[interestednovice]

I do think replacing BBC3/4 with a "boxset" channel could work best so new BBC3 style content is played out back to back over one or two nights then the rest of the week archive content takes priority.

I think, possibly, the only way that could be made to work from a branding perspective would be for the channel to be called something like “BBC Extra” instead of BBC Three. That way, “BBC Extra” would be presented as the replacement linear outlet for what-was BBC Three & BBC Four.

I do agree that the BBC Three demographic does get a particularly poor deal from the BBC, though. The only radio stations aimed at them are Radio 1 & 1Xtra, plus the new spinoff Radio 1 stations; BBC Three is the only linear outlet specifically for the demographic and even online content largely doesn’t appeal to them.

Compare that to the average middle aged person, for example, who arguably has Radios 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 Music & their spinoffs; BBC One, Two & Four; the BBC website all arguably “aimed” at them.

Basically, it was a mistake to axe BBC Three before, certainly in the way they did, as it simply “went away”. The replacement online service hardly had any new content and was poorly promoted. This meant younger viewers were severely underserved. BBC Three only regained some traction once some programming started to be aired on BBC One, which shows the importance of linear even if only as a shop window. By the time the relaunch occurred, it was so much later on that the channel effectively had to start again. So “new BBC Three” was brought in. I think a big part of the thinking, unofficially, at the BBC was that BBC Four would be unsustainable as the focus shifted to iPlayer for access to archive content and the small amount of new niche content on the channel could no longer be justified anyway given budget cuts. So basically they would close BBC Four and CBBC (“because young people are always streaming anyway”) save on playout and distribution costs for one whole stream, and BBC Three would work as officially a “young person’s channel” but also be a fairly general entertainment and overspill channel. Partly this was because they were planning to not have BBC Four any more, and BBC Three could be more easily repurposed as both “younger viewers plus other content” than BBC Four being “archive content plus other content”. It also made no sense to have 1, 2 & 4!

[Toby brown]

I do agree that the BBC Three demographic does get a particularly poor deal from the BBC, though. The only radio stations aimed at them are Radio 1 & 1Xtra, plus the new spinoff Radio 1 stations; BBC Three is the only linear outlet specifically for the demographic and even online content largely doesn’t appeal to them.

Asian network also aimed at a young audience but apart from that you are right the BBC doesn't do very much for that audience

[Keith]

As mentioned in the BBC News thread the annual plan has been published: www.bbc.co.uk 

It's vague in terms of specific plans for the future (in terms of cuts), though a couple bits outside of News caught my eye around page 46.

We continue to review options for how we can clarify the station brand of Asian Network
and refocus elements of its programming to ensure maximum audience impact for
British Asian audiences.

I wonder if this means a potential rebrand is being considered, maybe coming under the Radio 1 brand as 'Radio 1 Asian'?

On 1 April 2024, we will transfer some of the BBC’s in-house audio production teams to
BBC Studios. This was referenced in last year’s Annual Plan, a full materiality assessment
was carried out, and in November 2023 Ofcom agreed that the change was not material.

Perhaps tellingly on page 36 it states....

We will continue to transform the BBC this year, and anticipate a
number of announcements throughout the year.

It is notable that the annual plan makes no mention of the proposed closure of BBC Four or CBBC. I can't help wondering whether the BBC is trying to hold off certain decisions and announcements until after the general election, to ensure political parties don't politicise and/or weaponize it.

[Newshound47]

If you have a suitable internet connection - otherwise, televising parliament is about as peak PSB as it gets & people should be able to watch their politicians at work without the internet barrier. I thought the effective end of parliamentary documentaries/explainers in a previous round of cuts was rather short sighted too.

I think the idea of making it independent / run by the wider industry (similar to how CSPAN is funded by cable companies) or by parliament is an interesting one, though.

I wonder if the BBC could put some visualised podcasts on there.

[interestednovice]

Asian network also aimed at a young audience but apart from that you are right the BBC doesn't do very much for that audience

OK, I admit that I forgot about Asian Network completely, since it exists outside of the numbered radio stations. However, that does remind me of another important point: what little content for “young people” that the BBC does offer is overwhelmingly focused on the “young urban” viewer/listener. This leaves very little for the rural/more isolated viewer and is particularly a problem given that they are also likely to be the people who have more difficultly with online content due to poorer broadband in many rural or remote areas.

I agree with the speculation above that “Radio 1 Asian” (or something similar) perhaps makes more sense as a brand, too. It wouldn’t be the first time that a niche BBC Radio station was paired up with a more popular one to draw on existing brand value - BBC Radio 7 to BBC Radio 4 Extra was the previous example.

[Newshound47]

I didn’t realise till recently just how heavily music based the Asian Network is. I assumed it had a lot more speech than it does.

[tellyblues]

The BBC would point to shows like Waterloo Road and Doctor Who as serving a younger audience which they may do but they aren't shows specifically for young people.