03-04-2023, 09:23 AM
(03-04-2023, 05:41 AM)Rex Wrote:If they are keeping Four, I dare say they could spin it as ‘Four gets the viewers, Three doesn’t’ and close Three that way. Or - and I suggested this earlier on - extend Four’s hours. There is no shortage of archive content, and it would be an easy PR win (‘you loved BBC Four so much we’re not only saving it, but extending its hours’).(31-03-2023, 07:25 PM)Argyess Wrote: It puzzles me as to why BBC Three was brought back as a linear channel, given that their target audience mainly watches stuff online now.
Always came across as something of a backwards step to me.
I'm pleased BBC Four might end up being saved after all.
BBC Three's ratings haven't set the world alight, the schedule is padded out with repeats of at 1 or 2 shows in the late hours of the day. You can really tell that the lack of a big show to hook viewers on Three clearly says much about its fortunes right now. Its EPG slots at launch (particularly on Sky, especially if you live in London) were less than favourable
That said, I don't think they should close it down, could they can afford to do it a second time with backlash once again?
As for BBC Four, it's welcome news that they are considering keeping it on air. Although it really begs the question, if they are keeping BBC Four but nuking CBBC in the process, they will have the same problem of unused bandwidth that they had when Three closed in 2016
I do think Three will ultimately be closed (again). I suspect someone at the BBC has been very clever with how they have leaked all this to Deadline. My impression is that there are senior people at the BBC who know they made a mistake bringing back Three and planning to close Four, and leaking this info is them testing the waters for public reaction.