BBC News Pres: Apr 2023 - Present (News Channel/BBC One) - 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 Pres: Apr 2023 - Present (News Channel/BBC One) (/showthread.php?tid=412)

---

RE: BBC News Pres: Apr 2023 - Present (News Channel/BBC One) - harshy - 19-04-2023

Yeah the bbc news channel consists of the breaking news team presented from a balcony in front of the what used to be the outside source screen, that is the news channel reduced to minuscule levels and it’s full of simulcasts it’s useless.

---

RE: BBC News Pres: Apr 2023 - Present (News Channel/BBC One) - freeview87 - 19-04-2023

Watching the breaking news opt for Holyrood statement earlier had the feel of an old style 'News Report'.

The BBC say that the merger would be good for UK viewers and we wouldn't be at a loss. They can't honestly say the UK is getting value for money surely.

---

RE: BBC News Pres: Apr 2023 - Present (News Channel/BBC One) - Newsroom - 19-04-2023

(19-04-2023, 07:10 PM)itsrobert Wrote:  It seems the implications of the merger are starting to filter through to 'ordinary' people. A work colleague of mine mentioned how BBC News has effectively given up and moves to Singapore at night. It led to an office chat that included moans about there being no stories from the UK anymore and that it's all foreign news. I explained the rationale behind the merger (i.e. protecting BBC World News output/audiences) which was met with "why do we pay for this rubbish?"

Granted, it's only one office but I'm sure there are more people thinking the same across the UK. And these are not 'pres fans' - just regular people.

I tried the new news channel in its first couple of weeks but have given up completely now. I dipped in at the weekend only to find foreign stories that had no interest or relevance to me, so I switched over. In fact, the only BBC News output I ever see now is Breakfast as the BBC1 bulletins are not really at suitable times for me. That's why I liked the old BBC News Channel as you could get a good dose of UK news at strange times like 7/8pm. Or 9/10am if on a late shift. Now, I just go between the ITV Evening News and Sky News. And I flick around between Breakfast, GMB and Sky News at breakfast time to miss the adverts.

Same Robert. Curiosity sometimes has me switching over when a push alert comes through, but other than that - unwatchable and of no relevance to me at all. The UK opts outs are so disjointed and basic, it feels like a real let down. It's Sky all the way for UK relevant output and I'm really liking it again after such a hiatus.

Do we know whether the studios are manned at all? There are very few studio guests on any bulletin. Granted there are instances when someone has been sat down but few and far between.

---

RE: BBC News Pres: Apr 2023 - Present (News Channel/BBC One) - Alx321 - 19-04-2023

So Laura Kuenssberg is doing the overnight coverage on the elections in May.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m001lmsx 

---

RE: BBC News Pres: Apr 2023 - Present (News Channel/BBC One) - Kojak - 19-04-2023

(19-04-2023, 07:10 PM)itsrobert Wrote:  It seems the implications of the merger are starting to filter through to 'ordinary' people. A work colleague of mine mentioned how BBC News has effectively given up and moves to Singapore at night. It led to an office chat that included moans about there being no stories from the UK anymore and that it's all foreign news. I explained the rationale behind the merger (i.e. protecting BBC World News output/audiences) which was met with "why do we pay for this rubbish?"

Granted, it's only one office but I'm sure there are more people thinking the same across the UK. And these are not 'pres fans' - just regular people.

I tried the new news channel in its first couple of weeks but have given up completely now. I dipped in at the weekend only to find foreign stories that had no interest or relevance to me, so I switched over. In fact, the only BBC News output I ever see now is Breakfast as the BBC1 bulletins are not really at suitable times for me. That's why I liked the old BBC News Channel as you could get a good dose of UK news at strange times like 7/8pm. Or 9/10am if on a late shift. Now, I just go between the ITV Evening News and Sky News. And I flick around between Breakfast, GMB and Sky News at breakfast time to miss the adverts.

Why do we pay for this rubbish indeed. I do think it is bad that we Brits, who pay the licence fee, are now the poor relations to viewers in the rest of the world, most of whom have never paid a penny into the Beeb in their lives! Obviously I understand why things have turned out as they have - not that I want to go over old ground - but in my opinion, it is still a travesty that the country's public broadcaster can no longer provide a news channel to the public that pay for it. I still think other things could and should have been cut first.

I couldn't agree with you more about the new channel, Robert, and IMO the extreme sloppiness of its presentation does not help its cause in any way. It just gives off the impression of an amateur operation, run by people who can no longer be bothered. And the sad thing is that the reality is they are anything but. Then again, I suppose this is the result of having a government who is constantly at war with the BBC.

It's such a shame that not even a weekday daytime service could have been kept - and no, I don't count the balcony opt-outs. As honourable as the intention is to keep some UK breaking news, constantly flitting between the balcony and World just looks very bitty. I'd like to think that it is currently all so amateurish by design, in order to force a rethink at the top - but  I fear that might be giving certain people too much credit! My God, a rethink is needed, though. And soon.

---

RE: BBC News Pres: Apr 2023 - Present (News Channel/BBC One) - freeview87 - 19-04-2023

They should have went down the CNN route where you welcome Intl viewers are carry on with serving the domestic audience.

---

RE: BBC News Pres: Apr 2023 - Present (News Channel/BBC One) - DTV - 19-04-2023

(19-04-2023, 08:23 PM)Kojak Wrote:  I still think other things could and should have been cut first.

But which services would you have cut first? I know this isn't a popular view here, but I honestly can't see how ringfencing the old News channel could possibly have been justified any longer - it had remained relatively unscathed throughout several prior rounds of cuts (to the extent of actually increasing its budget in real terms) and has, regardless of thoughts on the output, been actually able to retain the same level of original programming as before - which isn't something that could be said of other cutback services.

While there might have been other options (none of which would have been popular here either) and, even with a merger, there would have been several crucial things I personally would have done differently, I find it hard to see the cuts to the News channel as unfair or see services that should have shouldered extra cuts (or even be wholly eliminated) to save it.

---

RE: BBC News Pres: Apr 2023 - Present (News Channel/BBC One) - Kojak - 19-04-2023

(19-04-2023, 09:02 PM)DTV Wrote:  

(19-04-2023, 08:23 PM)Kojak Wrote:  I still think other things could and should have been cut first.

But which services would you have cut first? I know this isn't a popular view here, but I honestly can't see how ringfencing the old News channel could possibly have been justified any longer - it had remained relatively unscathed throughout several prior rounds of cuts (to the extent of actually increasing its budget in real terms) and has, regardless of thoughts on the output, been actually able to retain the same level of original programming as before - which isn't something that could be said of other cutback services.

For starters, BBC Three. What was the point of bringing that back as a linear channel, doubling its budget to £80 million, only for the BBC to then announce a couple of months later that BBC Four, CBBC and the News Channel were for the chop? Now there is talk that BBC Four might stay and Three could be shut down again - so what was the point? BBC Three's target audience just don't watch linear TV. That extra £40 million could have paid for the News Channel multiple times over.

Quote:While there might have been other options (none of which would have been popular here either) and, even with a merger, there would have been several crucial things I personally would have done differently, I find it hard to see the cuts to the News channel as unfair or see services that should have shouldered extra cuts (or even be wholly eliminated) to save it.

Even if weekends and evenings had to be fully merged, I still think a separate weekday daytime service could and should have been preserved. As I said, I don't think there was any need to bring back BBC Three - just a fraction of the money spent on its revival could easily have gone towards maintaining the News Channel.

---

RE: BBC News Pres: Apr 2023 - Present (News Channel/BBC One) - ViridianFan - 19-04-2023

I don’t think this has been posted already. 


https://rxtvinfo.com/2023/viewers-unhappy-at-bbc-news-channel-changes/

The part I found interesting was the last paragraph:
[size=1]  [/size]

Quote:Controversially, as job posts in the UK have been closed, the BBC has been recruiting new staff to work on the expansion of its North America news division. This is being funded by the public-funded part of the BBC, not its commercial arm BBC Studios. The BBC hopes it can increase commercial income by tapping in to the North American market, but this raises concerns that this is being done at the expense of the service previously provided to UK viewers.

Do we know how true that is?  It would seem very wrong if UK license fee money was being spent to expand the North American news division especially as the UK is now getting much less UK focused content. 


There is a second article which seems to suggest that the BBC is focused on increasing in presence in the US. 

https://pressgazette.co.uk/publishers/broadcast/bbc-news-us-culture-wars/

It would explain why more and more it feels like the channels intended audience is a US audience and who so many of the talking heads are from the US. 

It feels very much like the UK viewer is going to be the one who looses out in this situation as we are told we want to access news via live pages and US audience have a channel more geared to them.

---

RE: BBC News Pres: Apr 2023 - Present (News Channel/BBC One) - Kojak - 19-04-2023

(19-04-2023, 09:21 PM)ViridianFan Wrote:  I don’t think this has been posted already. 


https://rxtvinfo.com/2023/viewers-unhappy-at-bbc-news-channel-changes/

The part I found interesting was the last paragraph:
[size=1]  [/size]

Quote:Controversially, as job posts in the UK have been closed, the BBC has been recruiting new staff to work on the expansion of its North America news division. This is being funded by the public-funded part of the BBC, not its commercial arm BBC Studios. The BBC hopes it can increase commercial income by tapping in to the North American market, but this raises concerns that this is being done at the expense of the service previously provided to UK viewers.

Do we know how true that is?  It would seem very wrong if UK license fee money was being spent to expand the North American news division especially as the UK is now getting much less UK focused content. 


There is a second article which seems to suggest that the BBC is focused on increasing in presence in the US. 

https://pressgazette.co.uk/publishers/broadcast/bbc-news-us-culture-wars/

It would explain why more and more it feels like the channels intended audience is a US audience and who so many of the talking heads are from the US. 

It feels very much like the UK viewer is going to be the one who looses out in this situation as we are told we want to access news via live pages and US audience have a channel more geared to them.

IF that is true, then I think it is appalling. I suppose the official line given would be something along the lines of 'increased funding for our US newsroom means better reporting on the US, which is particularly important in the run-up to the presidential election, and benefits our audiences in the UK'. I do kind of get their thinking - if this gamble works, it could turn out very lucrative, and may hopefully have the side-effect of giving the domestic news operation more money to play with. But - it looks tremendously bad for the BBC to be cutting jobs here and effectively giving them to a load of people Stateside. If the usual suspects get wind of this I can see it possibly becoming a minor scandal. It is a gamble - either it will work really well and make a lot of money, or it will backfire tremendously.

---