08-01-2024, 02:28 PM
(08-01-2024, 01:56 PM)Brekkie Wrote: The BBC knew all of this when the decision to merge operations was made and the 5 presenters don't each come with the team of people required to produce a separate feed when they're on air, though I do suspect there may he dome off-air staff in similar HR limbo to these, but more likely they've been paid off or reallocated roles.
As much as you're right the news cycle this year means the news channel operation needs to cater to two different audiences I just can't see much changing. At best we may get a UK election focused programme in the mornings (which may or may not be simulcast) but in all honesty I suspect they'll just put the Nicky Campbell phone in back on air to tick that box.
Interesting viewpoint, but I think it credits the BBC with greater strategy and planning than the evidence would support.
A competent organisation wouldn't have got itself into a position where a short time after it was caught mistreating woman, particularly over 50, poorly and had to make significant financial settlements, it self made a situation where it risked mistreating woman, primarily over 50 again.
Budget wise, it's already paying 5 presenters a full-time salary consistent with experience and long service, PLUS freelance and acting up costs. Divert those additional costs to producer roles, political producers/reporters will already be at the likely events needing airtime. The additional studio director, production journalists and support for a mon-fri 9-1 shift would come in under 750k (marginal in a £5.7billion pound revenue organisation) a UK feed world still access world content and domestic reporting as now.
One thing woth noting, Sky News runs the majority of its output on the same production staffing as BBC News domestic opts, and look at the difference in production quality.