Why the blithering flip do broadcasters always seem to describe one channel "closing" and being "replaced by" another, when
to all practical intents and purposes
they are simply renaming (and revamping the content of) an existing channel?
The justification for this way of categorising things is probably that the channel's content will also be a bit different from before (and also so that they can disingenuously use words like "launch" and "new").
Well, for example, BBC Two's content has changed after the advent of the BBC Three/Four era, and arguably Channel 4 and Channel 5 each now have content that is far removed from their respective at-launch content.
At yet at no point have these stations been officially regarded as "closed" and "replaced" by a "new channel".
If you want an innuendo, I'll give you one.