Without getting involved in this debate, wouldn't new news channels appear to fill in the gap? France, a TV market comparable to the UK in terms of both size and wealth, has three privately run 24-hour news channels, so whatever happens, I'm having a hard time imagining Sky News having a total monopoly in the UK.
But who? News channels aren't exactly known for making money and starting one from scratch takes a heck of a lot of money. ITN is the only broadcaster that would even consider it and they won't want to burn their fingers again.
I'd assume that one of the reasons why France has 3 independent news channels (what are they by the way?) is because BBC World, CNN and others aren't in French - there's a bigger niche to fill
Quote:
Besides, instead of being shut down, wouldn't BBC News (Channel) just be sold off to another company?
How would that work then? The BBC News Channel without BBC News doesn't exist... there's nothing to sell
Aaaaanyway... extra regional opts this morning during BBC Breakfast for local reaction to the spending review. Caught a couple of them, BBC South East live at Tonbridge station, BBC West at Temple Meads, BBC South on a hill over Portsouth (why?). This is the first time in a very long time I can remember additional opt outs for the regions during Breakfast... any other thoughts?
How frequent were they, deejay? I'm guessing every 15 minutes?
No, they were hourly at around 0610, 0710 and 0810. These were in addition to the usual opts at 0627, 0657, 0727, 0757, 0827 and 0857. That will have been a pretty busy morning for the regional galleries! Most regions use basic facilities for breakfast opts (single-operator presentation galleries, combined sound/vision mixers etc) with limited scope for dealing with live contributions. I would have though at least some extra staffing was needed on site (as well as on location of course). A few centres might have staffed the main galleries...
This seemed quite unprofessional based on what I have seen in the video above and what I saw on BBC One yesterday. Surely the whole point of Nick Robinson being out in the open in Westminster rather than being in a studio was to show the viewer what was happening there. From what I saw, the protester(s) didn't interrupt the broadcast, didn't stop Nick Robinson doing his job and didn't stop the viewer hearing what he had to say nor did Nick Robinson claim any of this on his blog, in fact he hasn't really said why the protester(s) upset him so much. It was really no different to a bus driving past with an advert for a film he doesn't like on the side.
Wow I certainly have hit a nerve by suggesting the BBC scales back it's news budget and by pointing out the uselessness of the BBC News Channel in terms of public service. All I seem to get back, is that I don't understand how TV works or something related guff.
It's supporters on this thread have to resort to immature (and inappropriate) slagging. I think I won this one.
If "hit a nerve" means "expressed an ill thought out minority opinion that nobody else here agrees with'" then you're right.
It's perfectly true that you don't appear to understand that the BBC News Channel isn't an isolated operation, the majority of the resources it uses are in place for the BBC1 bulletins and BBC World (commercially funded) anyway.
What you've got back is reasoned opinions to the contrary with something to back them up other than "whatever". I'm not sure how you can claim to have won this argument when the BBC News Channel is still on air and there is no suggestion of it being closed. But if that's what you want to believe, then that's cool. Enjoy your own little reality
So you should only express an opinion if it's in the majority?
Someone posted that the news channel costs £20 million - a vast amount of money and no matter what people say here, the sky won't fall in if the channel goes tomorrow.
I'll finish at this. I said "whatever" in relation to the poster pointing out a spelling mistake - he used my spelling mistake as a pathetic tactic to undermine my point of view.
Wow I certainly have hit a nerve by suggesting the BBC scales back it's news budget and by pointing out the uselessness of the BBC News Channel in terms of public service. All I seem to get back, is that I don't understand how TV works or something related guff.
It's supporters on this thread have to resort to immature (and inappropriate) slagging. I think I won this one.
If "hit a nerve" means "expressed an ill thought out minority opinion that nobody else here agrees with'" then you're right.
It's perfectly true that you don't appear to understand that the BBC News Channel isn't an isolated operation, the majority of the resources it uses are in place for the BBC1 bulletins and BBC World (commercially funded) anyway.
What you've got back is reasoned opinions to the contrary with something to back them up other than "whatever". I'm not sure how you can claim to have won this argument when the BBC News Channel is still on air and there is no suggestion of it being closed. But if that's what you want to believe, then that's cool. Enjoy your own little reality
So you should only express an opinion if it's in the majority?
Someone posted that the news channel costs £20 million - a vast amount of money and no matter what people say here, the sky won't fall in if the channel goes tomorrow.
I'll finish at this. I said "whatever" in relation to the poster pointing out a spelling mistake - he used my spelling mistake as a pathetic tactic to undermine my point of view.
In isolation, yes, £20mn is a vast amount of money. However, when put in the context of the total income of the BBC, it's a small drop in the ocean and, in my view, is money well spent considering the high quality public service BBC News provides.
Oh and by the way, before you start saying I'm obsessed with the BBC and can't see the bigger picture, I'm also a loyal follower of ITN and I'm looking at this objectively. Comparing BBC News with Sky News, there's no doubt in my mind as to which is the higher quality.
I can just imagine all the comments and the media hype if Kay did that.
It was very unprofessional, rude and arrogant it's not like they were pushing him or something, they were far down from the BBC platform. Also we always see these signs behind reporters, maybe he should report from the studio from now on.
How ironic that you use that name, ginnyfan, given what I've just posted over on the main Sky News thread! I must have tempted fate when referring to Ms. Burley.
