There's a big audience churn at ten o'clock. If people want to watch the ITV News, they'll watch it.
I really don't buy this argument - it's always conveniently forgotten that ITV beat the BBC for number of weeks after that half-hearted News at Ten return in 2001. It's not hard to work out why the tables eventually turned.
The ridiculous start time is making people turn off, before even hearing Bradby.
Well, you can argue this but how many people are sat there dead at 10pm waiting for it to start? BBC2 and C4 certainly run their 9pm shows after ten o'clock, they usually finish around 10.02 most nights. When they switch over they'll have missed the start of the BBC News but they'll be in time for ITV News. I'm not saying they schedule it entirely for that reason but the audience is not neccessarily switching on dead on 10pm. Even the viewers from the previous programme have probably taken the opportunity to go to the toilet or put the kettle on. Whether it's at 10.00 or 10.02 makes virtually no difference.
Exactly - and people forget it was exactly the same in the 90s too. ITV obviously feel the ads are better placed before the programme rather than during it - I've not watched it regularly for a while but News at Ten more often than not was commercial free in recent years, and even if there were breaks there were relatively short.
The ridiculous start time is making people turn off, before even hearing Bradby.
Well, you can argue this but how many people are sat there dead at 10pm waiting for it to start? BBC2 and C4 certainly run their 9pm shows after ten o'clock, they usually finish around 10.02 most nights. When they switch over they'll have missed the start of the BBC News but they'll be in time for ITV News. I'm not saying they schedule it entirely for that reason but the audience is not neccessarily switching on dead on 10pm. Even the viewers from the previous programme have probably taken the opportunity to go to the toilet or put the kettle on. Whether it's at 10.00 or 10.02 makes virtually no difference.
Exactly - and people forget it was exactly the same in the 90s too.
ITV obviously feel the ads are better placed before the programme rather than during it - I've not watched it regularly for a while but News at Ten more often than not was commercial free in recent years, and even if there were breaks there were relatively short.
Ah, but there was no competition back then! People wanting news on TV would've had no other option but to wait for News at Ten.
There's a big audience churn at ten o'clock. If people want to watch the ITV News, they'll watch it.
I really don't buy this argument - it's always
conveniently
forgotten that ITV beat the BBC for number of weeks after that half-hearted News at Ten return in 2001. It's not hard to work out why the tables eventually turned.
Only because ITV were over running high rating shows like "Who wants to be a Millionaire, late by up to 8- 10 minutes most days. In those days the ratings were not time cut for the slot, which makes those NAT figures from 2001 utterly worthless as they were artificially inflated by the overruns. Ratings are now "timechecked" to the exact slot.
People aren't that impatient though - if they want to watch ITV News at Ten they'll wait a couple of minutes. If they're switching over it's because they want to watch the BBC Ten o'clock News, not because ITV News didn't start on the dot.
Only because ITV were over running high rating shows like "Who wants to be a Millionaire, late by up to 8- 10 minutes most days. In those days the ratings were not time cut for the slot, which makes those NAT figures from 2001 utterly worthless as they were artificially inflated by the overruns. Ratings are now "timechecked" to the exact slot.
Everyone forgets that, actually, but from late 2000 ITV would always run massively late every night, presumably a side effect of cramming an extra ad break into programmes. Certainly for about eighteen months after that if you were recording anything on ITV you'd have to leave a good ten minutes at the end of the tape, even if everything that night was pre-recorded.
Can't find Huw Edwards' article on the Telegraph website, anyone care to upload it;)
First of all, it isn't an article
by
Huw Edwards, it's an article about the 10pm bulletins and
includes
his comments in response to Tom Bradby's interview.
Secondly, it isn't on the website. It's in the newspaper. If the newspaper hasn't been thrown out, I'd be more than happy to post it here.
Finally, do you intend explaining why you think my comments are "codswhallop" [sic] and why you disagree with them? As I said, this is a forum for dialogue and discussion.
Please do post it if the newspaper hasn't been binned. The "codswhallop'' wasn't for your post but for a previous post going on about regional news HTV Wales and God knows what my point was that ITV is a commercial channel and its regional news has got to be viable. I agree with large parts of your post except that I don't agree with your implicit or explicit criticisms of Bradby's presenting style and News at Ten's heritage etc. Here's why:
When ITV axed News at Ten in March 1999 it squandered its entire news heritage at a stroke
ITV News at Ten has been hammered by the BBC in the ratings for years
So ITV has quite rightly decided to try something different which quite frankly works rather well.
JU
thejules
By the way this evenings ITV News at Ten was authoritative, informative well scripted and well presented....
By the way this evenings ITV News at Ten was authoritative, informative well scripted and well presented....
And your reaction is just as scripted, predictably pathetic and insipidly shallow. You seem to be mistaking your opinion for gospel fact, when around here it is only Nick Harvey's opinion that is gospel fact.
By the way this evenings ITV News at Ten was authoritative, informative well scripted and well presented....
And your reaction is just as scripted, predictably pathetic and insipidly shallow. You seem to be mistaking your opinion for gospel fact, when around here it is only Nick Harvey's opinion that is gospel fact.
