Why was the version of World News America shown on News24 so short tonight? It was only about 15 minutes long. Is it always going to be that short or was it cut down for breaking news reasons?
I started discussing this over on the News 24 thread as it is really exclusively a News 24 issue.
I think BBC World was better when it just used to have The World Today in it's schedule (back in the late 90's). All these World News Today's just seem to interupt the channel flow. Like Rob says it shouldn't be region specific as this doesn't work on a global channel. I don't understand why BBC World News America isn't just broadcast on BBC America? Ok maybe it has something to do with audience reach and the availability of BBC America in the U.S? I think there used to be 3 The World Today's on BBC World's weekday schedule but it's as if we are heading for every hour to be branded at someone else. Asia Business Report is only broadcast in that region so why is BBC World News America seen as a global needed broadcast?
Yep, have to agree with you David. The way the channel is going, they're going to end up like the American channels where every hour is branded as a different programme. That really irritates me with CNN and FOX News. For instance, Business International on CNN is a misleading title. It's basically an hour of world news with a few more trips to the LSE. It's blatently obvious that BBC World is just trying to rip-off CNN with its World News Europe/Asia, Your World Today, but for me, that's a big turn-off. There was nothing wrong with BBC World but they've tinkered with its format for the sake of it. It was refreshing to be able to go to a channel for a standard, balanced, non-branded world news bulletin. Sadly, that's more difficult now...
I don't want to make allegations but some of the same people here use to say BBC WORLD don't do hour long programs and regional programs. All i see is when you are doing business you have to take everything into consideration and timing is the key. We here don't know the inner runnings of BBC WORLD so we can speculate and guess what is their next move. This might just be their next strategic move. As a business operation you have to grow and expand. Getting in the US and more importanlty offering news on a regional basis separates you from the AL Jazeeras of the world. Do you ever see multinational companies advertising in Al Jazerra? Non..... BBC WORLD can showcase it offerings to madison Avenvue in the US. Yesterday and this morning most of the advertisers and commercials on BBC America were blue chip companies and tourism ads from overseas not america companies. Those companies want to get exposure in the US and BBC WORLD wants it product to be seen by the big corps to expand it product. Having access to the US market is a advertiser dream. And associating youself with the BBC brand is valuable. As a business you have to open new ways. However you see it, everything nowaday has to do with money. It is a win win situation from a business prespective.
BBC World News America off to strong start
Tue Oct 2, 2007 8:46pm EDT
LOS ANGELES (Hollywood Reporter) - The British have come! It seems almost too good to be true: a daily television newscast tailored to American viewers that covers actual international news -- and covers it extremely well.
Pipe dream though it might seem, here it is, an hour-long weekday broadcast from BBC America that very much represents the Brits saving we Yanks from ourselves. "BBC World News America" hit the air Monday and immediately put the so-called broadcast network evening newscasts to shame.
Live to the East Coast at 7 p.m. (which means 4 p.m. PT), this newscast is a typically reserved affair featuring a spare set, a low-key vibe and a capable but divertingly unflashy anchor in Matt Frei. And on Day 1, it not only covered the bases far better than anyone else in the TV news pantheon but also actually made a little global news itself during an interview with former Pakistani Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto in which she gave her approval for a U.S. military strike inside Pakistan to assassinate Osama bin Laden.
Watching this hour was almost surreal to see the BBC staffers' capacity to comprehensively sum up world affairs with in-depth attention in the course of 60 minutes (including commercials). The broadcast covered the disturbing, tragic unrest in Darfur and Myanmar, served up exclusive, expansive interviews with Bhutto, first lady Laura Bush and Democratic presidential candidate John Edwards, and examined the campaign for the presidency from a perspective that was refreshingly honest rather than overwrought. That it's all filtered through a U.S. lens makes this newscast all the more remarkable, demonstrating that this sort of authentic news coverage can be pulled off minus the seemingly obligatory histrionics and sensationalism. "BBC World News America" is calm, measured and light years more journalistically sophisticated and informative than its domestically bred competition. It's also significantly more internationally focused, to say the least. May it live long and prosper.
BBC World News America off to strong start
Tue Oct 2, 2007 8:46pm EDT
LOS ANGELES (Hollywood Reporter) - The British have come! It seems almost too good to be true: a daily television newscast tailored to American viewers that covers actual international news -- and covers it extremely well.
Pipe dream though it might seem, here it is, an hour-long weekday broadcast from BBC America that very much represents the Brits saving we Yanks from ourselves. "BBC World News America" hit the air Monday and immediately put the so-called broadcast network evening newscasts to shame.
Live to the East Coast at 7 p.m. (which means 4 p.m. PT), this newscast is a typically reserved affair featuring a spare set, a low-key vibe and a capable but divertingly unflashy anchor in Matt Frei. And on Day 1, it not only covered the bases far better than anyone else in the TV news pantheon but also actually made a little global news itself during an interview with former Pakistani Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto in which she gave her approval for a U.S. military strike inside Pakistan to assassinate Osama bin Laden.
Watching this hour was almost surreal to see the BBC staffers' capacity to comprehensively sum up world affairs with in-depth attention in the course of 60 minutes (including commercials). The broadcast covered the disturbing, tragic unrest in Darfur and Myanmar, served up exclusive, expansive interviews with Bhutto, first lady Laura Bush and Democratic presidential candidate John Edwards, and examined the campaign for the presidency from a perspective that was refreshingly honest rather than overwrought. That it's all filtered through a U.S. lens makes this newscast all the more remarkable, demonstrating that this sort of authentic news coverage can be pulled off minus the seemingly obligatory histrionics and sensationalism. "BBC World News America" is calm, measured and light years more journalistically sophisticated and informative than its domestically bred competition. It's also significantly more internationally focused, to say the least. May it live long and prosper.
Reuters/Hollywood Reporter
Amazing review. Just shows how much better we can do it!
I have to agree with that from an American perspective. I was in the US just last week and was horrified by how shockingly poor the domestic network news bulletins are. NBC/ABC/CBS News is basically domestic news, heavily biased and the little world news which is included is tinted with an American emphasis. I flew home a week ago having spent a long weekend in the US. I hadn't got the faintest clue that anything was happening in Burma until I got home and saw the BBC. That's how bad things are in America. From the American point of view, I can fully understand that, for them, BBC World News America is a breath of fresh air, which that author summed up well.
However, from my perspective, I wish BBC World had fewer region-centric programmes and more standard BBC News bulletins like they use to. As I said yesterday, having the stories organised by regional importance may prove popular in the target region, but it alienates the rest of the viewership. If every hour was organised solely on story importance, then the channel would be more accessible to more people all day long. The management of the channel seem to think that people in each region only watch BBC World during certain hours of the day. I'm sure this isn't 100% true. There has to be people watching, say, in Europe during Asia's peak hours, and the channel isn't catering for them.
However, from my perspective, I wish BBC World had fewer region-centric programmes and more standard BBC News bulletins like they use to. As I said yesterday, having the stories organised by regional importance may prove popular in the target region, but it alienates the rest of the viewership. If every hour was organised solely on story importance, then the channel would be more accessible to more people all day long. The management of the channel seem to think that people in each region only watch BBC World during certain hours of the day. I'm sure this isn't 100% true. There has to be people watching, say, in Europe during Asia's peak hours, and the channel isn't catering for them.
I can certainly see where you're coming from with that viewpoint, but I personally wouldn't have such an issue with the regionalisation of the channel if there was more news and less non-news feature programming. Considering the fact that the BBC now has the Knowledge, Entertainment and Lifestyle international channels, I can't see how programming like Equestrian World, the Imagination strand, and World Challenge belongs on a global news channel.
Granted, these channels are not all available in territories where BBC World is currently broadcasting, but given that so much has been made of BBC World's commitment to "putting news first", there's far too much fluff in its schedules to justify that claim.
Yes, there is news at the top of every hour, but it's bad enough having most news bulletins lasting 25 minutes, interrupted with ad breaks, without also having other programming reducing the TOTH bulletins to a 5 or 10 minute summary - how is that "putting news first"?
As far as I'm concerned, if World reduced its peripheral programming, and concentrated on a more focused news agenda, I'd be happy to tolerate more regionalised programming.
Did you see this one this morning on the 0600hrs UK time version of BBC World News?
Quote (Anya Sitaram): "We can now cross over live to our correspondent in Rangoon, who has to remain entirely anonymous due to the legal situation in the country. So, tell us, what's the mood in the City today?"
In my entire history of watching tv news, I can never recall when an anonymous reporter filed a piece from anywhere. Is this a first?
Did you see this one this morning on the 0600hrs UK time version of BBC World News?
Quote (Anya Sitaram): "We can now cross over live to our correspondent in Rangoon, who has to remain entirely anonymous due to the legal situation in the country. So, tell us, what's the mood in the City today?"
In my entire history of watching tv news, I can never recall when an anonymous reporter filed a piece from anywhere. Is this a first?
Radio 4 are dealing with the situation in a simular fashion. The Midnight News last night simply refused to name the correspondent 'for their own safety'.
I shall admit, a very odd situation.
That said, the picture the correspondent described, with families being removed in the dead of the night, does truely sound horrific.
Did you see this one this morning on the 0600hrs UK time version of BBC World News?
Quote (Anya Sitaram): "We can now cross over live to our correspondent in Rangoon, who has to remain entirely anonymous due to the legal situation in the country. So, tell us, what's the mood in the City today?"
In my entire history of watching tv news, I can never recall when an anonymous reporter filed a piece from anywhere. Is this a first?
Who was the reporter? Surely one could tell by voice or did they do something to their voice?
