[Stooky Bill]

Fundamentally, the last few months, and I expect the next few months, could not be undermining the idea of merging the two channels any more if they tried. Even in their worst nightmares, the BBC could not have imagined a worse news agenda - a perfect storm of near-constant top-tier UK stories only intermittently relevant to international audiences.

Although almost all those UK stories have been simulcast on BBC World News even before the merger. This is the case this afternoon too

[DTV]

Although almost all those UK stories have been simulcast on BBC World News even before the merger. This is the case this afternoon too

Today would have, obviously. And I don't think that anybody would reasonably argue against that. But a lot of the stuff over the last few weeks has been overdone from the perspective of an international audience. Last week, BBC World News dropped regular programming for several hours to take live coverage of a procedural debate and then financial statement whose provisions had already been announced. A few years ago, the financial statement would have been given coverage as a packaged story, but the Commons statement would almost certainly not have been taken live. And all this coverage meant that BBC World News went for several hours without talking about Ukraine or Iran or other major international stories.

And I wasn't just talking about the stuff that has been simulcast, but about the stuff that hasn't. The remaining domestic hours have focussed, rightly, on the cost of living crisis - a major issue in the UK that it would be unacceptable for a UK news channel to avoid. But there is no way that you can cover that story on an international news channel, certainly not in any detail and certainly not as a lead story. Over the coming week, the Conservative leadership contest will dominate the UK news and will rightly be covered in depth on the BBC News channel. But, other than highlights, the day-to-day stuff will be irrelevant to the BBC World News audience.

My point has always been that domestic and international news channels are completely different beasts, with different objectives and different editorial priorities. BBC News and BBC World News used to be very good at getting the balances right, but this prolonged transition to a merged channel over the last few years has just shown how irreconcilable the differences between the domestic and international agenda are on the vast majority of days.

[ALV]

Although almost all those UK stories have been simulcast on BBC World News even before the merger. This is the case this afternoon to
Today would have, obviously. And I don't think that anybody would reasonably argue against that. But a lot of the stuff over the last few weeks has been overdone from the perspective of an international audience. Last week, BBC World News dropped regular programming for several hours to take live coverage of a procedural debate and then financial statement whose provisions had already been announced. A few years ago, the financial statement would have been given coverage as a packaged story, but the Commons statement would almost certainly not have been taken live. And all this coverage meant that BBC World News went for several hours without talking about Ukraine or Iran or other major international stories.

And I wasn't just talking about the stuff that has been simulcast, but about the stuff that hasn't. The remaining domestic hours have focussed, rightly, on the cost of living crisis - a major issue in the UK that it would be unacceptable for a UK news channel to avoid. But there is no way that you can cover that story on an international news channel, certainly not in any detail and certainly not as a lead story. Over the coming week, the Conservative leadership contest will dominate the UK news and will rightly be covered in depth on the BBC News channel. But, other than highlights, the day-to-day stuff will be irrelevant to the BBC World News audience.

My point has always been that domestic and international news channels are completely different beasts, with different objectives and different editorial priorities. BBC News and BBC World News used to be very good at getting the balances right, but this prolonged transition to a merged channel over the last few years has just shown how irreconcilable the differences between the domestic and international agenda are on the vast majority of days.

And weirdly enough these decisions to simulcast are done for editorial reasons, not logistical reasons - it's not like they are forced to simulcast due to resources problem like staff shortage on weekends... They have two production teams on NC and WN respectively available on weekdays, yet most of these simulcasts happen during weekdays, under utilizing the WN production team most of the time recently. Not sure why the editorial discretion to simulcast on weekdays changed drastically in recent months~

[Radio_man]

The merger might as well happen now. Is it really appropriate for World to roll with UK Political developments at the expense of no international news all afternoon, and no doubt all evening as well? Even the 6 is being simulcast.
And apart from weekend afternoons and Breakfast, the channels have merged at the weekend already.

[Andrew]

When there is a big story it seems there are a few rules in broadcasting in recent decades

Network Bulletins must be extended even though they’ll still resort to interviewing pensioners in indoor markets 20 minutes in, and the News Channel and World must simulcast, even though both channels are fully resourced and operating as normal up to that point. They’ve done that for years.

It’s that same old debate about whether World is supposed to be a global news channel for everyone worldwide, or a UK channel for ex-pats abroad.

[Steve in Pudsey]

Why would they have a copyright statement aston ready to go with the new logo and a 2019 date?
   

[DTV]

It’s that same old debate about whether World is supposed to be a global news channel for everyone worldwide, or a UK channel for ex-pats abroad.

Is this really a debate that's been had since the 90s, though? BBC WSTV Europe certainly had a clear lean towards catering for the expat audience, but BBC World (which really evolved out of BBC WSTV Asia) was strongly globally focussed by at least the turn of the century. Today, the expat audience must be a minor fraction of viewers (which is claimed to be at over 100m per week) - with the channel generally seeming to be aimed at educated English-speaking professionals in Asia, Europe and, more so in recent years, America, while also serving as a general news source for the English-speaking Commonwealth.

Network Bulletins must be extended even though they’ll still resort to interviewing pensioners in indoor markets 20 minutes in, and the News Channel and World must simulcast, even though both channels are fully resourced and operating as normal up to that point. They’ve done that for years.

I do agree, though, that the increasingly constant extending of news bulletins when there has been a 'major' story is not always well utilised and sometimes unnecessary. You'd assume that they would use the extended running time to give more analysis and still cover the other news stories, but often other stories barely get a mention, while we get multiple vox pop packages on the lead story.

[Radio_man]

So tonight, we've got the extended Ten on the NC, with World taking The Papers. Is this a first, the review of tomorrow's UK newspapers to go out on World but not the NC?

[Andrew]

I often wonder how they set up those pre planned vox pops. Not when they ask random people in the street, but the ones where they have people in a pub watching the news events, or they feature a member of the public with a specific set of issues who give their take on the news. Where and how do they find them.

[robrymond]

Do we presume the Studio B walk from Huw at the end of the Ten is now over given that BBC London have moved in?

Most of the other presenters stopped ages ago who did it but some never did anyway.