The Newsroom

General Election Debates

Rules Published (December 2009)

This site closed in March 2021 and is now a read-only archive
NG
noggin Founding member
Last night's got 4 million viewers between Sky News, Sky 3 and the BBC


That's a pretty low number for a nation of more than 60 million, isn't it? In the US, the second Obama-McCain debate in 2008 got an audience of 63.2 million viewers (in a nation of 307 million) -- although it was carried on all the major networks.

And in France, whose population is similar to that of the UK, the 2007 presidential debate got an audience of 20 million.

But even considering that not all viewers were able to watch yesterday's debate live, I would have expected a higher figure given all the publicity -- the event even received prominent coverage here in Slovenia.


A digital channel was never going to get 10million for a debate like this. It could have quite easily been shown live on BBC Two, instead of a repeat at night.


Suggestions that the BBC wanted to avoid this - as if they had given it a large BBC audience they would have had to have given more air time to minority parties on a pro-rata basis (BNP in particular). By showing it at a time where it would get a much smaller audience on a mainstream channel, and on digital-only channels live, they reduced the potential audience on their outlets, and thus avoided the requirement to give more air time to minority parties for the sake of balance. (The BBC have strict guidelines about giving balanced air time - presumably the reason the News Channel followed the debate instantly with interviews with the SNP and Plaid Cymru?)
NG
noggin Founding member
- but Sky couldn't have given the job to anyone else.


Really? What about Messrs Thompson or Murnaghan or Standford?


Boulton is their heavyweight political figure - and political editor. It is inconceivable that he wouldn't have done it. None of the others have that much experience of anchoring heavyweight political interviews, though they are more accomplished presenters.

It just shows how lucky the BBC are to have Dimbleby, Paxman, Edwards and Marr all in their fold - any of them could have done a better job than Boulton...
RR
RR
Last night's got 4 million viewers between Sky News, Sky 3 and the BBC


That's a pretty low number for a nation of more than 60 million, isn't it? In the US, the second Obama-McCain debate in 2008 got an audience of 63.2 million viewers (in a nation of 307 million) -- although it was carried on all the major networks.
About 27 million voted last time in the UK.

UK channels also don't have the public service ethos of US channels - although offered for free to them, none of the traditional terrestrial channels thought the debate worthy enough to interrupt their usual programming. In the US, as you say, all main channels, news channels, and quite a few other channels carry the debates.
BR
Brekkie
RR posted:
UK channels also don't have the public service ethos of US channels - although offered for free to them, none of the traditional terrestrial channels thought the debate worthy enough to interrupt their usual programming. In the US, as you say, all main channels, news channels, and quite a few other channels carry the debates.

And thank god for that. We don't want a situation where if the Primeminister says jump, all the main networks go and clear their schedules for them.


Talking of the US though, the Daily Show's take on the UK election pretty much summed it up perfectly.
JO
Jon
From this shot it looks like the BBC have made a better looking set than the others.
http://news.sky.com/sky-news/content/StaticFile/thirdparty/jpg/2010/Apr/Week4/15621890_300x225.jpg
IT
IndigoTucker
From this shot it looks like the BBC have made a better looking set than the others.
http://news.sky.com/sky-news/content/StaticFile/thirdparty/jpg/2010/Apr/Week4/15621890_300x225.jpg


Well for a start they have the beautiful surroundings of the Great Hall at the University of Birmingham Razz
DE
derek500
From this shot it looks like the BBC have made a better looking set than the others.
http://news.sky.com/sky-news/content/StaticFile/thirdparty/jpg/2010/Apr/Week4/15621890_300x225.jpg


Well for a start they have the beautiful surroundings of the Great Hall at the University of Birmingham Razz


And lots of licence fee payers' money to spend. Personally, I thought the 'intimacy' of the second debate helped it flow faster than the first one.
SC
scottishtv Founding member
These are from Wednesday's Newsnight:

*

*

*

Bit of a Newswall going on there in the background.
ST
Stuart
From this shot it looks like the BBC have made a better looking set than the others.

And lots of licence fee payers' money to spend.

...and ITV & Sky have lots of advertisers' money to spend. It's a shame they decided not to use a bit more on the sets for their debates.
MD
mdtauk
I wonder if the set will be reused for Question Time after the Ten O'Clock News?
BR
Brekkie
I'd still say ITV had the best set - simple, but effective.
NG
noggin Founding member
I'd still say ITV had the best set - simple, but effective.


Can't agree. I'd describe it as cheap and dated. (Looked like a late 80s/early 90s gameshow set...)

Newer posts