Are you sure it's not Westcoutry Live people are thinking about? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r_6sVNk6RxI Check it out from around 13:30 where Alison first goes to Exeter for a round up of news where you are.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GtYYJWVw9gg this is a few years later in 1997 where at 28:00 Westcountry News split to Local News - Noth, East, South and West for a longer period
Are you sure it's not Westcoutry Live people are thinking about? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r_6sVNk6RxI Check it out from around 13:30 where Alison first goes to Exeter for a round up of news where you are.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GtYYJWVw9gg this is a few years later in 1997 where at 28:00 Westcountry News split to Local News - Noth, East, South and West for a longer period
The first clip isn't really double headed pres, it's just the same as BBC news today when they 'throw' to Salford for the sports news.
Something that has crossed my mind, if for example 'Dispatches' is moved out of London, could the 'Double header' aspect of the new C4N be subtle, with say a glorified Dispatches sequence every evening from wherever it's moved to. with the remainder of the programme as is from ITN. It'd be doing what's allegedly 'needed' but not over compromising the ethos of the current presentation.
What's more interesting is an apparent suggestion of more news to come, could this involve a late evening summary being introduced. To close up the news shop at 1955 each evening does seem a tad premature.
Coast to Coast when TVS launched had a weird format consisting on a pan-regional part and including the ITN News at 545.
Yes, I read about this in Independent Television In Britain - it ran 5.30 to 6.30 and I think the format was that the first fifteen minutes would be pan-regional and feature the biggest story from the entire region, then there'd be the News at 5.45 of course, and then the last half hour would be from the two different sub-regions. But the book suggests it was far more trouble than it was worth and swiftly abandoned, not least because it meant a particularly big story might appear three times within just over half an hour.
Coast to Coast when TVS launched had a weird format consisting on a pan-regional part and including the ITN News at 545.
Yes, I read about this in Independent Television In Britain - it ran 5.30 to 6.30 and I think the format was that the first fifteen minutes would be pan-regional and feature the biggest story from the entire region, then there'd be the News at 5.45 of course, and then the last half hour would be from the two different sub-regions. But the book suggests it was far more trouble than it was worth and swiftly abandoned, not least because it meant a particularly big story might appear three times within just over half an hour.
I remember it, I'm not sure it was pan regional, but it might have been. As seen in the west Khalid Aziz turned to an invision monitor at 17:45:00 that had ITN's output, and introduced the News at 5:45, they then faded up the audio and cut to ITN at about 5 secs in, after the ITN voiceover at the top of the show had finished. It was all rather messy.
Channel 4 News is getting a lot of play over here on there investigation on Cambridge Analytica. Right now their Washington Correspondent is appearing on All In With Chris Hayes on MSNBC.
A few clips of the undercover video were approved for NBC affiliates to use. In addition to the Channel 4 bug burned in, use the video also requires verbal credit in the script to say "N-B-C NEWS' U-K PARTNER I-T-N CHANNEL 4 NEWS."
Most of the yanks probably think 'Channel 4' is some sort of local affiliate.
I remember in the early days of their website they'd have people posting in their forums about stations like WANC Channel 4 Nebraska
I actually doubt that, considering that CNN, PBS and NBC have in the past used material from "ITN's Channel 4 News" over the past 25 years or so, and the stories used have been international news not merely London or UK news.
Most of the yanks probably think 'Channel 4' is some sort of local affiliate.
I remember in the early days of their website they'd have people posting in their forums about stations like WANC Channel 4 Nebraska
I actually doubt that, considering that CNN, PBS and NBC have in the past used material from "ITN's Channel 4 News" over the past 25 years or so, and the stories used have been international news not merely London or UK news.
The North American public won't be familiar with the concept of a station called 'Channel 4', to be a national network, they will think it's something like 'WXYZ4-London' with a flashy news chopper, and white teethed presenters
Most of the yanks probably think 'Channel 4' is some sort of local affiliate.
I remember in the early days of their website they'd have people posting in their forums about stations like WANC Channel 4 Nebraska
I actually doubt that, considering that CNN, PBS and NBC have in the past used material from "ITN's Channel 4 News" over the past 25 years or so, and the stories used have been international news not merely London or UK news.
The North American public won't be familiar with the concept of a station called 'Channel 4', to be a national network, they will think it's something like 'WXYZ4-London' with a flashy news chopper, and white teethed presenters
To give an example, I was arguing with an American on Reddit. "We had 70 TV channels in the US in 1965, you Brit's only got your 5th in 1997?"
Of course, he was talking about their being 70 affiliates in 1965, whereas there was only 4 channels (NBC, ABC, CBS and maybe an independent UHF station). But I was talking about BBC1, BBC2, ITV, C4, C5 and not the BBC and ITV regions.
Of course, he was talking about their being 70 affiliates in 1965, whereas there was only 4 channels (NBC, ABC, CBS and maybe an independent UHF station). But I was talking about BBC1, BBC2, ITV, C4, C5 and not the BBC and ITV regions.
It's not correct to describe NBC, ABC and CBS as 'channels' though - they were networks. The individual stations (affiliates if you will - if indeed they were fully affiliated) were the 'channels' people watched - and branded as such.
It really is tricky to compare the US and UK/European broadcast cultures. To this day the US can't quite comprehend a co-ordinated national transmitter network, and in some cases describe it as socialist, antidemocratic or state-controlled (I kid you not)...