[Kim Wexler’s Ponytail]

The BBC are a very political organisation, that's not party politics, it's lobbying and changing things in pursuit of what it wants - that is to maintain and grow influence - hence push online and into written text content where it was set up as a audio visual broadcaster. Pushing into markets they weren't set up to cover. That's why newspapers hate the BBC, and now podcasters are becoming increasingly negative about the organisation.

,

Sure, nothing at all to do with the ideology of the owners of those newspapers.

The pearl clutching over podcasting isn't too dissimilar to when the commercial sector objected to BBC Three, and indeed the BBC entering the multichannel world at all. It's the same old BBC attack lines, when they try to evolve they're told they have no right to. If they don't they're accused of being stubbornly stuck in their ways. Back in the day The Daily Mail probably objected to the BBC broadcasting in colour.

[Moz]

Has Politics Live always been in a box when on the News Channel? Madness!

   

[Keith]

Cost wise it didn't make sense for Morning Live to switch from using an otherwise dormant Obe Show studio in the morning to a space specifically hired for the purpose in Manchester, but guessing lower labour costs up North balance out the extra cost. I guess as well moving tge One probably helped justify spending a bit more on the Breakfast studio.

Worth noting that the One Show studio space was originally meant to be a space for a BBC Shop.

I seem to recall that a planning condition or agreement was that the space was supposed to be used for educational purposes during the daytime, or something to that effect. If this is the case, though they may have been pushing it slightly when Morning Live originally came from that studio it was still a limited run series, and the same for Rip Off Britain Live. I've no idea if it's used in the daytime these days for non-TV stuff.

[House]

x.com 

If everyone currently on the News at One also cover the other BBC One bulletins, and are staying on in those roles, what exactly is the cost saving of moving to Salford and employing additional staff to cover the programme? Even if there are overtime arrangements or something in place for the current team to cover the additional hours, surely those are just being transferred to those on Breakfast now also covering a bulletin several hours after Breakfast comes off air?

[Reith85]

Nice sign-off from Jane Hill just before the regional bulletins at 1:30pm today, marking the end of 37 years of the News at One (or the One o'clock News as it once was) from London.

[South]

x.com 

If everyone currently on the News at One also cover the other BBC One bulletins, and are staying on in those roles, what exactly is the cost saving of moving to Salford and employing additional staff to cover the programme? Even if there are overtime arrangements or something in place for the current team to cover the additional hours, surely those are just being transferred to those on Breakfast now also covering a bulletin several hours after Breakfast comes off air?

Going back a couple of years the News at One was a News Channel production made by the News Channel team. When they announced the changes to the News Channel and the 1 moved to B it was incorporated back to the bulletin teams. I don't believe there was any mass hiring or redeployment at that time to the News at 1 team.

The changes to the 1 are part of the expansion of Breakfast which did create some additional roles in Salford to share across both outputs, but the changes although creating a bigger expense in Salford actually would save the BBC money as they are producing an additional half hour of news per day which means they don't have to commission a long running 30 minute programme with associated production costs to fill that time on BBC 1, something which I am sure has contributed to the demise of doctors.
In addition an hour long 1 also removes the 15 minute section after the lunchtime sports day on the news channel which always felt a bit disjointed.

[Moz]

Nice sign-off from Jane Hill just before the regional bulletins at 1:30pm today, marking the end of 37 years of the News at One (or the One o'clock News as it once was) from London.

Here’s how it started in London back in 1986. Oddly a set with lots of white and a bit of red back then too…

youtu.be 

[House]

Going back a couple of years the News at One was a News Channel production made by the News Channel team. When they announced the changes to the News Channel and the 1 moved to B it was incorporated back to the bulletin teams. I don't believe there was any mass hiring or redeployment at that time to the News at 1 team.

The changes to the 1 are part of the expansion of Breakfast which did create some additional roles in Salford to share across both outputs, but the changes although creating a bigger expense in Salford actually would save the BBC money as they are producing an additional half hour of news per day which means they don't have to commission a long running 30 minute programme with associated production costs to fill that time on BBC 1, something which I am sure has contributed to the demise of doctors.
In addition an hour long 1 also removes the 15 minute section after the lunchtime sports day on the news channel which always felt a bit disjointed.

I’m not convinced Breakfast needed much greater resources to be extended by another 15 minutes, and I’m also not sure why an hour-long News at One (which again is only 10-12 minutes longer than before) needed to come from Salford to achieve that?

The move to Salford feels more like a quota exercise for out-of-London programming (as happened with Breakfast’s move to Salford) than about costs savings, as has been suggested here for some weeks now. Especially with Birmingham-produced Doctors ending later this year, moving 45-50 minutes of news to Salford makes things look less London-centric on paper.

[interestednovice]

The move to Salford feels more like a quota exercise for out-of-London programming (as happened with Breakfast’s move to Salford) than about costs savings, as has been suggested here for some weeks now. Especially with Birmingham-produced Doctors ending later this year, moving 45-50 minutes of news to Salford makes things look less London-centric on paper.

Agreed. The problem is that moving the programme doesn’t really add anything for the viewer, so it is not a good example of representing a different area of the UK on screen. Whereas a drama, for example, does that much better.

In the context of Doctors being axed, it does end up looking like a tokenistic quota-driven move, rather than a genuine effort to represent out of London areas better.

[oscillon]

Due to Trump making a statement, 4pm UKT TOTH is simulcast on both UK and World feeds, with Matthew Amroliwala from Studio E and generic BBC News branding (instead of Verified Live on the World feed).