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)

---

Newshound47 - Newshound47 - 07-01-2023

(07-01-2023, 03:28 PM)DTV Wrote:  

(07-01-2023, 03:23 PM)Newshound47 Wrote:  I suspect in time World News will end up with the national bulletins airing sometimes on it.

I highly doubt this. It has only happened in very rare and unusual circumstances where taking the domestic bulletin made editorial and practical sense. As I've said before, the merger is not going so deep as to affect network bulletins - arguably they'll be more independent from the news channels than they've been since 2006.

Wait until the headlines about presenters working for only a brief amount onscreen each day start. Totally unjustified because of how much work happens when not live on air but it could well spook the BBC into making more cuts.

---

RE: Newshound47 - qwerty123 - 07-01-2023

(07-01-2023, 04:11 PM)Newshound47 Wrote:  

(07-01-2023, 03:28 PM)DTV Wrote:  I highly doubt this. It has only happened in very rare and unusual circumstances where taking the domestic bulletin made editorial and practical sense. As I've said before, the merger is not going so deep as to affect network bulletins - arguably they'll be more independent from the news channels than they've been since 2006.

Wait until the headlines about presenters working for only a brief amount onscreen each day start. Totally unjustified because of how much work happens when not live on air but it could well spook the BBC into making more cuts.

If anyone had actually bothered to check iPlayer they would see that although the lunchtime bulletin is now separate to the News Channel at weekends the presenter used goes on to present the following shift on the channel so it's not as though anyone is actually on air for a few minutes.
The bigger question is probably as to whether the savings being made are actually worth it considering only one presenter shift has been lost at the expense of 15 hours of separate content.

---

RE: Newshound47 - DTV - 07-01-2023

(07-01-2023, 04:11 PM)Newshound47 Wrote:  Wait until the headlines about presenters working for only a brief amount onscreen each day start. Totally unjustified because of how much work happens when not live on air but it could well spook the BBC into making more cuts.

I would agree that it would make more sense to use the News at One and Weekend Lunchtime presenters and gallery teams to produce at least several hours of separated coverage, but we are basically returning to the network set-up that existed prior to 2006 and what exists on ITV. Even if there are critical headlines, I doubt they'd be able to gain any traction because of this.

I also don't think you need to worry about cuts to network bulletins. Their budget has been ringfenced (and at times given extra investment) throughout the whole cuts process. Indeed, weekend bulletins have seen their total running time increase by roughly 20/25 minutes in the last 15 years. I think we can sometimes forget that network bulletins exist on a whole other plane to the News channel - the average BBC One bulletin's viewing figures are roughly two orders of magnitude greater than the average BBC News channel hour's viewing figures!

---

RE: BBC News Channel/BBC World News Merger - Critique - 07-01-2023

Having taken a look at the 2pm hour, although it seems to have been a World news production it didn’t follow the clockwork timings that World bulletins have generally followed. Instead, the timings were looser, like they would be on the BBC News Channel, which flows better for UK viewers (there were no pregnant pauses whilst waiting for World to opt in/out to breaks etc), but must look strange for viewers on BBC World News?

For example, World bulletins normally finish at exactly :26 with a proper close (thanks for watching, bye for now), at which point as I understand it the different feeds show weather for whichever part of the world you are in and local ads. There’s then a sixty second headline summary at :30, followed by an ident/pre-recorded CA into whatever’s airing during the back half hour. These strict timings presumably also help for when bulletins are syndicated on other channels.

However, in the 2pm hour there was a report running through :26, with the weather starting during :27 and the presenter name checking the UK weather forecaster. As such, presumably the forecast(er) was UK only, in which case what did everyone else see? Did World just crash out mid-report at :26?

The bottom of the hour headlines weren’t on time either (probably starting during :31, but the clock isn’t on screen so not certain). Did World get their own headlines at :30, or did they just have to miss them and go straight into whatever pre-record they were showing in the back half hour? As the News Channel doesn’t have a presentation gallery (whereas World has Red Bee), I’d have thought it’s not possible to do split programming from the same gallery, as the gallery would have been tied up at :30 running News Channel trails?

---

RE: BBC News Channel/BBC World News Merger - qwerty123 - 07-01-2023

(07-01-2023, 04:30 PM)Critique Wrote:  Having taken a look at the 2pm hour, although it seems to have been a World news production it didn’t follow the clockwork timings that World bulletins have generally followed. Instead, the timings were looser, like they would be on the BBC News Channel, which flows better for UK viewers (there were no pregnant pauses whilst waiting for World to opt in/out to breaks etc), but must look strange for viewers on BBC World News?

For example, World bulletins normally finish at exactly :26 with a proper close (thanks for watching, bye for now), at which point as I understand it the different feeds show weather for whichever part of the world you are in and local ads. There’s then a sixty second headline summary at :30, followed by an ident/pre-recorded CA into whatever’s airing during the back half hour. These strict timings presumably also help for when bulletins are syndicated on other channels.

However, in the 2pm hour there was a report running through :26, with the weather starting during :27 and the presenter name checking the UK weather forecaster. As such, presumably the forecast(er) was UK only, in which case what did everyone else see? Did World just crash out mid-report at :26?

The bottom of the hour headlines weren’t on time either (probably starting during :31, but the clock isn’t on screen so not certain). Did World get their own headlines at :30, or did they just have to miss them and go straight into whatever pre-record they were showing in the back half hour? As the News Channel doesn’t have a presentation gallery (whereas World has Red Bee), I’d have thought it’s not possible to do split programming from the same gallery, as the gallery would have been tied up at :30 running News Channel trails?

Luxmy said goodbye to world viewers at 14:13 so the rest of the bulletin would have been UK only. World has always had a few hours at weekends where the bulletin was much shorter and I don't think these hours have ever featured headlines at half past (given they would historically have been the hours in which presenters on 7 hour shifts took their breaks and it wasn't unknown for certain presenters to do 14 hours back to back at weekends).

---

RE: BBC News Channel/BBC World News Merger - Jimbo2022 - 07-01-2023

The BBC never had a news channel in UK before 1997. World started when they split world service television into BBC world and BBC prime.

Only when Princess Diana died - 8 and a half years after Sjy News started - did the BBC even consider doing a bewjs channel.

The BBC were never told to start a news channel as far as I know. World Service radio existed since 1932 but it took them 60 years to start a news TV channel

Given we used nit to have a BBC news channel could they get away with just closing it altogether?

---

RE: BBC News Channel/BBC World News Merger - Jon - 07-01-2023

Well we never used to have a BBC One so not sure how the point is relevant. Of course the country wouldn’t collapse without the News channel, but it’s a question of whether it’s the sort of thing the BBC should offer and at what cost. I guess the other point is if you can make lots of targeted cuts the cost of delivering the service becomes negligible.

I also think it makes sense for simulcasting with BBC One/Two to take place. Because presumably people dip into the news channel independently of the main channels and indeed many places will leave it on all day so it’s targeting a different audience.

---

RE: BBC News Channel/BBC World News Merger - DTV - 07-01-2023

News 24 was definitely planned before Diana died. If not, two months would've been a hell of a turnaround for starting a channel.

I think you could get rid of the News channel without much problem - it's very few people's favourite BBC service and pretty much everything it does is done by another BBC service, so you aren't losing anything outright if it disappeared. It was a nice to have luxury and the BBC would survive without it.

But replacing it with the new channel will be fine for most viewers - the kinds of breaking stories that lead to peaks in BBC News' audience will also be covered on the new channel.

---

RE: BBC News Channel/BBC World News Merger - Jimbo2022 - 07-01-2023

You can't compare it to BBC1 but when I was at junior school so in the mid 70s yes the licence fee was less - but

BBC1 and BBC2 transmitters were on air from 0600 and carried Open University prior to 0800 approx. BBC2 did the same

On other days OU was on on Saturdays until around 1500 on BBC2 and on Sundays until around the same time.

But bbc1 core programmes ran at lunchtime and after 1555 fir children then the news then entertainment in the evening. Daytime was schools programmes outside that

BBC2 had OU during the week at 1650-1800 approx. Most nights BBC2 started around 1900 rather like BBC3/4 do today.

After 1972 after play school BBC2 would close down completely until 1600.

So they were not full time services. Bbc1 started daytime output in 1983 after schools were moved to BBC2 daytime.

If the BBC cannot afford the news channel they should put proper resources into the main channels and leave it at that. Back to basics in other words.

Many countries only have one or two main public channels. The BBC actually has 7 TV networks and 9 channels. Four if them are timeshared. BBC Parliament inky exists because the BBC took over responsibility for it in 1998 from UAP.

Although the current generation if viewers are used to multiple channels it would possibly make a better BBC if only they did not feel they had to do everything.

---

Newshound47 - Newshound47 - 07-01-2023

(07-01-2023, 05:42 PM)Jimbo2022 Wrote:  The BBC never had a news channel in UK before 1997. World started when they split world service television into BBC world and BBC prime.

Only when Princess Diana died - 8 and a half years after Sjy News started - did the BBC even consider doing a bewjs channel.

The BBC were never told to start a news channel as far as I know. World Service radio existed since 1932 but it took them 60 years to start a news TV channel

Given we used nit to have a BBC news channel could they get away with just closing it altogether?

It must have been planned before Princess Diana died. It launched two and bit months after her death. Surely they couldn’t have arranged it all that quick.

---