The Newsroom

London Live

announce News presenters (December 2013)

This site closed in March 2021 and is now a read-only archive
LL
London Lite Founding member
How is it acceptable that the 6pm 'News' bulletin on London Live has just a single story - the launch of the .london domain name - and a perfunctory weather forecast?

Is that really the best we can do in a world city?


I've just watched the 3pm bulletin during my recording of London's Burning. It was nothing more than an advertorial for the Standard who have decided to buy a .london url for their website.

The sound quality from the supposed digital hub continues to be awful. Mark suggested in an earlier post that The Big Question area of the main set should be used for weather and travel, I'd extend this to the 'news' bulletins as well.
MA
mark Founding member
The sound quality from the supposed digital hub continues to be awful. Mark suggested in an earlier post that The Big Question area of the main set should be used for weather and travel, I'd extend this to the 'news' bulletins as well.


A good idea - the main studio isn't half bad, actually.

From the limited amount of Wake Up London I've seen this week, Marc seems to be back in the chair, with Alex spending a lot of time doing two-ways in the studio, which seems like a bit of a waste.

I think they've only had one reporter out and about - but it's hard to tell as they don't really have a proper top-of-the-hour sequence. I'd really like to see one with local, national and travel/weather headlines, including teasers from the reporters on location.
Last edited by mark on 17 April 2014 11:45am
MO
Mouseboy33
Does anyone know if there is a news share agreement with the BBC or any other broadcaster? I know there were public funds to support the overall local tv operations....
BA
bazinga
Finally getting to watch some of London Live, and first impressions is that it's awful.
LL
London Lite Founding member
It comes as no surprise that London Live has been panned by Private Eye for it's OTT coverage in the Standard, along with putting it's listings ahead of BBC One.

According to Private Eye, most shows are rating below LL's own projections and the highest rated show so far has been an episode of Trigger Happy TV with 30.000.
NG
noggin Founding member
Does anyone know if there is a news share agreement with the BBC or any other broadcaster? I know there were public funds to support the overall local tv operations....


My understanding is that the BBC are required to buy content from local TV operations to effectively subsidise them with licence fee revenue. There have been a number of models for Local TV funding discussed though - so I may be out of date. Pretty certain that is the current status quo.

I think it was one of the things introduced under the recent licence fee settlement (along with funding BBC World Service Radio, S4C TV in Wales, and rural broadband...)
Last edited by noggin on 17 April 2014 9:01pm
RI
Rijowhi
Does anyone know if there is a news share agreement with the BBC or any other broadcaster? I know there were public funds to support the overall local tv operations....


My understanding is that the BBC are required to buy content from local TV operations to effectively subsidise them with licence fee revenue. There have been a number of models for Local TV funding discussed though - so I may be out of date. Pretty certain that is the current status quo.

I think it was one of the things introduced under the recent licence fee settlement (along with funding BBC World Service Radio, S4C TV in Wales, and rural broadband...)


I'm sure that is still the arrangement.The Local TV programmes being screened by the BBC is not something I agree with to be honest, would prefer the Local TV stations to compete against the BBC (and ITV) If something is good enough surely people will watch the Local stations.There is no need for the BBC to screen the programming.The extra funding given by the Licence Fee is more than enough in my opinion.
MO
Mouseboy33

I'm sure that is still the arrangement.The Local TV programmes being screened by the BBC is not something I agree with to be honest, would prefer the Local TV stations to compete against the BBC (and ITV) If something is good enough surely people will watch the Local stations.There is no need for the BBC to screen the programming.The extra funding given by the Licence Fee is more than enough in my opinion.


Sorry not really sure what you are referring to.... But I was asking if the BBC agreed to share news content? Video, etc.
SkyNews really missed out on this. They could have really bulked up their national coverage. Utilizing video from local stations created across the country could have given them a leg up. CNN thrives off its affiliate news service. They trade and provide video for affiliates and the affiliates do likewise. CNNNEWSSOURCE http://newsource.cnn.com/Login.aspx?ReturnUrl=%2f also provides scripts and other services. They also will provide generic live reports that can be taken by members. The the national networks will do this as well. Often for a major breaking national story a live report is provided to all affiliates at the same time. The timing is amazing. The ability to coordinate hundreds of stations seemlessly is pretty cool. The reporter usually will end their report by saying something like: "I'm "GENERIC REPORTER" at the scene in Boston, now back to you in the studio" and the anchors will say something like "thanks GENERIC REPORTER" or "GENERIC REPORTER live at the scene of the Blah Blah blah" and then carry on.

BUt having said that seeing the way LL has decided on not doing actual news who knows what certain stations would have to offer as far as content.
LL
London Lite Founding member
An article worthy of RT's spin on Ukraine about the "truly successful launch" of London Live in Thursday's Evening Standard.

http://www.standard.co.uk/londonlive/london-live-and-kicking-chief-executive-andrew-mullins-talks-about-the-launch-of-the-capitals-youngest-broadcaster-9267388.html?origin=internalSearch
NG
noggin Founding member

Sorry not really sure what you are referring to.... But I was asking if the BBC agreed to share news content? Video, etc.


And the answer is - not really. There is no agreement to share content, but there is a requirement of the recent licence fee settlement (I believe) for the BBC to purchase content (may not be programmes - could just be footage) from the local TV operations. This is effectively allowing the government to subsidise Local TV using licence fee revenue.

Quote:

SkyNews really missed out on this.

I'm not sure they have...

I think you are imagining that UK Local TV operations are like US local stations. They really aren't... They have almost no facilities, and are not going to be in a position to provide significant breaking news coverage of their own. I'm not sure if any of the current Local TV operations, other than London Live can even do much in the way of live newsgathering.

Quote:

They could have really bulked up their national coverage. Utilizing video from local stations created across the country could have given them a leg up.

Not really. If you watch any of the UK local output - it isn't the kind of content that Sky would be that interested in nationally. A lot of it is incredibly parochial. Of interest, possibly, to local viewers, but not really network-ready stuff. The closure of a local furniture shop in Norwich after 30+ years isn't going to leap up the Sky News running order.

Quote:

CNN thrives off its affiliate news service. They trade and provide video for affiliates and the affiliates do likewise.


Yep - but Local TV isn't the same as the CNN affiliates. It really isn't. You are still looking at the UK local TV operations through the prism of the US experience. They are VERY different.

One thing to remember is that the UK is almost a third the size of Texas, and the BBC and ITV/ITN have newsgathering operations (including live trucks) in most of the UK's major administrative cities. And they have significant operations in all of the areas where Local TV operations are starting.

Sky aren't quite as distributed - but don't really have a problem covering the areas that local TV operations are springing up in.

Quote:

BUt having said that seeing the way LL has decided on not doing actual news who knows what certain stations would have to offer as far as content.


Very little is the answer. When Mustard TV's flagship programme is a 15 minute bulletin you can see how little content is being produced.
Last edited by noggin on 18 April 2014 3:14pm - 2 times in total
MO
Mouseboy33
Got to innovate to make money. Not sure what service you are referring to. But thats not what CNN Newssource does or how it operates.
Anyway I still think SkyNews could make money off of providing support services and footage to these stations.
TM
Telly Media
I’m sure you’re right about most of this, but just a couple of things I’d pick up on:


I'm not sure if any of the current London TV operations, other than London Live can even do much in the way of live newsgathering.



I assume you’re not referring to BBC London News or ITV News London here, given that both regional news operations make full use of live news-gathering facilities in just about every regional bulletin?


If you watch any of the UK local output - it isn't the kind of content that Sky would be that interested in nationally. A lot of it is incredibly parochial. Of interest, possibly, to local viewers, but not really network-ready stuff. The closure of a local furniture shop in Norwich after 30+ years isn't going to leap up the Sky News running order.



I think that example is slightly unfair. Yes, there is unlikely to be much national interest in the closure of a furniture shop in Norwich but a warehouse fire, a helicopter crash, a motorway pile-up etc, would easily make the national news. Were Local TV operators to up their game when it comes to actual local news coverage, I think it is entirely possible that the BBC, ITN and Sky would want access to their footage, especially if they are able to get to the scene before anybody else.

Newer posts