London Live

While "simply" blaming BARB shouldn't be their lone strategy (but they won't come out and say "well this was a bad idea that went badly"), I think it's unfair to disregard those concerns.

They're a smaller station with a smaller audience. With the way this sampling works, it can't be a surprise that their figures won't be as accurate or representative. How right/wrong they are for rivals could feasibly vary, surely?

But then if you're getting audiences so low that you do hit zero on BARB, that's not just issues with the suitability of that sampling for your scale, there are definitely bigger problems which many other posters here have covered already.

His quote about BARB is the same type of argument a poorly performing commercial radio station will argue about low share and hours thanks to a format which doesn't suit the market. I'd also dispute the 30k who watched a show on the website, they could have simply dipped in for seconds and that's how they got their stats.

If Mullins wants to use social media as a barometer, why is it that London Live staff are contributing to shows instead of actual viewers?

It's a bit of a non story really, ratings were never going to be great no matter what the content was like. It's a new channel in amongst lots of other established ones. Not only that it's a new type of channel and available to part of the country.

Some channels that have been on air for years still register 0 sometimes. It takes time to build an audience.

That said, one of the big mistakes they've made is that they're going for a niche audience, and that will never rate.

Well it isn't Andrew Mullins or Jonathan Boseley who are still tweeting about LL.

I'm going for either Tim Kirkman who is their Chief Operating Officer or Vikki Cook, the Head of News, who has been in charge of the news and current affairs output or even Stefano Hatfield, who has taken the channel down this editorial direction.

Heard rumblings it's Stefano.

Get rid of Vikki Cook, terrible job. What was she head of?

http://www.theguardian.com/media/2014/apr/25/local-tv-london-live-bbc-funding-stefano-hatfield?CMP=twt_gu Stefano Hatfield according to The Guardian

You may or may not be right, but if you don't even know what job she's doing, how on Earth can you comment on how well she's doing that job?!

Two things that stand out for me from the first weeks of London Live are the genuine lack of preparedness in terms of editorial content and the overall lack of any sort of news sensibility.

I would have thought that any editorial team with a nous for news would have had some decent self-generated news stories to go at launch to give the channel some publicity.

I can't help but wonder whether some key individuals have vastly under-estimated just what is required to produce live television day in day out. I know of a couple good journalists who moved from print and radio into television news, and both remarked that even as experienced journalists they were surprised at just how logistically complicated and resource intensive doing TV news is.

I know she was head of news. But there was virtually no news to be seen on the channel. Thats why. And I'm entitled to my opinion like everyone else.

The most concerning element of that MG piece is the Comux issue. If the Mux operator is found to be in trouble it leaves the whole Local TV service in a much more complex level of difficulty beyond that of editorial shortcomings at one particular station.