBC News channel), so there clearly is a bit of wiggleroom. But it isn't as simple as reverting to a pre-2023 version of the News channel, not least as many staff will have been let go. There's lot of focus on presenters and studios, but the actual costs of presenters and studio production staff is only going to run into a few million - the bulk of cuts are coming from newsgathering and the reduction in location reporting, contributor costs, etc.

If you were to primarily play out VTs prepared for network/regional news with a presenter linking between them, you could actually return to pre-2015 levels of UK-only output within the new smaller budget, but a lighter newsgathering operation means your ability to break and explain news would be significantly reduced. Would that make a particularly worthwhile channel? Why not just repeat network bulletins on a loop? Any UK-only service more akin to what is to be expected of the News channel would require a more limited output than what we had until even last week and would still suffer from a reduced UK newsgathering operation.

Ultimately, it's hard to argue that this week has struck a good balance, particularly not from the perspective of world viewers. But I don't think the project is wholly unworkable, it just needs to be done radically differently from what has happened so far. A sensible balance in shared hours + a decent UK breaking/developing news opt + some dedicated UK news hours could be a fairly decent channel in its own right, it's just a matter of hoping the BBC gets there before it's too late.

---

RE: BBC News Channel/BBC World News Merger - harshy - 11-03-2023

They need to go full fat bbc world news or bbc news international with all the branded shows they’ve dropped, simulcast that in the Uk and Uk viewers will get the picture and go off elsewhere for Uk news or tune into the network bulletins or just go to the app, it has to be full throttle and make themselves clear it’s the home of international news from the bbc, as this week has shown you can’t please both audiences it’s impossible.

---

RE: BBC News Channel/BBC World News Merger - DTV - 11-03-2023

(11-03-2023, 01:23 PM)harshy Wrote:  They need to go full fat bbc world news or bbc news international with all the branded shows they’ve dropped, simulcast that in the Uk and Uk viewers will get the picture and go off elsewhere for Uk news or tune into the network bulletins or just go to the app, it has to be full throttle and make themselves clear it’s the home of international news from the bbc, as this week has shown you can’t please both audiences it’s impossible.

But it really doesn't need to be 'full fat' BBC World News. It obviously needs to be World-led (which it hasn't this week) due to the financial realities, but there is definitely a reasonable level of UK news that can be included in shared hours, it's just about striking the right balance and having sensible editorial rules in place. Plus dropping any UK output, such as the as yet unseen UK breaking/developing opt, would be a real case of 'cutting of your nose to spite your face' given there is clearly enough money left for some limited services.

Also, I know you like the branded programmes and studios lit differently, but I doubt that is a dealbreaker for a significant number of viewers.

---

RE: BBC News Channel/BBC World News Merger - matthieu1221 - 11-03-2023

(11-03-2023, 12:25 PM)James2001 Wrote:  Part of the problem then is that trying to provide context to international viewers may make it look patronising to UK audiences- it's an issue it's going to be very, very hard to properly balance when you're broadcasting to both UK and international viewers.  And even with context, most international viewers aren't going to care about the story anyway and will be annoyed it's taking up so much airtime. This really has shown up just how difficult, if not impossible, it's going to be to properly handle major stories of UK interest but limited to zero interest for international viewers on a merged channel. The Lineker story is one that likely wouldn't have been anywhere near BBC World pre-merger, now it's taking up half their airtime.

This sort of situation is why the merged channel is likely to fall apart quite quickly after a there's been a few major UK stories and inadequate handling that will likely annoy both UK and international viewers. Adding context for international viewers will make UK viewers feel they're being talked to like children, not enough coverage of major (or even minor) UK stories will make UK viewers annoyed, UK stories of zero foreign interest will annoy international viewers, it's never going to work. UK viewers want to know what's going on at home, international viewers will turn off at UK stories about people, places and companies they've never heard of. It's like merging Radios 1 and 3 and expecting it to work.

Especially how in this case, any sort of contextualisation which would get international viewers vaguely interested would mean explaining how the government has in effect interfered with the BBC, the double standards, etc... which clearly is not going to be explained on air. The sort of explainer from Sky Sports' Kaveh Solhekol would be perfect for the international audience but clearly it will not happen.

At the moment, the way things are presented, it is more or less irrelevant for most international viewers.

The question is, how do you enable this contextualisation? Are they just going to tell people to go to their website for more details/a proper explainer?

---

RE: BBC News Channel/BBC World News Merger - Brekkie - 11-03-2023

(11-03-2023, 12:21 PM)ALV Wrote:  A huge issue I’m having with the Gary Lineker coverage during simulcast is the lack of CONTEXT…

For example, during the 11AM simulcast, they dedicated 12 minutes for this story, and in these 12 minutes the producers/editors didn’t bother to add a piece to explain who is Gary Lineker, what in the world is MOTD, why is the issue a matter of importance in the UK etc… This can be a 1 min mention when the presenter introduces the top story.

The lower third just writes “BBC Gary Lineker Controversy” - how about modifying it to a World friendly version, like “BBC Sport Presenter in Controversy”, then mention Gary’s name in the second line?

It's as if merging the two services doesn't work.

---

RE: BBC News Channel/BBC World News Merger - James2001 - 11-03-2023

(11-03-2023, 01:53 PM)Brekkie Wrote:  

(11-03-2023, 12:21 PM)ALV Wrote:  A huge issue I’m having with the Gary Lineker coverage during simulcast is the lack of CONTEXT…

For example, during the 11AM simulcast, they dedicated 12 minutes for this story, and in these 12 minutes the producers/editors didn’t bother to add a piece to explain who is Gary Lineker, what in the world is MOTD, why is the issue a matter of importance in the UK etc… This can be a 1 min mention when the presenter introduces the top story.

The lower third just writes “BBC Gary Lineker Controversy” - how about modifying it to a World friendly version, like “BBC Sport Presenter in Controversy”, then mention Gary’s name in the second line?

It's as if merging the two services doesn't work.

Let's merge radios 1 and 3 to save money, I'm sure we can satisfy the fans of rap and obscure classical music all in one station.

Not as extreme as that admittedly, but similar vibes.

---

RE: BBC News Channel/BBC World News Merger - orange - 11-03-2023

[Removed - I seem to have posted into the wrong thread somehow!]

---

RE: BBC News Channel/BBC World News Merger - DTV - 11-03-2023

(11-03-2023, 01:56 PM)James2001 Wrote:  

(11-03-2023, 01:53 PM)Brekkie Wrote:  It's as if merging the two services doesn't work.

Let's merge radios 1 and 3 to save money, I'm sure we can satisfy the fans of rap and obscure classical music all in one station.

Not as extreme as that admittedly, but similar vibes.

Sure, but the plausible options that are on the table are somewhere between the BBC having no news channels and having one news channel with separation possibilities. The spectrum of options no longer stretches far enough for two different channels. The way things have worked this week is definitely not the way forward, but there are undoubtedly ways of something working.

---

RE: BBC News Channel/BBC World News Merger - freeaxe - 11-03-2023

Live cross to a chap reporting that "Football Focus which should have been at midday has been replaced by Bargain Hunt"

Compelling and relevant coverage for global viewers.

---

RE: BBC News Channel/BBC World News Merger - Brekkie - 11-03-2023

Didn't a shorter version of Football Focus used to go out on BBC World?

---