Should the 1 and 6 O'Clock News be axed?

I know we've been here before, but please hear me out - this is what I propose...

The 1 and the 6 both axed from BBC One's schedules. Hourly 60 seconds style news on BBC One at XX.58 provided by News 24 (one of the presenters would do it from the right hand area while weather and trails went out on News 24) with pointers to a full round up on News 24 at the top of the hour.

A beefed up 10 with 40 minutes of main news, 10 minutes of regional news and then a 10 minute in depth feature. Simulcast on New 24 with business and sport during the regional opt out.

Newsnight moved to 9pm on BBC Two. It's excellent so deserves the earlier time slot. Could come from N6 also. No need for existing Newsnight studio which could be closed saving money.

That sounds dreadful.

With no disrespect intended to anyone on the 60 Seconds team, but I need more than a minute to absorb the news. I don't want sound bites, I want reports. And I want them 3 times a day.

The fact that I am at work during the One and much of the Six is academic.

Terrible idea - the 6pm especially is an important bulletin, as is the 1pm bulletin.

Agree though more updates throughout the day would be welcome.


Also, I agree that there needs to be a shake-up of the late night news. Personally, I'd axe the 10pm news, moving Newsnight to BBC1 to fill the 10-11pm slot (inc regional news), and then move The World from BBC4 to BBC2 to air at 8pm.

Should the 1 and 6 O'Clock News be axed? No, quite simply.

The Ten News really does need a skake up, and a longer regional bulletin.

I fully agree with Moz's first point re: the 1 and 6; mostly the 6.

Key reasons are:

Most people who want in-depth news are still coming home from work between 6:00 and 6:30 - yes, men AND women - anyone who thinks couples can survive only on one wage these days is VERY old-fashioned or very privileged;

Many people, including those with Freeview boxes, still don't have PVRs (Personal Video Recorders). Even those with VCRs, for the majority, do not use them and if they do, they use it for movies, not for timeshifting news bulletins;

Those who want to watch news at 6:00 can surely watch BBC NEWS 24 - for those without digital TV, with set-top boxes being as cheap as they are these days, anyone who can't be bothered to shell out the £20 or so quid obviously doesn't watch much TV and it therefore stands to reason that when they do, the least likely thing they're going to turn on for is the news;

Given the above, sinking resources into a stand-alone bulletin that fewer people want to watch or can watch than into the rolling news that comes between that and the 10 is a rather shaky premise;

People who get home from work around 6:30 are unlikely to want to watch news as soon as they come in from work, and moving it to 7:00 isn't much of an option either because that's primetime - and why is it primetime? Because people want entertainment first thing in the evening, not news. Saying people want news first thing in the evening is questioning the whole reasoning behind the evolution of the idea of 'primetime' in the first place, so any counterargument is on a hiding to nothing there;

Top-of-the-hour updates, going by Moz's suggestion, would come from N24, NOT the 60 Seconds team - just to re-iterate that as it would appear that bit of the suggestion was not picked up on by the replies above.

The only thing is that I don't see the point of beefing up the 10, and in fact I already thing the 10 has become a far too bloated and confused animal already. It seems less like a news bulletin now and more a proto-"Tonight with Trevor McDonald". Trying to be as in-depth as Newsnight and Panorama but not claim to be either, and therefore being yawn-inducing to those who want a snappier bulletin, but slightly TOO snappy to be considered a weighty current affairs roundup programme. The snappy bulletin timings with regard to how long each story gets, how many graphics illustrate each story, matched against the amount of depth they try to cram in, rather jar to me. I would suggest to the BBC that they leave Newsnight to serve the steak and let the 10 concentrate on the sausages.

How on earth does that make sence? You wouldnt save any money by just moving the SET to a diffrent studio, and the studio is still used to "save money" by Breakfast, Newsround, Working Lunch etc... Just putting the purple sofa in N6 saves no money at all.

I think perhaps your overlooking some small details with this opinion.
1. Yes set-top boxes are cheap but they won't work in a non digital area where I live and
2. I would watch News24/Sky if I could.
3. Not everyone can afford/want to pay Murdoch for Sky or indeed pay for Cable. Which proves my point that
4. It's not simply people "who can't be bothered".

I personally think this would be a bad idea as the idea of the One and Six is to provide a full summary of the day's news with reports and analysis. I am all for a headline summary on BBC One and/or Two but I prefer a much lengthier bulletin at the usual times.
Besides, lets say I've tuned into N24 for the lunchtime news and want a full 30 minute summary then what happens when there is breaking news or a press conference? N24 go to continuous coverage of this breaking news or conference and gone is my lunchtime news update, unless I get a headline summary through interactive. A bad idea IMO - N24 should be kept for rolling news and terrestial bulletins should remain to provide an in-depth summary.
Despite this I would welcome an earlier slot to Newsnight, but the 21.00-22.00 slot at the moment on BBC One, and until 22.30 on Two, has some of the best programmes on so removing these programmes wouldn't be a good idea either.

The 1, 6 and 10 (and News 24) should be scrapped, but only because they are turd. They are specifically aimed at idiots with little or no news content. Any real news is instantly jizzed over by music and graphics. Scrap them and put some rubbish entertainment on instead - at least there's little pretence of seriousness there. Also News 24 is like Deal or no Deal, about 2% something happening, 98% padding (just without Noel leching over anything in a skirt). No need for it.

Anyone actually interested in the news should find it by some reputable sources online, not spoon fed by morons.

Am I the only person who prefers to get their news online now, rather than from the telly? I find that I can reach a variety of different sources quickly, when I want to, and often get a more in depth picture from the web of a story (and a greater variety of what's going on in the world, for that matter) rather than the half-arsed tidbits that constitute television news now, whether that be the Six bulletin or 24 hour news channels.

you are very odd.