10-03-2023, 11:23 PM
If you ask me, "ITVX Kids" sounds like a really stupid name. They could've repurposed the CITV brand for the new service rather than dispose of it
(10-03-2023, 11:23 PM)XIII Wrote:(10-03-2023, 11:03 PM)tellyblues Wrote: More options but still the same limited amount of time to watch.Streaming is not going to be scrapped by any broadcasters in favour of pure linear TV. It's the present and the future and we just have to accept that.
Sticking everything online means people can watch what they want when they want, but that's not necessarily a good thing. It eradicates all the positives of what a varied schedule brings. How many programmes have we all watched that we didn't intend to but we learned something or even were able to ponder why we didn't like it? People being able to just watch (and they're perfectly entitled to of course) what they want for hours on end isn't healthy, particularly those with developing minds.
Some programmes/subjects also wouldn't get much-needed awareness if it wasn't for linear TV.
(10-03-2023, 11:23 PM)XIII Wrote:(10-03-2023, 11:03 PM)tellyblues Wrote: More options but still the same limited amount of time to watch.Streaming is not going to be scrapped by any broadcasters in favour of pure linear TV. It's the present and the future and we just have to accept that.
Sticking everything online means people can watch what they want when they want, but that's not necessarily a good thing. It eradicates all the positives of what a varied schedule brings. How many programmes have we all watched that we didn't intend to but we learned something or even were able to ponder why we didn't like it? People being able to just watch (and they're perfectly entitled to of course) what they want for hours on end isn't healthy, particularly those with developing minds.
Some programmes/subjects also wouldn't get much-needed awareness if it wasn't for linear TV.
(10-03-2023, 11:23 PM)ITVMan Wrote: If you ask me, "ITVX Kids" sounds like a really stupid name. They could've repurposed the CITV brand for the new service rather than dispose of it
(10-03-2023, 11:54 PM)GMc Wrote: With the channel closing, is it possible for ITV to use the bandwidth to add an extra HD channel to Freeview - ITV4 perhaps? I realise they'd need more bandwidth for that, so potentially closing ITV2 +1? I'm not clued-up on the technical side of things like this, just wondering if that would be at all possible.
(10-03-2023, 11:54 PM)GMc Wrote: With the channel closing, is it possible for ITV to use the bandwidth to add an extra HD channel to Freeview - ITV4 perhaps? I realise they'd need more bandwidth for that, so potentially closing ITV2 +1? I'm not clued-up on the technical side of things like this, just wondering if that would be at all possible.CITV is currently being carried on Multiplex A, a band of channels that isn't equipped to carry HD material. Don't expect ITV to add HD versions of channels when there is virtually no bandwidth at the moment to do so.
(10-03-2023, 06:35 PM)cable Wrote: Back when I was younger CITV was great, Fun house, MPAA, ZZZap etc. that 1998-2005 period was exquisite.In fairness, I'm not aware of the channel being mapped out as a partnership with Nickelodeon as far back as 2001 - prior to the latter part of the year CITV still had most of its budget intact, and it wasn't until the first big cuts came in November that the initial plans for a digital channel to get a head start on CBBC were cancelled.
BUT CITV hasn't really been great since the ban on junk food advertising 2005. They were limited as they could not set up CITV Ltd which would allow them to properly exploit IP and merchandise the same way BBC WW did with Teletubbies etc.
The channel was late to market, originally envisaged in 2001 as a partnership with NICK, INK never was realised and after mutual backing away the CITV channel launched in 2006. By this time it was placed at the end of the kids section on Cable and Satellite, On Freeview it was placed 3rd. The audience targeting 6-12 narrowed its audience when it previously under 16.