DV
It summarised the events well - The retention of the Christmas Idents made things so much more poignant.
Chris
Chris
NG
I think thats a little harsh- looking at ratings allows us to see what everyone thinks of the coverage rather than just a few of our opinions. Its not meant to be disrespectful to the disaster.
I should rephrase that, its not the discussion of ratings thats perhaps is inappropriate but more the use of figures as illustrated in Timmy's post to make a point. He's always trying to rubbish a particular news outlet, but to use the ratings of one of the most terrible events to occur in centurys makes me feel a little blahhh.
Whilst the news is horrible - it isn't irrelevant to examine which channels the public watch. It may feel as if it is in poor taste - but coverage of major events is one of the major reasons for 24 hour news channels to exist. The popularity of such channels (especially the commercial channels) is directly relevant to discussion on a forum such as this.
It seems that as with terrestrial channels, when a major news story breaks the British public are more likely to turn to a BBC News outlet than a commercial one. This isn't Sky bashing - they've done a very good job - it is just a discussion of the viewing choices people have made. (Though those figures are confidential I believe - so shouldn't have been made public...)
The incredibly low ITV NC figures aren't likely to be helped by its disappearance from DTT (aka "Freeview") across the bulk of the UK. (It IS on air in London via Crystal Palace - but not from most other transmitters?)
noggin
Founding member
Snu posted:
North East posted:
Quote:
Hmm...Is discussing something as trivial as ratings really appropriate at this stage? Surely we should 'Discuss' the actual way in which the various news outlets handle this horrendous situation.
I think thats a little harsh- looking at ratings allows us to see what everyone thinks of the coverage rather than just a few of our opinions. Its not meant to be disrespectful to the disaster.
I should rephrase that, its not the discussion of ratings thats perhaps is inappropriate but more the use of figures as illustrated in Timmy's post to make a point. He's always trying to rubbish a particular news outlet, but to use the ratings of one of the most terrible events to occur in centurys makes me feel a little blahhh.
Whilst the news is horrible - it isn't irrelevant to examine which channels the public watch. It may feel as if it is in poor taste - but coverage of major events is one of the major reasons for 24 hour news channels to exist. The popularity of such channels (especially the commercial channels) is directly relevant to discussion on a forum such as this.
It seems that as with terrestrial channels, when a major news story breaks the British public are more likely to turn to a BBC News outlet than a commercial one. This isn't Sky bashing - they've done a very good job - it is just a discussion of the viewing choices people have made. (Though those figures are confidential I believe - so shouldn't have been made public...)
The incredibly low ITV NC figures aren't likely to be helped by its disappearance from DTT (aka "Freeview") across the bulk of the UK. (It IS on air in London via Crystal Palace - but not from most other transmitters?)
NR
In the countdown to the 9pm bulletin on News 24 just now there was a BBCNews Special listed for 11pm. Are we to assume they are repeating the one already shown, or is there another to come tonight. It would seem silly to repeat a News Special, especially when the news coming out of this story is changing by the minute.
Anyone on the inside know more???
EDIT - They are repeating it twice throughout the night at 11.30 and at 0230.
Anyone on the inside know more???
EDIT - They are repeating it twice throughout the night at 11.30 and at 0230.
WI
When it was countrywide does anyone know if it finally got a 24 hour slot? I seem to remember it having to timeshare bandwidth with all sorts of things..
william
Founding member
noggin posted:
The incredibly low ITV NC figures aren't likely to be helped by its disappearance from DTT (aka "Freeview") across the bulk of the UK. (It IS on air in London via Crystal Palace - but not from most other transmitters?)
When it was countrywide does anyone know if it finally got a 24 hour slot? I seem to remember it having to timeshare bandwidth with all sorts of things..
IT
I think thats a little harsh- looking at ratings allows us to see what everyone thinks of the coverage rather than just a few of our opinions. Its not meant to be disrespectful to the disaster.
I should rephrase that, its not the discussion of ratings thats perhaps is inappropriate but more the use of figures as illustrated in Timmy's post to make a point. He's always trying to rubbish a particular news outlet, but to use the ratings of one of the most terrible events to occur in centurys makes me feel a little blahhh.
Whilst the news is horrible - it isn't irrelevant to examine which channels the public watch. It may feel as if it is in poor taste - but coverage of major events is one of the major reasons for 24 hour news channels to exist. The popularity of such channels (especially the commercial channels) is directly relevant to discussion on a forum such as this.
It seems that as with terrestrial channels, when a major news story breaks the British public are more likely to turn to a BBC News outlet than a commercial one. This isn't Sky bashing - they've done a very good job - it is just a discussion of the viewing choices people have made. (Though those figures are confidential I believe - so shouldn't have been made public...)
The incredibly low ITV NC figures aren't likely to be helped by its disappearance from DTT (aka "Freeview") across the bulk of the UK. (It IS on air in London via Crystal Palace - but not from most other transmitters?)
Get rid of the License fee, then at least Sky and ITV will have and equal chance.
noggin posted:
Snu posted:
North East posted:
Quote:
Hmm...Is discussing something as trivial as ratings really appropriate at this stage? Surely we should 'Discuss' the actual way in which the various news outlets handle this horrendous situation.
I think thats a little harsh- looking at ratings allows us to see what everyone thinks of the coverage rather than just a few of our opinions. Its not meant to be disrespectful to the disaster.
I should rephrase that, its not the discussion of ratings thats perhaps is inappropriate but more the use of figures as illustrated in Timmy's post to make a point. He's always trying to rubbish a particular news outlet, but to use the ratings of one of the most terrible events to occur in centurys makes me feel a little blahhh.
Whilst the news is horrible - it isn't irrelevant to examine which channels the public watch. It may feel as if it is in poor taste - but coverage of major events is one of the major reasons for 24 hour news channels to exist. The popularity of such channels (especially the commercial channels) is directly relevant to discussion on a forum such as this.
It seems that as with terrestrial channels, when a major news story breaks the British public are more likely to turn to a BBC News outlet than a commercial one. This isn't Sky bashing - they've done a very good job - it is just a discussion of the viewing choices people have made. (Though those figures are confidential I believe - so shouldn't have been made public...)
The incredibly low ITV NC figures aren't likely to be helped by its disappearance from DTT (aka "Freeview") across the bulk of the UK. (It IS on air in London via Crystal Palace - but not from most other transmitters?)
Get rid of the License fee, then at least Sky and ITV will have and equal chance.
TI
Snu, with the greatest of respect mate - get a life.
No-one is denying that the events in central Asia are sad and devastating beyond comprehension but there's nothing tasteless in comparing news channels' coverage of events. If we're comparing graphics, presenters and presentation then why shouldn't we compare ratings?
I am certainly not trying to rubbish Sky News - I have great respect for it. But I do get very irritated when people take swipes at the BBC and then hold up Sky News as the model of how things should be done. Sky News is a very long way from an excellent example and it's frustrating that not enough people realise that.
When last did you ever hear someone stand up for the BBC?
Finally - BARB figures are published in summary on their website and are constantly used by the media (patricularly Sky News and Media Guardian). I'm not aware they're confidential - perhaps someone could enlighten me.
Actually speaking of Sky using Barb figures, I see their publicity website Sky News Audience Figures hasn't been updated with the latest figures (they're stuck in September) which has since constantly put News 24 ahead of Sky.
Quote:
I should rephrase that, its not the discussion of ratings thats perhaps is inappropriate but more the use of figures as illustrated in Timmy's post to make a point. He's always trying to rubbish a particular news outlet, but to use the ratings of one of the most terrible events to occur in centurys makes me feel a little blahhh.
Snu, with the greatest of respect mate - get a life.
No-one is denying that the events in central Asia are sad and devastating beyond comprehension but there's nothing tasteless in comparing news channels' coverage of events. If we're comparing graphics, presenters and presentation then why shouldn't we compare ratings?
I am certainly not trying to rubbish Sky News - I have great respect for it. But I do get very irritated when people take swipes at the BBC and then hold up Sky News as the model of how things should be done. Sky News is a very long way from an excellent example and it's frustrating that not enough people realise that.
When last did you ever hear someone stand up for the BBC?
Finally - BARB figures are published in summary on their website and are constantly used by the media (patricularly Sky News and Media Guardian). I'm not aware they're confidential - perhaps someone could enlighten me.
Actually speaking of Sky using Barb figures, I see their publicity website Sky News Audience Figures hasn't been updated with the latest figures (they're stuck in September) which has since constantly put News 24 ahead of Sky.
LO
Although timmy did say that he was only giving us the satellite figures to make the comparison fair.
Yes, it had been 24 hour on DTT for some time. Previously it had been unavailable 0600-0925 until agreement with GMTV was reached for use of its capacity.
In the OnDigital/ITN News Channel era it was only on DTT in the mornings. Later it became 24 hours, but again the hours were initially restricted when the channel moved to the Digital 3+4 mux.
noggin posted:
The incredibly low ITV NC figures aren't likely to be helped by its disappearance from DTT (aka "Freeview") across the bulk of the UK. (It IS on air in London via Crystal Palace - but not from most other transmitters?)
Although timmy did say that he was only giving us the satellite figures to make the comparison fair.
william posted:
When it was countrywide does anyone know if it finally got a 24 hour slot? I seem to remember it having to timeshare bandwidth with all sorts of things..
Yes, it had been 24 hour on DTT for some time. Previously it had been unavailable 0600-0925 until agreement with GMTV was reached for use of its capacity.
In the OnDigital/ITN News Channel era it was only on DTT in the mornings. Later it became 24 hours, but again the hours were initially restricted when the channel moved to the Digital 3+4 mux.
NG
Although timmy did say that he was only giving us the satellite figures to make the comparison fair.
Yes, it had been 24 hour on DTT for some time. Previously it had been unavailable 0600-0925 until agreement with GMTV was reached.
And when it was the ITN News Channel rather than the ITV News Channel it was only carried for some periods of the day on the SDN/Five multiplex. ISTR there was a period when it was rebranded as the ITV News Channel but still carried on the Five/SDN Mux (A) and 24hrs - then when it moved to the ITV/C4 Mux (2) it had to cease transmissions 0600-0925 when GMTV rather than the ITV regional franchise holders had the entire "ITV" allocation of Mux 2.
noggin
Founding member
Londoner posted:
noggin posted:
The incredibly low ITV NC figures aren't likely to be helped by its disappearance from DTT (aka "Freeview") across the bulk of the UK. (It IS on air in London via Crystal Palace - but not from most other transmitters?)
Although timmy did say that he was only giving us the satellite figures to make the comparison fair.
william posted:
When it was countrywide does anyone know if it finally got a 24 hour slot? I seem to remember it having to timeshare bandwidth with all sorts of things..
Yes, it had been 24 hour on DTT for some time. Previously it had been unavailable 0600-0925 until agreement with GMTV was reached.
And when it was the ITN News Channel rather than the ITV News Channel it was only carried for some periods of the day on the SDN/Five multiplex. ISTR there was a period when it was rebranded as the ITV News Channel but still carried on the Five/SDN Mux (A) and 24hrs - then when it moved to the ITV/C4 Mux (2) it had to cease transmissions 0600-0925 when GMTV rather than the ITV regional franchise holders had the entire "ITV" allocation of Mux 2.
CA
I think you have rather misinterpreted what I was saying.
I was suggesting that regular viewers of BBC One news at 1pm, or 6pm, or whenever, upon finding no news on said channel, went over to News 24, perhaps explaining an increase in viewing figures over Sky at these times of the day.
You have also provided two sets of figures, which are indeed available on Gateway, which do not tally:
Tuesday 28th December
13h00
BBC News 24: 2.1% 145.0
Sky News: 2.1% 144.5
Yesterday (given that today is the 29th, I assume you mean the 28th, so the figures should be as above) at 13.00
BBC News 24: 2.0% share
Sky News: 2.3% share
ITV NC:0.4%
timmy posted:
One of my little helpers at The Corporation got them for me. Apparently they're available on the internal Auntie-Intranet.
cat, er the point of News 24 is that BBC News viewers watch the channel and not the main networks. Since when does BBC One or BBC Two brand themselves as news channels? That's the reality of this "multichannel" world everyone keeps talks about.
It does roughly break even though at each important time, ie 12h00, 13h00 and 17h00, where continuous news channel viewerships are at their peak, News 24 is ahead of Sky News.
I didn't ask for ITV NC but they would be statisically distorted because the channel is not on Sky.
Quote:
Regular BBC News viewers having to look to News 24 rather than BBC One and Two for coverage, as the latter two were providing absolutely none, perhaps?
It roughly breaks out as even, with Sky ahead at some times and News 24 ahead at others.
It roughly breaks out as even, with Sky ahead at some times and News 24 ahead at others.
cat, er the point of News 24 is that BBC News viewers watch the channel and not the main networks. Since when does BBC One or BBC Two brand themselves as news channels? That's the reality of this "multichannel" world everyone keeps talks about.
It does roughly break even though at each important time, ie 12h00, 13h00 and 17h00, where continuous news channel viewerships are at their peak, News 24 is ahead of Sky News.
I didn't ask for ITV NC but they would be statisically distorted because the channel is not on Sky.
I think you have rather misinterpreted what I was saying.
I was suggesting that regular viewers of BBC One news at 1pm, or 6pm, or whenever, upon finding no news on said channel, went over to News 24, perhaps explaining an increase in viewing figures over Sky at these times of the day.
You have also provided two sets of figures, which are indeed available on Gateway, which do not tally:
Tuesday 28th December
13h00
BBC News 24: 2.1% 145.0
Sky News: 2.1% 144.5
Yesterday (given that today is the 29th, I assume you mean the 28th, so the figures should be as above) at 13.00
BBC News 24: 2.0% share
Sky News: 2.3% share
ITV NC:0.4%
TI
cat, it's clear which set of figures are which as I have explained. The first are figures for multichannel homes, the second ratings for those with digital satellite only. Of course they don't tally.
Quote:
You have also provided two sets of figures, which are indeed available on Gateway, which do not tally:
Tuesday 28th December
13h00
BBC News 24: 2.1% 145.0
Sky News: 2.1% 144.5
Yesterday (given that today is the 29th, I assume you mean the 28th, so the figures should be as above) at 13.00
BBC News 24: 2.0% share
Sky News: 2.3% share
ITV NC:0.4%
Tuesday 28th December
13h00
BBC News 24: 2.1% 145.0
Sky News: 2.1% 144.5
Yesterday (given that today is the 29th, I assume you mean the 28th, so the figures should be as above) at 13.00
BBC News 24: 2.0% share
Sky News: 2.3% share
ITV NC:0.4%
cat, it's clear which set of figures are which as I have explained. The first are figures for multichannel homes, the second ratings for those with digital satellite only. Of course they don't tally.