NE
Sounds like the slow wind-down of the News Channel (I think rolling new channels are probably on the way out - people don't want to have to wait for a story to 'come round')
I think we'd all like a bit more information about this from the BBC's press release today!
Quote:
A transition from rolling news to streaming news, with BBC Newstream, bringing the expertise of our journalism into the palm of your hand.
Sounds like the slow wind-down of the News Channel (I think rolling new channels are probably on the way out - people don't want to have to wait for a story to 'come round')
.png)
CW
Charlie Wells
Moderator
From Lord Hall's speech...
...and...
Full speech text: http://www.theguardian.com/media/2015/sep/07/tony-hall-speech-future-bbc-full-text
Quote:
It will be easier to offer more people information they can trust, more quickly. And they will demand more, more quickly. So, over the period of this charter, we will make a transition from rolling news to streaming news. News in the palm of your hand.
...and...
Quote:
Mobile also provides the best opportunity to deliver a more personalised news service and to inform audiences in new ways - the relevant data, context and information that everyone needs, delivered to suit their requirements.
A bespoke BBC News, made to measure for you, wherever you are.
Inevitably, this will be a more video based service - complemented by audio, graphics and text live from BBC News. It will be the place to go to find out the facts and to understand the story behind them.
A bespoke BBC News, made to measure for you, wherever you are.
Inevitably, this will be a more video based service - complemented by audio, graphics and text live from BBC News. It will be the place to go to find out the facts and to understand the story behind them.
Full speech text: http://www.theguardian.com/media/2015/sep/07/tony-hall-speech-future-bbc-full-text
DT
IMHO this is a terrible idea based on faulty reasoning and a poor rational. If the basis is cuts - it isn't really saving money moving the News Channel online, it's just reallocating resources replacing broadcasting costs with online ones. It seems more like the BBC is trying to appear more modern for the sake of appearing more modern but this isn't the way to do it. I'm in their 18-24 demographic any personally hate reading the news on a smartphone because it's tiny and my laptop and TV do a much better job. Trying to watch video on a 4 inch screen is ridiculous. The BBC News Channel is currently watched by 9 million individual viewers a week (a statistic oddly missing here) and by going online they are handing those viewers to Sky. We've already heard tales of civil servants switching the TVs over to Sky News in the mornings because of the out-of-remit Victoria Derbyshire programme. By switching off the channel they are practically giving up and saying Sky can do it better. I don't care if they share more resources with World News but there is plenty of waste at the News department and elsewhere that can be got rid of before they basically destroy the news channel. Sure some might like sports news but Sky Sports News HQ HR HS HO HD does it so much better and do the BBC need that many Sports News presenters. If CBeebies prime time is during the day and CBBC's in the late afternoon and mornings why not merge the two channels. Sure BBC Four has launched many good shows (QI, Charlie Brooker) and had some great imports over the years (Parks and Rec, Curb) but they can fit in BBC Two's evening schedule and BBC Two's endless repeats could make way to accommodate their documentaries. I think the BBC needs to look at cutting services with the least effect on the overall service without becoming some wh*re for the commercial sector. Some plans of these are good - assisting in the maintenance of local news outlets and (for once) expanding the World Service. But I don't see sensible reductions in services (the 3 'extra' radio stations, number of costly programme promos every year, merging smaller local radio stations). If the BBC can get more programming out of women's sports (which are, perhaps a knock back for equality, substantially cheaper) than some of these sports such as F1 which are costing the Beeb a fortune and other broadcasters are happy to show. Or maybe the BBC could, a revolutionary idea I know, grow some balls for change and say no to what are ideologically driven cuts.
BA
Petition time?
IMHO this is a terrible idea based on faulty reasoning and a poor rational. If the basis is cuts - it isn't really saving money moving the News Channel online, it's just reallocating resources replacing broadcasting costs with online ones. It seems more like the BBC is trying to appear more modern for the sake of appearing more modern but this isn't the way to do it. I'm in their 18-24 demographic any personally hate reading the news on a smartphone because it's tiny and my laptop and TV do a much better job. Trying to watch video on a 4 inch screen is ridiculous. The BBC News Channel is currently watched by 9 million individual viewers a week (a statistic oddly missing here) and by going online they are handing those viewers to Sky. We've already heard tales of civil servants switching the TVs over to Sky News in the mornings because of the out-of-remit Victoria Derbyshire programme. By switching off the channel they are practically giving up and saying Sky can do it better. I don't care if they share more resources with World News but there is plenty of waste at the News department and elsewhere that can be got rid of before they basically destroy the news channel. Sure some might like sports news but Sky Sports News HQ HR HS HO HD does it so much better and do the BBC need that many Sports News presenters. If CBeebies prime time is during the day and CBBC's in the late afternoon and mornings why not merge the two channels. Sure BBC Four has launched many good shows (QI, Charlie Brooker) and had some great imports over the years (Parks and Rec, Curb) but they can fit in BBC Two's evening schedule and BBC Two's endless repeats could make way to accommodate their documentaries. I think the BBC needs to look at cutting services with the least effect on the overall service without becoming some wh*re for the commercial sector. Some plans of these are good - assisting in the maintenance of local news outlets and (for once) expanding the World Service. But I don't see sensible reductions in services (the 3 'extra' radio stations, number of costly programme promos every year, merging smaller local radio stations). If the BBC can get more programming out of women's sports (which are, perhaps a knock back for equality, substantially cheaper) than some of these sports such as F1 which are costing the Beeb a fortune and other broadcasters are happy to show. Or maybe the BBC could, a revolutionary idea I know, grow some balls for change and say no to what are ideologically driven cuts.
Petition time?
LL
London Lite
Founding member
If they're going to move the NC online, then at least give us BBC World News on linear platforms. It's largely a better produced channel with wider output.
CW
Charlie Wells
Moderator
It may be worth tuning in to Jeremy Vine on radio 2 from about 12.30pm as he's interviewing Lord Hall. Just after the news headlines he read out a tweet from a certain listener about the news channel suggesting he asks Lord Hall about it.
IS
Bear in mind he says 'in the duration of the charter'... So by 2026. Things will be very different then so this probably won't seem like such an odd or revolutionary idea.
By then linear TV will probably be on its last legs, isn't there a switch off/shrinking of DTT planned by then?
By then linear TV will probably be on its last legs, isn't there a switch off/shrinking of DTT planned by then?
NE
Interesting that some people seem to be reading this as 'move the news channel online'.
I assumed that this was looking at a different way of delivering news.
When it comes down to it, a rolling news channel is almost more an analogue than a digital idea - wait till the required bit of news comes round (almost like Ceefax pages in a way). It'll survive for a while yet, no doubt, but it will become more outmoded as a delivery system.
Whereas this sounds like moving towards an approach more suited to people being able to access reports and analysis on particular news and current affairs issues as they wish.
In a sense, this is already happening - more an more videos appear alongside text on the BBC website and the 'BBC News' section on NowTV is basically links to video reports for different headlines.
I assumed that this was looking at a different way of delivering news.
When it comes down to it, a rolling news channel is almost more an analogue than a digital idea - wait till the required bit of news comes round (almost like Ceefax pages in a way). It'll survive for a while yet, no doubt, but it will become more outmoded as a delivery system.
Whereas this sounds like moving towards an approach more suited to people being able to access reports and analysis on particular news and current affairs issues as they wish.
In a sense, this is already happening - more an more videos appear alongside text on the BBC website and the 'BBC News' section on NowTV is basically links to video reports for different headlines.
DT
Those were the words used by the reporter on Breakfast this morning so that's how I read it.
Interesting that some people seem to be reading this as 'move the news channel online'.
Those were the words used by the reporter on Breakfast this morning so that's how I read it.
NE
Those were the words used by the reporter on Breakfast this morning so that's how I read it.
Listened to Jeremy Vine interviewing Tony Hall.
The relevant bit about the News Channel reflected that post-election around 20% of people were getting their main BBC news via mobile/tablet and that this was expected to grow. Consequently, sounds like they're moving more towards different ways of producing videos of news an analysis for mobile use and ( longer term) away from the broadcast channel as usage changes.
Interesting that some people seem to be reading this as 'move the news channel online'.
Those were the words used by the reporter on Breakfast this morning so that's how I read it.
Listened to Jeremy Vine interviewing Tony Hall.
The relevant bit about the News Channel reflected that post-election around 20% of people were getting their main BBC news via mobile/tablet and that this was expected to grow. Consequently, sounds like they're moving more towards different ways of producing videos of news an analysis for mobile use and ( longer term) away from the broadcast channel as usage changes.