BBC News Pres: Apr 2023 - Present (News Channel/BBC One)

(18-08-2023, 11:11 PM)harshy Wrote:  Unless I’m imagining it bbc news Uk is just repeating panaroma again

That's far more sensible than showing Newsday tonight.   Suspect it'll get a couple more outings over the weekend too. 


As for the BBC World debate - I think part of the issue now is even prior to the merger such stories end up dominating the hour rather than being the headline story then moving on to other news after 10 minutes or so, returning to it for more later in the hour.   It's the sort of story though you feel would get more coverage on international news channels had it happened in the US rather than UK.
[-] The following 1 user Likes Brekkie's post:
  • chrisherald
Reply

(18-08-2023, 10:30 PM)Newsroom Wrote:  Perfectly audible on my tv.

One thing I noticed is that she didn't have autoscript on the 6 nor on the ten.

Yes, I didn't say it was inaudible, but I found the background noise and Reeta's raised voice noticeable - particularly at the start of the programme - and felt it was a bit distracting.

It was just unfortunate really, as they clearly needed important contributions from Judith Moritz who was one of the few journalists in court throughout the trial. They did the best they could given the weather/impending storm.
Reply

(18-08-2023, 10:15 PM)all new phil Wrote:  With the Lucy Letby coverage - again the talk is of how it’s not how World News would have done it. That’s irrelevant, World News doesn’t exist any more. The conscious decision has been made that world viewers will see more UK News than before, and the opposite for UK viewers. Agree or disagree, that’s your choice, but the channel has a different focus now.

My worry is that if former World viewers start turning away from the channel because of the different editorial decisions then there will be even less funding.

It's trying to please both audiences, and in doing so risks alienating both.

I'd rather it focus on World news, with more frequent opts for major UK stories, instead of wall to wall coverage on stories like Schofield.
[-] The following 9 users Like Marcell's post:
  • AndrewP, BlightyExPat, Brekkie, chrisherald, Frances, harshy, ilsondan15, Radio_man, UTVLifer
Reply

I do think going back to basics and having a bulletin on the hour every hour, rather than rolling news coverage, would be best. That doesn't mean breaking news can't be covered - but it's done so as part of the bulletin and you then move on rather than roll with it for hours.

The back half hours can have a bit more flexibility for additional UK news, extended coverage of one developing story and the various opts, and there could still be the option for a full opt out - but use it both for the UK and world feed where appropriate. There was of course a major story developing in Canada yesterday too - not sure how much of a look in that got on World once the Lucy Letby story became the focus.
[-] The following 11 users Like Brekkie's post:
  • AJB39, alfiejmulcahy, AndrewP, bkman1990, chrisherald, ilsondan15, Marcell, MarkL, oscillon, Radio_man, UTVLifer
Reply

(19-08-2023, 03:04 AM)Marcell Wrote:  My worry is that if former World viewers start turning away from the channel because of the different editorial decisions then there will be even less funding.

It's trying to please both audiences, and in doing so risks alienating both.

I'd rather it focus on World news, with more frequent opts for major UK stories, instead of wall to wall coverage on stories like Schofield.
It’s a difficult balance as upsetting the Government and the British press is arguably just as important for the future funding of the BBC.
[-] The following 2 users Like Newshound47's post:
  • chrisherald, Marcell
Reply

(18-08-2023, 11:25 PM)Brekkie Wrote:  As for the BBC World debate - I think part of the issue now is even prior to the merger such stories end up dominating the hour rather than being the headline story then moving on to other news after 10 minutes or so, returning to it for more later in the hour.
I think broadly, this is it. Beyond any format or editorial considerations, it's the fact that things are just so slow that it magnifies the other issues. I feel you could even keep the rather UK-heavy editorial split, but it'd be less noticeable if more stories from around the world were getting covered.
[-] The following 4 users Like DTV's post:
  • AndrewP, chrisherald, Frances, Marcell
Reply

(19-08-2023, 10:15 AM)DTV Wrote:  I think broadly, this is it. Beyond any format or editorial considerations, it's the fact that things are just so slow that it magnifies the other issues. I feel you could even keep the rather UK-heavy editorial split, but it'd be less noticeable if more stories from around the world were getting covered.

In the last half hour (which I've fast forwarded through not actually watched) there was 3 minutes on a world story, the hurricane in the US. Over 20 minutes was still on the Letby story and more of another UK murder. 

If I was a former BBC World News viewer I'd now be looking for my TV World news bulletins elsewhere. 
I don't think anyone can complain that this new channel is World heavy, quite the opposite.
[-] The following 6 users Like Radio_man's post:
  • AndrewP, chrisherald, Frances, Independent, LondonViewer, Marcell
Reply

(19-08-2023, 10:31 AM)Radio_man Wrote:  In the last half hour (which I've fast forwarded through not actually watched) there was 3 minutes on a world story, the hurricane in the US. Over 20 minutes was still on the Letby story and more of another UK murder.
There does seem to be a particular problem with weekends skewing far too heavily towards UK news. I don't know if it's wholly separate editorial teams or whatever, but since January, many of the most egregious cases of poor editorial balance have been on Saturdays and Sundays.
[-] The following 2 users Like DTV's post:
  • chrisherald, oscillon
Reply

The problem is you often don't get more info out of 20 minutes on one story than you do compared to a few minutes covering the key aspects. I watched quite a bit of coverage yesterday on BBC News, Sky News and the Panorama special - and also caught Newsbeat covering it at teatime. I thought they'd spend the full 15 minutes on it but they covered it in less than 4 minutes and it was just as informative as any other coverage - though just listening again seems that decision was due to spending the rest of the bulletin on the Lionesses rather than actual news. Suspect BBC World will have to suffer that tomorrow too.
[-] The following 1 user Likes Brekkie's post:
  • chrisherald
Reply

(19-08-2023, 10:39 AM)Brekkie Wrote:  The problem is you often don't get more info out of 20 minutes on one story than you do compared to a few minutes covering the key aspects.    I watched quite a bit of coverage yesterday on BBC News, Sky News and the Panorama special - and also caught Newsbeat covering it at teatime.  I thought they'd spend the full 15 minutes on it but they covered it in less than 4 minutes and it was just as informative as any other coverage.
Certainly. There's always been a tendency among certain programmes and outlets to conflate 'analysis' and spending more time saying the same thing. Other than the biggest 'category A' stories, there's rarely any need to spend more than about 5/6 minutes on even lead stories.
[-] The following 7 users Like DTV's post:
  • AndrewP, Brekkie, chrisherald, Independent, LargelyALurker, thePineapple, UTVLifer
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: bananaman, kookaburra, Krede, Lec_Ver16, lepeterrr, Stockland Hillman, 48 Guest(s)