JO
Idiots make stupid predictions that never come true, and Fran Unsworth just proved she's the latest idiot to predict the demise of something, that in fact isn't going to die. Like so many other media before them, linear TV will evolve, and become a more live proudced product, much like it used to be. But it sure as hell ain't gonna die.
It's not nice to call people you don't know idiots.
Idiots make stupid predictions that never come true, and Fran Unsworth just proved she's the latest idiot to predict the demise of something, that in fact isn't going to die. Like so many other media before them, linear TV will evolve, and become a more live proudced product, much like it used to be. But it sure as hell ain't gonna die.
It's not nice to call people you don't know idiots.
JF
That's just journalism for you. You could be pressured into saying something you shouldn't and then your head's hung on the newspapers.
It's something which does not invoke any sort of good PR, at least in the BBC, the license fee debate and moreso the death of linear viewing of news. By literally cutting the news programmes which many tune to at specific hours, they'll likely have their audience tune out of the whole network of channels and end up causing more of a reason not to pay the license fee if what their money is going to is to make the Head of News end up saying stuff she shouldn't.
It's something which does not invoke any sort of good PR, at least in the BBC, the license fee debate and moreso the death of linear viewing of news. By literally cutting the news programmes which many tune to at specific hours, they'll likely have their audience tune out of the whole network of channels and end up causing more of a reason not to pay the license fee if what their money is going to is to make the Head of News end up saying stuff she shouldn't.
CI
Idiots make stupid predictions that never come true, and Fran Unsworth just proved she's the latest idiot to predict the demise of something, that in fact isn't going to die. Like so many other media before them, linear TV will evolve, and become a more live proudced product, much like it used to be. But it sure as hell ain't gonna die.
It's not nice to call people you don't know idiots.
Like I care...
The BBC have really made some immensely stupid decisions over the years. But this is just a whole new level of stupidity, and it deserves to be accurately described for what it is. Fran has obviously learned nothing from media history and has therefore repeated the same idiotic mistake that many others have done before. Nobody can predict the future, so she shouldn't even try.
Idiots make stupid predictions that never come true, and Fran Unsworth just proved she's the latest idiot to predict the demise of something, that in fact isn't going to die. Like so many other media before them, linear TV will evolve, and become a more live proudced product, much like it used to be. But it sure as hell ain't gonna die.
It's not nice to call people you don't know idiots.
Like I care...
The BBC have really made some immensely stupid decisions over the years. But this is just a whole new level of stupidity, and it deserves to be accurately described for what it is. Fran has obviously learned nothing from media history and has therefore repeated the same idiotic mistake that many others have done before. Nobody can predict the future, so she shouldn't even try.
CH
Let’s also not forget this isn’t the same as Kevin Lygo saying ITV may not have as many news bulletins in a decade because the audience has gone elsewhere. The BBC should be providing appropriate services even if audiences fall, and it would be a conscious decision rather than following markets. As lots have said, it was a pretty careless thing to say at the very least. She surely should have known it’d be picked up and spun in the press?
I don’t think anybody thinks Unsworth is psychic? It’s been quite a considered debate about what we think as TV enthusiasts will happen. Bar a couple of unnecessary personal comments, this has been one of the most interesting threads for some time - give me more of this than the endless counting of presenters.
Loose lips create newspaper headlines.
Now it'll probably play into the hands of the #DefundTheBBC brigade - so angry that the BBC might lose their national bulletins that they want to see the BBC not be given the money to make them.
MIRROR: Beeb TV news doomed #TomorrowsPapersToday pic.twitter.com/725O7LGPwn
— Neil Henderson (@hendopolis) August 20, 2020
Now it'll probably play into the hands of the #DefundTheBBC brigade - so angry that the BBC might lose their national bulletins that they want to see the BBC not be given the money to make them.
Let’s also not forget this isn’t the same as Kevin Lygo saying ITV may not have as many news bulletins in a decade because the audience has gone elsewhere. The BBC should be providing appropriate services even if audiences fall, and it would be a conscious decision rather than following markets. As lots have said, it was a pretty careless thing to say at the very least. She surely should have known it’d be picked up and spun in the press?
Well if this thread has taught me one thing, it’s that TVF doesn’t understand that someone predicting what might happen in the future (even saying that she might be wrong) doesn’t mean that it will. Things evolve.
Of course things will look different in 10 years time, and it is perfectly reasonable for someone in Unsworth’s position to discuss what that might look like. It’s no different to say the boss of Tesco speculating that the majority of people might pay using their phone in ten years time. Things don’t stand still, no matter how much you can’t bear the thought of Huw no longer standing there on the catwalk reading the top story.
Of course things will look different in 10 years time, and it is perfectly reasonable for someone in Unsworth’s position to discuss what that might look like. It’s no different to say the boss of Tesco speculating that the majority of people might pay using their phone in ten years time. Things don’t stand still, no matter how much you can’t bear the thought of Huw no longer standing there on the catwalk reading the top story.
I don’t think anybody thinks Unsworth is psychic? It’s been quite a considered debate about what we think as TV enthusiasts will happen. Bar a couple of unnecessary personal comments, this has been one of the most interesting threads for some time - give me more of this than the endless counting of presenters.
AN
another_beauty
Was silly of the BBC to word their own headline as they did - probably contributed to that going on the front page.
I very much think this was a deliberate act.
BR
Let's be honest - apart from the multiple cuts to news channel output over the last decade or so the network TV bulletin landscape hasn't really changed much since all the bulletin changes back in 1999-2000 - and even less so in the last decade regardless of what has happened in the online arena, so I don't think there is any reason to think it'll change much more in the next decade or so.
W1
I think this smacks of a political move by Fran Unsworth - the Telegraph is a good way to speak indirectly to Conservative Party members and MPs...and highlighting the very bulletins that audience really values sort of tells me it's a shot across the bow of any incoming Chairperson (who I think is going to be someone with a 'Number 10' view of the BBC) that traditional BBC services are at risk if the cuts keep coming.
If it isn't that, and it's just a worldview, then, like most on here I think it's slightly off. But having said that, other than working in it and consuming it, I'm not an expert...very few people are when it comes to the future and the future of media and news is pretty complicated.
I think there's always going to be a roll for curated content, and appointment to view news programmes will still be made, and be an important part of daily BBC output. The length, timing and method of broadcast are up for grabs. I can't help but mention that Apple have just rebranded their Apple Music 'radio' stations - a perfect example of a company that's realised despite forwarding ultimate choice in personal music (iPod+iTunes), some customers want curated content and the way to do that is traditional broadcast formats.
I do think the BBC News is guilty of not really thinking radically enough sometimes, and then focusing on the wrong things. Being London-centric is one of the faults, and Tony Hall has pledged (and hopefully it survives under Davie) to try and fix that by shifting more of the BBC workforce away from London...News has to do this ASAP and at the moment, I don't think there's any radical plans there. The BBC write up of Unsworth's interview highlights the point about the popularity of regional news, yet they are being cut (again).
I reckon there's a systematic issue with the regions in that they can be places where people are on the way up or on the way down in their career (that's not meant to disparage those working there, there's plenty of talent around) ... and the ones on the way down can be expensive due to long service etc, so on paper it can look like a good thing to cut - but it seems like a strategic error to me. Ultimately, the regions have to become somewhere where people can 'achieve' at the BBC and be rewarded for it - with exposure and equipment that does the job (and pay for those on their way up).
The two things (or one and half) that are at risk of change, or should be IMO, are the two things that Tony Hall created in the white heat of the digital revolution. Decisions that were ultimately great ones at the time, being News 24 and BBC News Online.
Firstly, it's the linear news channels that should be at risk in the next decade, not bulletins. Ironically it's bulletins that have never done rolling news before that have the right strategy: PBS in America and Channel 4 News are two example of the future I think: push notifications to live ad-hoc coverage of important live events. BBC News could add in presenters and guests on location when it needs it (for example, those long Brexit days in Parliament). College Green for 10 hours and then gone. Summary on News At Ten tonight. In depth analysis of the week's news in a Newsnight (once a week) format. The push notifications world will be easier to achieve once vulnerable viewers are streaming only and not reliant on a tv aerial - which may be 10+ years away. BBC World News makes less sense when there's loads of really successful local BBC News offerings in markets that matter (India, the BBC's largest, has several tv shows a day all broadcast on other networks...where the Indian audience is).
BBC News Online is a largely a political problem. Those who might want to curtail the BBC from the govt side can't help but notice the sheer size, and market share of the website...and it's text based services. It's a core BBC service for so many people, but it sits out of the remit (IMO) of a broadcaster. No European or North American broadcaster has a website anywhere near the scale of BBC News online and it's being offered, free, without advertising. I can see it being repurposed to point to video and audio content more prominently. Whether that saves any money, I don't know...but the print industry would be quite pleased if the website was shrunk a bit and News focused more on the middle 'B'...'broadcasting'.
If it isn't that, and it's just a worldview, then, like most on here I think it's slightly off. But having said that, other than working in it and consuming it, I'm not an expert...very few people are when it comes to the future and the future of media and news is pretty complicated.
I think there's always going to be a roll for curated content, and appointment to view news programmes will still be made, and be an important part of daily BBC output. The length, timing and method of broadcast are up for grabs. I can't help but mention that Apple have just rebranded their Apple Music 'radio' stations - a perfect example of a company that's realised despite forwarding ultimate choice in personal music (iPod+iTunes), some customers want curated content and the way to do that is traditional broadcast formats.
I do think the BBC News is guilty of not really thinking radically enough sometimes, and then focusing on the wrong things. Being London-centric is one of the faults, and Tony Hall has pledged (and hopefully it survives under Davie) to try and fix that by shifting more of the BBC workforce away from London...News has to do this ASAP and at the moment, I don't think there's any radical plans there. The BBC write up of Unsworth's interview highlights the point about the popularity of regional news, yet they are being cut (again).
I reckon there's a systematic issue with the regions in that they can be places where people are on the way up or on the way down in their career (that's not meant to disparage those working there, there's plenty of talent around) ... and the ones on the way down can be expensive due to long service etc, so on paper it can look like a good thing to cut - but it seems like a strategic error to me. Ultimately, the regions have to become somewhere where people can 'achieve' at the BBC and be rewarded for it - with exposure and equipment that does the job (and pay for those on their way up).
The two things (or one and half) that are at risk of change, or should be IMO, are the two things that Tony Hall created in the white heat of the digital revolution. Decisions that were ultimately great ones at the time, being News 24 and BBC News Online.
Firstly, it's the linear news channels that should be at risk in the next decade, not bulletins. Ironically it's bulletins that have never done rolling news before that have the right strategy: PBS in America and Channel 4 News are two example of the future I think: push notifications to live ad-hoc coverage of important live events. BBC News could add in presenters and guests on location when it needs it (for example, those long Brexit days in Parliament). College Green for 10 hours and then gone. Summary on News At Ten tonight. In depth analysis of the week's news in a Newsnight (once a week) format. The push notifications world will be easier to achieve once vulnerable viewers are streaming only and not reliant on a tv aerial - which may be 10+ years away. BBC World News makes less sense when there's loads of really successful local BBC News offerings in markets that matter (India, the BBC's largest, has several tv shows a day all broadcast on other networks...where the Indian audience is).
BBC News Online is a largely a political problem. Those who might want to curtail the BBC from the govt side can't help but notice the sheer size, and market share of the website...and it's text based services. It's a core BBC service for so many people, but it sits out of the remit (IMO) of a broadcaster. No European or North American broadcaster has a website anywhere near the scale of BBC News online and it's being offered, free, without advertising. I can see it being repurposed to point to video and audio content more prominently. Whether that saves any money, I don't know...but the print industry would be quite pleased if the website was shrunk a bit and News focused more on the middle 'B'...'broadcasting'.
JL
Well, just catching up on this, and I think it's utter garbage.
While it has its faults, the BBC is well known for major bulletins at One, Six and Ten. I know people who for a fact, even when streaming, pause at Ten (or occasionally Six if started early enough) to stop for the main bulletins of the day.
The best thing maybe however, is to make sure each bulletin is fresh/unique. Similar to the 99 relaunch, have one focus on Britain, and one on international news, while providing summaries of the other in the bulletin
While it has its faults, the BBC is well known for major bulletins at One, Six and Ten. I know people who for a fact, even when streaming, pause at Ten (or occasionally Six if started early enough) to stop for the main bulletins of the day.
The best thing maybe however, is to make sure each bulletin is fresh/unique. Similar to the 99 relaunch, have one focus on Britain, and one on international news, while providing summaries of the other in the bulletin
NT
Yeah, I think this was an attempt to do that. I think it's backfired, though; what a way to put your staff through even more uncertainty. And it's impossible to have a sensible discussion about the future of the BBC in the Telegraph, of all places, without it being open-season for spittle-flecked fury from weirdos and wrong 'uns who'd have the place shut down tomorrow; particularly now nuance and actually thinking before you speak is so desperately unfashionable.
Unsworth's always struck me as one of those uninspiring and over-promoted BBC lifers who'd flounder elsewhere; I'm genuinely amazed she survived the Cliff farrago. I suspect while linear television exists, there'll continue to be a place for appointment-to-view news bulletins; particularly in times of crisis and worry and with so much disinformation spread by social media. Hey, we could go all 6 Music and call it "curated news".
She'll be on her way out soon anyway, it won't be her problem.
Yeah, the website is a big double-edged sword: being the default news source for a huge proportion of the population is a tribute to all the work put in to it, but creates a target that can be seen from space. It's had a few big cutbacks over the years, then seems to grow back. It remains a remarkable product but has lost some focus over the years. It'd benefit from doing fewer things better, and expanding in the English regions (not contracting) because the local news market has largely failed now. If you were looking at the future of BBC News, perhaps you'd start with the website - that's the shop window now - and work from there.
I think this smacks of a political move by Fran Unsworth - the Telegraph is a good way to speak indirectly to Conservative Party members and MPs...and highlighting the very bulletins that audience really values sort of tells me it's a shot across the bow of any incoming Chairperson (who I think is going to be someone with a 'Number 10' view of the BBC) that traditional BBC services are at risk if the cuts keep coming.
Yeah, I think this was an attempt to do that. I think it's backfired, though; what a way to put your staff through even more uncertainty. And it's impossible to have a sensible discussion about the future of the BBC in the Telegraph, of all places, without it being open-season for spittle-flecked fury from weirdos and wrong 'uns who'd have the place shut down tomorrow; particularly now nuance and actually thinking before you speak is so desperately unfashionable.
Unsworth's always struck me as one of those uninspiring and over-promoted BBC lifers who'd flounder elsewhere; I'm genuinely amazed she survived the Cliff farrago. I suspect while linear television exists, there'll continue to be a place for appointment-to-view news bulletins; particularly in times of crisis and worry and with so much disinformation spread by social media. Hey, we could go all 6 Music and call it "curated news".
She'll be on her way out soon anyway, it won't be her problem.
BBC News Online is a largely a political problem. Those who might want to curtail the BBC from the govt side can't help but notice the sheer size, and market share of the website...and it's text based services. It's a core BBC service for so many people, but it sits out of the remit (IMO) of a broadcaster. No European or North American broadcaster has a website anywhere near the scale of BBC News online and it's being offered, free, without advertising. I can see it being repurposed to point to video and audio content more prominently. Whether that saves any money, I don't know...but the print industry would be quite pleased if the website was shrunk a bit and News focused more on the middle 'B'...'broadcasting'.
Yeah, the website is a big double-edged sword: being the default news source for a huge proportion of the population is a tribute to all the work put in to it, but creates a target that can be seen from space. It's had a few big cutbacks over the years, then seems to grow back. It remains a remarkable product but has lost some focus over the years. It'd benefit from doing fewer things better, and expanding in the English regions (not contracting) because the local news market has largely failed now. If you were looking at the future of BBC News, perhaps you'd start with the website - that's the shop window now - and work from there.
NL
That's not a bad idea. the one could be on international news, the 6 could be on national news (would probably get the lions share of audience ie shift workers and the 10 could be a mix)
Well, just catching up on this, and I think it's utter garbage.
While it has its faults, the BBC is well known for major bulletins at One, Six and Ten. I know people who for a fact, even when streaming, pause at Ten (or occasionally Six if started early enough) to stop for the main bulletins of the day.
The best thing maybe however, is to make sure each bulletin is fresh/unique. Similar to the 99 relaunch, have one focus on Britain, and one on international news, while providing summaries of the other in the bulletin
While it has its faults, the BBC is well known for major bulletins at One, Six and Ten. I know people who for a fact, even when streaming, pause at Ten (or occasionally Six if started early enough) to stop for the main bulletins of the day.
The best thing maybe however, is to make sure each bulletin is fresh/unique. Similar to the 99 relaunch, have one focus on Britain, and one on international news, while providing summaries of the other in the bulletin
That's not a bad idea. the one could be on international news, the 6 could be on national news (would probably get the lions share of audience ie shift workers and the 10 could be a mix)