« Topics
123
itsrobert5,897 posts since 23 Mar 2001
harshy posted:
Re-it-er-ate posted:
They are rather unequal, unlike BBC News 24. One presenter does 30 minutes! Martine Dennis escapes with 2 hours. Some other poor little sod has to do 3 hours!


They are unequal, as you say the one presenter is the presenter for BBC Four News, Martine Dennis is only on for two hours.

A bit more bizzarre is we see the 1st Business presenter from TWT all the way to the 1600 bulletin, and then Manisha Tank takes over while the sports presenter gets replaced earlier after the 1100 bulletin!


Martine Dennis actually does exactly the same amount of time as Breakfast - 3 hours (0500-0800), although she's not on air for this whole time. On average in the week, they try to keep shifts to 4 hours long - 0800-1200, 1200-1600, 1600-2000 and 2100-0100. The only different ones are TWT and the BBC Four News. The weekend shifts are usually between 6 and 7 hours long, but they contain many 5min summaries.
deejay2,476 posts since 5 Jan 2003
The reason for short summaries at the weekends is simply so BBC World can show longer (40-50mins) programmes. These programmes range from Current Affairs flagships like Panorama and Correspondent to documentaries such as Horizon and also include season programmes.

Currently, BBC World is in the middle of the "Voyager Season" - showing stuff like Great Railway Journeys. Another recent season has been "Boardroom Battles" (Trouble at the Top, Back to the Floor). I think it's one of the things that makes BBC World so different to other news channels...
harshy5,358 posts since 24 Mar 2001
"The BBC should publish broad details of the financial relationships between its subsidised and commercial news activities," he says, referring not only to News 24 (funded by the licence fee) but to its global channel BBC World, which is a commercial service and which is said to cost a comparatively meagre £13 million. "

Source: BBC Online

Well i've always wanted to know how much it cost the BBC to run BBC World and the figure is 13 million, for a channel that only costs 13 million to run, BBC World have made the best use of it IMHO.
MikeG0 post since 12 Jul 2001
harshy posted:
"The BBC should publish broad details of the financial relationships between its subsidised and commercial news activities," he says, referring not only to News 24 (funded by the licence fee) but to its global channel BBC World, which is a commercial service and which is said to cost a comparatively meagre £13 million. "

Source: BBC Online

Well i've always wanted to know how much it cost the BBC to run BBC World and the figure is 13 million, for a channel that only costs 13 million to run, BBC World have made the best use of it IMHO.


Harshy - note the bit: "...which is said to cost...". Namely, the person writing doesn't know. It's probably more but remember they are subsidised by advertising, have many pre-recorded programmes (relatively cheap in comparison) and only 24ish min news bulletins an hour instead of the 60 on N24.

I also don't know the policy of BBC World regarding international bureaus. N24 pay for their upkeep out of their budget but as BBC World take BBC News bulletins - would they pay? Or would BBC News pay out of the overall budget?

Not that I'm trying to justify the vast £50m N24 spends but would like to know where the money goes so equal comparisons can be made.
harshy5,358 posts since 24 Mar 2001
MikeG posted:
I also don't know the policy of BBC World regarding international bureaus. N24 pay for their upkeep out of their budget but as BBC World take BBC News bulletins - would they pay? Or would BBC News pay out of the overall budget?


That is an interesting question MikeG, yes I'd like to know the answer to this one as well.

I presume though that the money comes from the overall BBC News budget and BBC World Ltd probably pays BBC News.
Re-it-er-ate3,758 posts since 4 Jan 2003
Without reading the entire article is this saying that BBC News 24 is not worth the money thats being spent on it and a better service should be expected for the £xxmillion or are they saying that this much money should not be spent on a BBC 24 hour news channel at all? Becuase I would hate for cutbacks to be introduced and it turn out like the ITV News Channel. "We can't afford Breaking News here, lets recap the Headlines and then use Central News' reports".
harshy5,358 posts since 24 Mar 2001
IIRC, Mr Lambert said he wanted BBC News 24 to provide a better regional and interactive service and to break news faster, unfortunately I can't open the report, but Mr Lambert also had a go at BBC News 24's graphics!, and hoped the gfx suite would improve things!
Davidjb1,499 posts since 23 Mar 2001
I think BBC World manages to save a fair bit of cash because it doesnt require half as much staff as News 24 does. There is only ever one news presenter at a time and they work slightly longer shifts than News 24 presenters.
NickyS1,569 posts since 1 Apr 2001
harshy posted:
MikeG posted:
I also don't know the policy of BBC World regarding international bureaus. N24 pay for their upkeep out of their budget but as BBC World take BBC News bulletins - would they pay? Or would BBC News pay out of the overall budget?


That is an interesting question MikeG, yes I'd like to know the answer to this one as well.

I presume though that the money comes from the overall BBC News budget and BBC World Ltd probably pays BBC News.

Well actually it's all changed recently. BBC World News now comes under the International News division (not sure of the official name) including World Service Radio and the international facing online sites. BBC World is still advertising funded but the news side of things has slightly changed. Will try and find more info.
And it's actually BBC Newsgathering that pay and run the overseas offices. BBC News 24 pay some cash to Newsgathering to provide them with a service, just as they pay BBC Nations and Regions to provide them with certain facilities - yes it is complicated... it's the BBC!