MA
They can't seem to give proportionate treatment, when more than one major event is occurring.
Remember the Mandela vs East Coast flooding evening ?
On any other day you'd have half the BBC on scene and the BBC one bulletins would have been anchored on location.
They can't seem to give proportionate treatment, when more than one major event is occurring.
Remember the Mandela vs East Coast flooding evening ?
HC
Whereas other parts of the BBC News machine managed to mention it.
Today on Radio Four, reported on a 'serious incident' at 7.19. Five Live shortly afterwards.
Today on Radio Four, reported on a 'serious incident' at 7.19. Five Live shortly afterwards.
ST
That's wrong.
When reporting legal cases in a specific area the media HAVE to report both the name and age of someone who is charged, in order to avoid confusion with someone with a similar name in the same street.
In the event of a pre-arrest incident, there is absolutely NO REASON why the media can't name the specific location. It's a matter of public record.
Whenever there is an incident like this, they have to be careful during reporting as it can impact on any future court case.
That's wrong.
When reporting legal cases in a specific area the media HAVE to report both the name and age of someone who is charged, in order to avoid confusion with someone with a similar name in the same street.
In the event of a pre-arrest incident, there is absolutely NO REASON why the media can't name the specific location. It's a matter of public record.
AN
They can't seem to give proportionate treatment, when more than one major event is occurring.
Remember the Mandela vs East Coast flooding evening ?
There seems to be some weird rule now where if a story is "massive" it has to dominate entirely. Not just receive lots of coverage but all the coverage
Andrew
Founding member
On any other day you'd have half the BBC on scene and the BBC one bulletins would have been anchored on location.
They can't seem to give proportionate treatment, when more than one major event is occurring.
Remember the Mandela vs East Coast flooding evening ?
There seems to be some weird rule now where if a story is "massive" it has to dominate entirely. Not just receive lots of coverage but all the coverage
NE
They can't seem to give proportionate treatment, when more than one major event is occurring.
Remember the Mandela vs East Coast flooding evening ?
There seems to be some weird rule now where if a story is "massive" it has to dominate entirely. Not just receive lots of coverage but all the coverage
Newswatch will all over this like a rash on Friday i expect.
On any other day you'd have half the BBC on scene and the BBC one bulletins would have been anchored on location.
They can't seem to give proportionate treatment, when more than one major event is occurring.
Remember the Mandela vs East Coast flooding evening ?
There seems to be some weird rule now where if a story is "massive" it has to dominate entirely. Not just receive lots of coverage but all the coverage
Newswatch will all over this like a rash on Friday i expect.
JA
They can't seem to give proportionate treatment, when more than one major event is occurring.
Remember the Mandela vs East Coast flooding evening ?
There seems to be some weird rule now where if a story is "massive" it has to dominate entirely. Not just receive lots of coverage but all the coverage
Newswatch will all over this like a rash on Friday i expect.
Probably. And nothing at all will change.
They can't seem to give proportionate treatment, when more than one major event is occurring.
Remember the Mandela vs East Coast flooding evening ?
There seems to be some weird rule now where if a story is "massive" it has to dominate entirely. Not just receive lots of coverage but all the coverage
Newswatch will all over this like a rash on Friday i expect.
Probably. And nothing at all will change.
LL
The BBC News representative on Newswatch said that they covered the Croydon tram derailment on the 1, 6 and 10, BBC London News and on the News Channel, although made no indication to why it took them so long to cover the story on the tv channels. He also justified the simulcasting on BBC1 as a "significant news event"
Viewer wise, they aired one complaint about a viewer about the lack of Breakfast for local news and weather and another about the tram.
London Lite
Founding member
For those of us outside the iPlayer territory who missed it, what did they have to say for themselves on Newswatch?
The BBC News representative on Newswatch said that they covered the Croydon tram derailment on the 1, 6 and 10, BBC London News and on the News Channel, although made no indication to why it took them so long to cover the story on the tv channels. He also justified the simulcasting on BBC1 as a "significant news event"
Viewer wise, they aired one complaint about a viewer about the lack of Breakfast for local news and weather and another about the tram.
MA
The BBC News representative on Newswatch said that they covered the Croydon tram derailment on the 1, 6 and 10, BBC London News and on the News Channel, although made no indication to why it took them so long to cover the story on the tv channels. He also justified the simulcasting on BBC1 as a "significant news event"
Amazing, three universal coverage TV channels at their disposal, one with full regional opt out facilities, to match up with one major international event, one major national event, and snow falling in the north of the Uk.
A 10 year old could have applied the appropriate division of resources
The BBC News representative on Newswatch said that they covered the Croydon tram derailment on the 1, 6 and 10, BBC London News and on the News Channel, although made no indication to why it took them so long to cover the story on the tv channels. He also justified the simulcasting on BBC1 as a "significant news event"
Amazing, three universal coverage TV channels at their disposal, one with full regional opt out facilities, to match up with one major international event, one major national event, and snow falling in the north of the Uk.
A 10 year old could have applied the appropriate division of resources
BR
Would you have expected a tram crash in Blackpool to get priority over the most significant US election result in recent times? Would people had been complaining if the tram crash hadn't been in the London area?
In some respects the lack of continuing coverage from the moment ig happened meant coverage was more respectful than usual. Yes, it was a major story of the day that was very much overlooked but ultimately not of the nationsl or international significance of what was happening in the US.
In some respects the lack of continuing coverage from the moment ig happened meant coverage was more respectful than usual. Yes, it was a major story of the day that was very much overlooked but ultimately not of the nationsl or international significance of what was happening in the US.
DO
This seems to be the question forefront in the minds of the BBC editors, but it's the wrong one.
Nobody is complaining that they didn't prioritise a tram accident (especially early on before the casualty's were revealed) over the US election - they're complaining that they didn't even mention said accident.
It was exactly the same with Mandela and the east coast flooding. The complaints were not that the BBC covered Mandela's death, or that the flooding wasn't given top billing - they were that the flooding was completely ignored overnight so they could give us non-stop chat.
As someone else said earlier in the thread, they seem to get it into the minds that if a story is big enough, it must take over all the output regardless of other stories. It does make me wonder what would happen if a VIP died on the same day as the election result - two big stories which would justify blanket coverage, would one still get ignored for the other?
Would you have expected a tram crash in Blackpool to get priority over the most significant US election result in recent times?
This seems to be the question forefront in the minds of the BBC editors, but it's the wrong one.
Nobody is complaining that they didn't prioritise a tram accident (especially early on before the casualty's were revealed) over the US election - they're complaining that they didn't even mention said accident.
It was exactly the same with Mandela and the east coast flooding. The complaints were not that the BBC covered Mandela's death, or that the flooding wasn't given top billing - they were that the flooding was completely ignored overnight so they could give us non-stop chat.
As someone else said earlier in the thread, they seem to get it into the minds that if a story is big enough, it must take over all the output regardless of other stories. It does make me wonder what would happen if a VIP died on the same day as the election result - two big stories which would justify blanket coverage, would one still get ignored for the other?