Are there too many channels?

It must make commerical sense for them to split the channels, I'd just prefer there to be fewer of them so there is more variety in the daytime schedule. Maybe I'm just still upset that they thought it was a good idea to drop the name 'UK Gold'.

I miss UK(TV) Gold too, yet it has allowed them to diversify what was UK Gold into GOLD, Watch and Alibi (and elements of Dave). The only thing they got wrong in the early days was the G.O.L.D. 'Go on laugh daily' nonsense.

The current GOLD isn't too bad either, thanks to a mix of credible classic show scheduling and new commissions.

Extraordinary that someone can claim BBC2, which has existed for over half a century, shouldn't be there.

But that's the thing about people who don't understand the wider context in which television exists: all they do is parrot names and lists, not ideas.

Gold is the best it's been at the moment, I reckon, particularly if you look at their 'After Dark' strand. They have the right mix of the more popular/mainstream shows in the daytime, and the more cult/alternative shows at night. http://gold.uktv.co.uk/gold-after-dark/

I'm not an advocate of closing BBC Two (at least, not yet!) but longevity is not a particularly compelling reason for something's continued existence unless it is in some way precious (and I don't agree that a Television or Radio station ever could be). Woolworths had been a high street staple for a century, it didn't mean they had a right to continue to exist when their business had failed.

It's called choice. And if you don't like it, don't press more than 4 times on the '+' button on your remote after BBC One.

The only problem I can see (and I will concede that at the moment we may be at the limit of channels - at least on via Sky) is that some channels that deserve a wider audience, are buried way down the EPG - and I contend most viewers only venture down there if they enter and transpose the channel numbers around - and get the wrong channel.

Interesting you point at Irish TV showing the same programmes as other channels in the murky pond around the 190's on the Sky EPG. I don't recall seeing 'Wexford County Views' being repeated on Information TV. Going to Ireland every year for a few days break, I only stumbled upon the channel by accident looking for something else earlier this year. OK, so it's not going to bother BARB at all, but it's there - and it's available to those that want it. Pity that 'Irish Paint Magic' isn't on a PSB channel, as it would quickly become a cult hit (with all respect to TG4 where it was shown originally in Ireland)

Remember, over 50% of the channels, may not be aimed with you in mind - but they are to someone, and that's the point of choice.

That said, Local tv channels could be switched off at midnight, and I doubt anyone would miss them...

(xpost) I think multiple broadcasting stations (sometimes doing very different things for very different audiences - I'm not the sort of person who thinks only Radios 3 & 4 could ever be defined as such) are, in their own way, as precious as Westminster Abbey.

For me, a wholly different thing from what I agree was a business in decline and failing on every level (and which even the most interventionist UK government post-1979 sensibly decided not to intervene to save, although I suspect it considered it more seriously than any other government in my lifetime would have done).

The thing about the concept of choice is that a lot of people who use the word religiously only mean their idea of choice, which is (for political reasons) Anglosphere content only. There are on other forums people who would accuse anyone else of Stalinism if he or she suggested that there might be too many channels consisting largely of American films, but who themselves suddenly turn into hardcore Reithians if it is suggested that there might be any channels at all consisting largely of mainland European football.

I think a lot of people who basically support the idea of a broad and pluralist media (as I do) don't use the word "choice" for that reason. A lot of the time, what is defined as such is actually remarkably narrow in its view of the world, and not what a broad and pluralist media ought to be - sometimes, it is narrower than what was allowed within paternalism. Those who talk about the rights of global corporations to promote their product without paternalistic barriers get very nervous, and often suggest arbitrary and unworkable changes of rules, when it is pointed out to them that the very system they admire also allows Channel AKA. We have a Prime Minister who is precisely of this ilk - "choice" remains a mantra to him, as it was in his student days, but breadth and pluralism are swear words, and he thinks he can wriggle out of where that very choice leads.

I support breadth and range and pluralism, and suspect that the demand for these things which has its roots in the New Left and '68 would have done for the old order in its own different (and preferable) way even without Thatcher & Murdoch, but I don't support the misleading Murdochian concept of "choice". The Sky EPG could easily contain more breadth and range and pluralism than it does, and if it did, I would cheer it to the echo far more than I would support any restoration of monopoly or duopoly. But breadth/range/pluralism and "choice" are two wholly different things which should not be confused. The most fervent political supporters of "freedom from" (freedom from the absolute primacy of Beethoven over Coldplay, or from the dominance of the likes of Peter Hill-Wood in football boardrooms) are, in most cases, the most fervent opponents of "freedom to" (freedom to watch grime videos or Swiss football). Multichannel, from the start, has been where it has all come together, and has been a long pitched battle between the two. Sky itself has never supported "freedom to", but other broadcasters who have used the Sky platform have.

In short, my ideal broadcasting model (accepting that in the long term neither technology nor public attitudes and ideas would have allowed the BBC/IBA model to persist indefinitely) would have been "alter-deregulation".

Yes, there are too many channels but rather than closing the ones you don't like you just don't watch them - just as others don't watch the channels you like.

Also one channel per broadcaster wouldn't boost choice - I think I'd rather have just the C4 family of channels than one each from the BBC, ITV, C4 and other broadcasters. They probably have the portfolio that complements each other the best, and it's already quite evident what a big hole losing BBC3 will leave in the BBC TV portfolio. I still don't really see the point of ITV Encore and ITV Be though understand the commercial reasons behind them, though in my mind if ITV2 was so popular amongst advertisers they could get another channel out of it then why not just up the ad price and boost the budget of the channel instead?

ITVBe has enabled ITV2 to become a general youth skewed entertainment channel again, leaving the structured reality shows as a niche on a minority channel.

Encore is a strange one, it has diluted ITV3, which was doing well on share, then the decent classic drama moved behind a Sky/NOW TV paywall. However Encore has had some new commissions recently which breaks up the mix of Band of Gold, Sherlock Holmes, Poirot etc. The original aim of Encore is to show the big ITV drama commissions first after ITV/ITV Hub.

It would be an act of commercial suicide for ITV, C4 & C5 to close the wider family of channels. The digital channels open up additional revenue streams and enable a targeting of demographics not otherwise reached by a single outlet. ITV's formula of a mainstream channel, a young skewing channel (particularly attractive to advertisers), an old skewing channel, a kids channel, a men's channel and a trashy women's channel allows them to target all types of audiences all of the time. Not just an occasional slot every now and again on a single linear channel.

The 'family of channels' also go some way to offset some of the loss of audience share suffered by ITV, C4 & C5 in the multi-channel landscape. ITV3 is the most watched digital channel, and ITV2 is second to it. They are revenue generating. The closure of those outlets wouldn't make for a better quality ITV main channel.

Just when you think you've seen everything on TV Forum, someone suggests that BBC Two existing is "excessive".