[Stooky Bill]

I feel like Comic Relief hasn't been worth watching for a long time, same with Children In Need.

When I was growing up, they were TV events that I would have sat and watched all evening with the family, but nowadays they barely get a mention when they come around. There used to be plenty of sketches and specials of popular shows that made you feel like you were seeing something really special. They seem to be light on that sort of content these days and there doesn't appear to be any sort of real buzz or excitement around them.

Things have changed. As has been discussed here in the past the Friday night programmes these days are the end of the fundraising event, not the event in themselves. There are other programmes in the lead up to the Friday

Everything's changed - audience expectations, the way TV is consumed, and how money works.

The thing that was memorable about both was the slightly loose, ramshackle nature of their live TV programmes. Comic Relief was at it's best when they had no idea what they were doing and they were making it up. CiN similarly for years was mainly Wogan bumbling around and weak amateur regional bits.
That sort of telly doesn't exist these days, production values are much higher and viewers are used to slick polished big budget shiny floor shows.

The need for a long telethon has gone because money can be instantly donated now and it requires no banks of telephone operators to take the money. Now they can put a the text and website details on screen during lots of programmes for several weeks. It reaches more people than one 7 hour programme and raises more money. That wasn't an option back in the days of pledging money, they couldn't man the phone lines for a few hours every few evenings for weeks

[Brekkie]

Surely fundraising though has always been about doing something out of the norm to raise money, which a telethon absolutely is.

Even in todays landscape it's probably best a telethon isn't thought of as one multi-hour event but the generation of potentially viral clips every half hour or so. Of course there is a balance of quantity vs quality, but also with Comic Relief it's often the unexpected that can be the most entertaining.

Even if abandoning the live Telethon after 10pm they should do something, ideally live but if pre-recorded so be it. A live Live at the Apollo could work.

[Stooky Bill]

Surely fundraising though has always been about doing something out of the norm to raise money, which a telethon absolutely is.

Telethons existed to fill time during which people were asked to phone in and pledge money, and to give them plenty of time to do so. A lot of the content of Children in Need in the old days was about that mechanism of raising money - talking to the phone operators, listing which banks to go to, addresses of where to send your money etc.
That's all gone now. It's just text an amount to this number.

Why have a single 8 hours of TV when they can promote that text number during documentaries and other specials over the course of a few weeks? It gets a wider range of viewers. They still get viral clips and talking points, it just doesn't all happen on the same night.

Stand Up To Cancer on Channel 4 does the same thing just over a longer period and arguably a lot better - lots of special entertainment programmes over months

[Keith]

Telethons existed to fill time during which people were asked to phone in and pledge money, and to give them plenty of time to do so. A lot of the content of Children in Need in the old days was about that mechanism of raising money - talking to the phone operators, listing which banks to go to, addresses of where to send your money etc.
That's all gone now. It's just text an amount to this number.

Why have a single 8 hours of TV when they can promote that text number during documentaries and other specials over the course of a few weeks? It gets a wider range of viewers. They still get viral clips and talking points, it just doesn't all happen on the same night.

Stand Up To Cancer on Channel 4 does the same thing just over a longer period and arguably a lot better - lots of special entertainment programmes over months

As far as I'm aware the studios at TVC were owned by the BBC, and not its commercial arm. This presumably made it easier and cheaper to give over a studio to Comic Relief for an entire day or two, compared to current arrangements. I'm guessing these days by finishing at 10pm it allows for the set to be dismantled and studio vacated the same night. Modern sets with video walls presumably take more time to dismantle than the wooden/fabric based sets of old.

Also, back in the 80s/90s they had the advantage of most other programmes filming in studios rather than on location, notably with sets in TV Centre. Which presumably made it easier for sketches such as www.youtube.com  to be filmed, especially if talent happened to be already working in another studio for a different programme.

[Brekkie]

Good point, and often requirements to clear out by 11pm too although there are always exceptions to the rule.

[Steve in Pudsey]

In the early days there was a lot of reliance on archive content, material that hadn't been seen for years. It's all a lot more available these days.

[RhysJR]

It seems after last year having a paper origami-like red nose, this year's nose(s) look to be erring back towards a more traditional design. Apparently it's made from '70% Sugarcane and 30% Wood Pulp' and is recyclable at home.

shop.comicrelief.com 

Family Pack of 4 Red Noses for Comic Relief – Comic Relief Shop
A fun, wearable pack of Red Noses to show your support for Comic Relief with a p…
  Source: shop.comicrelief.com

www.youtube.com 

[rick]

So the special programmes leading up to the night is a selection of shows that will be hosted by members of the public and not the usual presenters? A trailer for Pointless with no Alexander Armstrong was shown over the weekend. If so, I wonder what other programmes have had this special treatment.

[Keith]

So the special programmes leading up to the night is a selection of shows that will be hosted by members of the public and not the usual presenters? A trailer for Pointless with no Alexander Armstrong was shown over the weekend. If so, I wonder what other programmes have had this special treatment.

I believe BBC News tried this out a few years ago... www.bbc.com 

Guy Goma: BBC's best/worst interview? - BBC News
Guy Goma: 10 years since BBC's best/worst accidental interview.
  Source: www.bbc.com

[Flux]

So the special programmes leading up to the night is a selection of shows that will be hosted by members of the public and not the usual presenters? A trailer for Pointless with no Alexander Armstrong was shown over the weekend. If so, I wonder what other programmes have had this special treatment.

Once again this seems very misguided. Comic Relief should be about comedy first… so they’re, what, taking the professionals out of programmes? Even if it’s just Pointless they are… removing the comedian from the show for a comedy telethon special? Shouldn’t they be including more comedians in special editions of shows rather than removing them? Unless these episodes have comedians as contestants and the public as hosts (i.e. A role swap) then it just feels distinctly un-Comic Relief to me. If it’s just members of the public hosting shows, where are the laughs? It yet again feels more like something Children in Need could do - having kids or families host special editions of shows - and makes me worry that the team behind Comic Relief are once again misunderstanding and blurring its USB.