Five News from ITN

It makes sense to cut down in areas where they can't fully compete, and Channel 5 are not the only broadcaster to cut how much they spend on news. Currently 5 News at 7 is regularly the lowest rating part of the entire schedule, even achieving lower audience shares than the overnight gambling at under 1% of the available audience, putting them behind many digital channels during that timeslot. And that's in early primetime, which clearly presents huge problems for them commercially as it gets them off to the worst possible start each evening. There is clearly next to no demand for it, least not just a couple of hours after a near identical bulletin, but for reasons unbeknownst to me Ofcom stipulate it must continue. And whilst the 5pm bulletin does well, it's guaranteed a decent audience of sorts, cushioned in between the afternoon movie and Neighbours. Viewers are not tuning in for high quality reports per se, particularly those concerning international issues- why would they when this is already available in more obvious places- but for the adequate summary of the day's news and entertainment stories it provides in between other shows.

I think these cutbacks, which may appear brutal on the surface, are just about good old fashioned realism. No matter how much they spend on it, it will never be able to compete with what the BBC, ITV and Sky are providing. And nobody expects it to. So if they can provide a reasonable level of service at a much lesser cost, why not? Whether that's truly possible or not remains to be seen I would suggest, but using studio space within their own facilities is one very easy way to make it more economical without having a major impact on the quality of the programme.

I'm willing to bet half of the people turning their noses up and expressing faux concern are not 5 News viewers in the first place, and it is after all only their views that count. As someone who watches 5 News quite regularly before Neighbours, I wouldn't say the current standard is all that great, but it does the job reasonably well and it certainly has its moments. I can't imagine I'd be any less likely to watch before Neighbours when these changes are brought in.

A few further points to add:

1) The signs are that if anything the cross-promotion of Desmond's "trashy brands" is on the decline. OK! TV, the biggest example we've seen, will bow out in 10 days time after less than 12 months on the air.
2) Negotiations to sell air time of the sister channels happened under RTL as well. It's not a new development, although there may have been an increase.
3) The rival newspaper neglects to consider any remotely positive aspects of C5 under Desmond's tenure, such as the retainment of the children's strand Milkshake! which they are under no obligation to provide.
4) Clearly Desmond is a bit of a character to say the least but I think it's pretty obvious a lot of the stuff he comes out with is made in jest. Nobody really took the whole Panorama thing seriously, did they?

I used to be a regular viewer until around 2009. Back then there was a far better mix between 'hard' and 'soft' news. If there was hard news to report, it got reported. If it needed in depth coverage it got it. Five News did send their 'own' staff overseas when required (e.g. 2008 US Presidential Elections) and for special coverage (e.g. I recall Matt Barbet presenting from Afghanistan and Africa). There was clearly a commitment to 'hard' news alongside the human interest/celebrity stuff. And the weekend bulletins were still a decent length

However I'm no longer a regular viewer because 'hard news' coverage is less and less. I don't feel I can watched and get fully updated on all the main news of the day. For example today in the headlines at 5pm, nothing about the Eurozone crisis. Maybe it was included later in the programme, but it says something about the editorial priorities if it is not in the headlines. I didn't bother watching any more of the programme

While the new editor seems well qualified, cutting foreign budgets does not exactly fill me with hope of a return to the 2008 'glory days'. When something big happens overseas no doubt it will be a voiceover report from London - the ITN service I presume won't be able to use ITV/C4 material in the way Five can currently at least use repackaged Sky News reports. Even last year during the Pakistan floods, by which time Five News was 'dumbing down' they still sent Jonathan Samuels to cover the Pakistan Floods

As I'm no longer a regular viewer, do Five News still do their investigations? Used to be a distinctive part of their output

The reasons may be unbeknown to you, but they are stipulated clearly in the terms of service that Des signed up for. The benefits of gaining the fifth channel are clear - the payoff for the increased exposure of gifted spectrum is a commitment to certain PSB obligations. Running a poor news service to the point where it falls off the radar for most viewers does not negate that responsibility.



Except of course its not a reasonable service - that's why not.



Oh, so its the viewers fault then. Rather like serving people gruel and saying, "we might as well because they can eat beans on toast from someone else".



Rubbish. It has expanded so much it now feature as a regular piece in Private Eye. OK! TV is only one example. I suggests you read the Eye to see the extent it has grown to within his publications.



Selling to whom though - other N&S companies who produce porn?


Not axing a pre-existing children's strand is hardly something to boast about. I imagine it would be more expensive to fill that time with new programming.



Err.. when you make statements like that to convince a regulator you have a vision of greatness for a gifted spectrum channel, of course that is listened to.

He's not a "character". Not some benevolent old uncle. He's a trashy low-brow pornographer who has taken control of the fifth channel and broken his word utterly on how he would run it.

How he passed a "fit and proper" test is beyond me - but money talks; and then of course there's always people like you - no disrespect - who are ready to shrug off valid reasons why people are concerned as if its all some stuffy nonsense.

Good for you.

Probably poorer quality international news coverage though...

There is room for another decent news service, Channel 5 just choose not to compete and effectively bury their bulletin (against Channel 4 and just after the BBC and ITV 6pm-7pm duopoly concludes). 8pm - 10pm is a big gap in the schedules with no decent bulletin.

Since they're making it abundantly clear that they've no intention of creating something worthwhile, they might as well just try their luck at not showing any news at all.

But where would the trademark Sky3 docusoaps go?

Would be good if they did something like RTE and did a bulletin at 9pm.

Next week, the EPG seems to show just a two minute bulletin at 19:58 as oppose to the half-hour programme. With the demise of OK!TV, has the 5News at 7 been dropped as well..?

Just checked on Digiguide and 5 News scheduled at 18:30 from January 10th.

Ben Begley will be a video journalist for Wales and the West based in Bristol from February. He's a former press photographer turned broadcast journalist after joining ITV News's training scheme.

I wonder if Katie Goodman, who has been seen on-screen this week will also be another of 5's video journalists or if she's Sky cover?

Hi there

Is scheduling a bulletin at 6:30 a regular thing? If yes, I can't see it doing to well up against BBC's local news and ITV's 6:30 national bulletin and doesn't Hollyoaks air at the time on Channel 4? I really can't see that doing good at all! They need to improve their daytime and weekend coverage if you ask me, I suggest

Weekdays:
A 9am bulletin with updates throughout the morning (similar to the evenings) and a lunchtime update. Both should be 10-15 minutes long.
Then can the not move Neighbours to 5pm or 6pm? And put their main bulletin at 5:30pm? Then keep the evening updates?

Weekends:
They should have 2x10 minutes updates (one between 10:30am-12:30pm, the second between 4:30-6:30) then again keep the evening updates!

If you ask me they should do something along those lines!

Nope. It would be suicide moving two of their highest rated and most consistent programmes. 6:30 is a slot that they can never do well in and the seven o'clock news is a programme that noone watches and they have to produce so merging the two is a sensible decision, even if it continues to attract a none existent audience.