28-05-2023, 10:34 PM
There's been a bit of discussion on here over the domestic vs international news editorial priorities of the new channel, so, with eight weeks of the new channel now nearly complete, I thought I'd try and put a number on it to give the discussions some actual evidence. Using the archive.org recordings, I've noted the top three headlines every day at 17:00 - i.e., what used to be regarded as the premium hour for UK viewers - and classed them as either UK, US or World news depending on the location and/or framing of the story. For days when they were in rolling coverage mode at 17:00, I used 16:00 instead.
Of the top three stories across these first 56 days, 66 (39%) were UK stories, 29 (17%) were US stories and 73 (43%) were from the rest of the world. When looking at just the lead story, the proportions are roughly the same - 22 (39%) UK, 8 (14%) US and 26 (46%) RoW. Considering the dominance that the few main stories get in terms of coverage on the new channel, these proportions are likely a rough analogue for the total time devoted to such stories - in which case we're probably actually a bit closer to the old NC, which was typically around two-thirds UK news, than WN, which was usually only around 10-15% UK news*. There's also not much evidence of the supposed US dominance of the new channel.
What I found most interesting, though, was that there's been a seeming shift in the last few weeks, particularly in terms of lead stories. In the first four weeks (April), UK news led 7 times (25%) - nearly all of which were reasonably justifiable editorially. But in the last four weeks (May), UK stories have led 15 times (54%). Obviously, some of this is the Coronation, but there does seem to be a greater lean towards certain UK-big, World-nothing stories recently. In the last week, Madeleine McCann led over F16s being given to Ukraine; the Cardiff car crash over De Santis' presidential bid; and UK travel delays over the Turkish election. Does certainly feel like a push to give UK news greater undue prominence.
Obviously this is just a snapshot from (largely) one hour of the day, but it is one of the UK channel's strongest hours, so when more people's perceptions of the channel will be formed.
Of the top three stories across these first 56 days, 66 (39%) were UK stories, 29 (17%) were US stories and 73 (43%) were from the rest of the world. When looking at just the lead story, the proportions are roughly the same - 22 (39%) UK, 8 (14%) US and 26 (46%) RoW. Considering the dominance that the few main stories get in terms of coverage on the new channel, these proportions are likely a rough analogue for the total time devoted to such stories - in which case we're probably actually a bit closer to the old NC, which was typically around two-thirds UK news, than WN, which was usually only around 10-15% UK news*. There's also not much evidence of the supposed US dominance of the new channel.
What I found most interesting, though, was that there's been a seeming shift in the last few weeks, particularly in terms of lead stories. In the first four weeks (April), UK news led 7 times (25%) - nearly all of which were reasonably justifiable editorially. But in the last four weeks (May), UK stories have led 15 times (54%). Obviously, some of this is the Coronation, but there does seem to be a greater lean towards certain UK-big, World-nothing stories recently. In the last week, Madeleine McCann led over F16s being given to Ukraine; the Cardiff car crash over De Santis' presidential bid; and UK travel delays over the Turkish election. Does certainly feel like a push to give UK news greater undue prominence.
Obviously this is just a snapshot from (largely) one hour of the day, but it is one of the UK channel's strongest hours, so when more people's perceptions of the channel will be formed.