NW
If it ain't broke why fix it? I'm certain ITV are probably happy with the Morning News, Lunchtime News and Evening News, otherwise they would have been moved by now, like the Late News At When bulletin.
Though News on ITV always did well whatever time it was on in the old days, before News At Ten during the 1960's, the main News would be at about 5:50 and 8:50. But there were also the days when the News was on at 12:30, 5:40 and 10:00, viewers still found the News then.
I was reading a bit of 'And Finally' the other day and it was very interesting how the story of News At One came about, one of the editors at ITN wanted a News At One , ITV wanted a Lunchtime News, but out of the way at 12.00pm, a comprimise of 12:40 was later reached and in 1972 First Report was launched, due to its popularity in 1974 ITV moved it to 1.00pm, then in 1978 it became News At One , but over the next 15 years it would be constantly switched from 12:30 and 1:00, but yet the viewers have still found it.
ITV are only talking about the Late News here, not the rest of the bulletins.
JamesJH posted:
Er.. not me. There are several options here:
- Keep the uniformed 5.30am, 12.30pm, 6.30pm, 10.30pm news strategy.
- Try out 5am, 12pm, 7pm and 11pm.
I firmly believe they should have a consistent time, either on the hour or half past, like the BBC. Everyone knows it's 1pm, 6pm, 10pm.
- Keep the uniformed 5.30am, 12.30pm, 6.30pm, 10.30pm news strategy.
- Try out 5am, 12pm, 7pm and 11pm.
I firmly believe they should have a consistent time, either on the hour or half past, like the BBC. Everyone knows it's 1pm, 6pm, 10pm.
If it ain't broke why fix it? I'm certain ITV are probably happy with the Morning News, Lunchtime News and Evening News, otherwise they would have been moved by now, like the Late News At When bulletin.
Though News on ITV always did well whatever time it was on in the old days, before News At Ten during the 1960's, the main News would be at about 5:50 and 8:50. But there were also the days when the News was on at 12:30, 5:40 and 10:00, viewers still found the News then.
I was reading a bit of 'And Finally' the other day and it was very interesting how the story of News At One came about, one of the editors at ITN wanted a News At One , ITV wanted a Lunchtime News, but out of the way at 12.00pm, a comprimise of 12:40 was later reached and in 1972 First Report was launched, due to its popularity in 1974 ITV moved it to 1.00pm, then in 1978 it became News At One , but over the next 15 years it would be constantly switched from 12:30 and 1:00, but yet the viewers have still found it.
ITV are only talking about the Late News here, not the rest of the bulletins.
JJ
If it ain't broke why fix it? I'm certain ITV are probably happy with the Morning News, Lunchtime News and Evening News, otherwise they would have been moved by now, like the Late News At When bulletin.
Though News on ITV always did well whatever time it was on in the old days, before News At Ten during the 1960's, the main News would be at about 5:50 and 8:50. But there were also the days when the News was on at 12:30, 5:40 and 10:00, viewers still found the News then.
I was reading a bit of 'And Finally' the other day and it was very interesting how the story of News At One came about, one of the editors at ITN wanted a News At One , ITV wanted a Lunchtime News, but out of the way at 12.00pm, a comprimise of 12:40 was later reached and in 1972 First Report was launched, due to its popularity in 1974 ITV moved it to 1.00pm, then in 1978 it became News At One , but over the next 15 years it would be constantly switched from 12:30 and 1:00, but yet the viewers have still found it.
ITV are only talking about the Late News here, not the rest of the bulletins.
Yes but
5.30, 12.30, 6.30 and 11.00 doesn't seem a logical pattern.
nwtv2003 posted:
JamesJH posted:
Er.. not me. There are several options here:
- Keep the uniformed 5.30am, 12.30pm, 6.30pm, 10.30pm news strategy.
- Try out 5am, 12pm, 7pm and 11pm.
I firmly believe they should have a consistent time, either on the hour or half past, like the BBC. Everyone knows it's 1pm, 6pm, 10pm.
- Keep the uniformed 5.30am, 12.30pm, 6.30pm, 10.30pm news strategy.
- Try out 5am, 12pm, 7pm and 11pm.
I firmly believe they should have a consistent time, either on the hour or half past, like the BBC. Everyone knows it's 1pm, 6pm, 10pm.
If it ain't broke why fix it? I'm certain ITV are probably happy with the Morning News, Lunchtime News and Evening News, otherwise they would have been moved by now, like the Late News At When bulletin.
Though News on ITV always did well whatever time it was on in the old days, before News At Ten during the 1960's, the main News would be at about 5:50 and 8:50. But there were also the days when the News was on at 12:30, 5:40 and 10:00, viewers still found the News then.
I was reading a bit of 'And Finally' the other day and it was very interesting how the story of News At One came about, one of the editors at ITN wanted a News At One , ITV wanted a Lunchtime News, but out of the way at 12.00pm, a comprimise of 12:40 was later reached and in 1972 First Report was launched, due to its popularity in 1974 ITV moved it to 1.00pm, then in 1978 it became News At One , but over the next 15 years it would be constantly switched from 12:30 and 1:00, but yet the viewers have still found it.
ITV are only talking about the Late News here, not the rest of the bulletins.
Yes but
5.30, 12.30, 6.30 and 11.00 doesn't seem a logical pattern.
NW
You have to think what preceeds the programmes....
Before the 5:30 it's Nightscreen
Before the 12:30 it's This Morning
Before the 6:30 it's its Regional News which starts off at the important time of 6.00pm
Where as if they had an 11.00pm News then it would make more sense to run hour long programmes or films in full, rather than 30/45 minute fillers to lead up to 10.30pm.
ITV has had this problem for years. For many years people were annoyed that a Film which started at 9.00pm would be interrupted for 40 minutes to allow News At Ten to be broadcast. Then NAT disappeared ratings weren't great, so they brought NAT, thus we have the same problem again, ditto for the 10:30 that it always splits up films and shows like The Frank Skinner Show.
JamesJH posted:
Yes but
5.30, 12.30, 6.30 and 11.00 doesn't seem a logical pattern.
5.30, 12.30, 6.30 and 11.00 doesn't seem a logical pattern.
You have to think what preceeds the programmes....
Before the 5:30 it's Nightscreen
Before the 12:30 it's This Morning
Before the 6:30 it's its Regional News which starts off at the important time of 6.00pm
Where as if they had an 11.00pm News then it would make more sense to run hour long programmes or films in full, rather than 30/45 minute fillers to lead up to 10.30pm.
ITV has had this problem for years. For many years people were annoyed that a Film which started at 9.00pm would be interrupted for 40 minutes to allow News At Ten to be broadcast. Then NAT disappeared ratings weren't great, so they brought NAT, thus we have the same problem again, ditto for the 10:30 that it always splits up films and shows like The Frank Skinner Show.
NE
When the programme before it does well, News at 10.30 does well, when it has a sh*t programme infont of it, it does sh*t
Last night, some reality tripe about Kerry Mcfadden got a 16% Share, ITV News got 15%. The news at 10.30 does a good job of holding the audience, if network centre think the news is cause of their problems then they are kidding themselves. If anything they have been seduced by the success of the channel 4- over hyped- 10pm imports.
If they want to improve their share, do something about the 9pm programmes.
Last time they messed with the news they caused severe and permanent damage to the network by allowing the BBC to compete with drama at 9pm, idiots.
Londoner posted:
Just done some digging around, and the 11pm ITV Nightly News in 2000 averaged 3.43m (27.1%).
Currently the News at 10.30 averages 2.5 million (15%).
Currently the News at 10.30 averages 2.5 million (15%).
When the programme before it does well, News at 10.30 does well, when it has a sh*t programme infont of it, it does sh*t
Last night, some reality tripe about Kerry Mcfadden got a 16% Share, ITV News got 15%. The news at 10.30 does a good job of holding the audience, if network centre think the news is cause of their problems then they are kidding themselves. If anything they have been seduced by the success of the channel 4- over hyped- 10pm imports.
If they want to improve their share, do something about the 9pm programmes.
Last time they messed with the news they caused severe and permanent damage to the network by allowing the BBC to compete with drama at 9pm, idiots.
ST
Well, I think your suggested RADICAL restructuring wouldn't work. Mainly because you would be moving ITV's most popular programme (Corrie) out of it's traditional slot.
I still believe the best solution would be:
5:30 National then Regional News Hour
6:30 Popular Comedy/Quiz/Chat Show (perhaps seasonal rotation)
7:00 Emmerdale
7:30 Corrie/Tonight/"Regional cr*p"
8:00 The Bill/Drama/Documentary
9:00 Main News & Regional Bulletin
9:30 Drama/Film (uninterupted)
EDIT: Lets face it though, in 2008 if you live round here (in Plymouth) you will have to have digital, so can watch the news whenever you want on one of the many FTA news channels. By 2010 everyone will be in the same situation. So I imagine that then they will ditch all bulletins on the "main" channels and just have announcements at certain times directing people who want news to go to NEWS24/ITV NEWS/SKY NEWS etc.
JamesJH posted:
What do you suggest then to solve ITVs woeful problem?
Well, I think your suggested RADICAL restructuring wouldn't work. Mainly because you would be moving ITV's most popular programme (Corrie) out of it's traditional slot.
I still believe the best solution would be:
5:30 National then Regional News Hour
6:30 Popular Comedy/Quiz/Chat Show (perhaps seasonal rotation)
7:00 Emmerdale
7:30 Corrie/Tonight/"Regional cr*p"
8:00 The Bill/Drama/Documentary
9:00 Main News & Regional Bulletin
9:30 Drama/Film (uninterupted)
EDIT: Lets face it though, in 2008 if you live round here (in Plymouth) you will have to have digital, so can watch the news whenever you want on one of the many FTA news channels. By 2010 everyone will be in the same situation. So I imagine that then they will ditch all bulletins on the "main" channels and just have announcements at certain times directing people who want news to go to NEWS24/ITV NEWS/SKY NEWS etc.
BP
Maybe I'm a dreamer - but if ITV want to move their news bulletin - why not move it to.....
....Ten O'clock?
I'm convinced that a properly funded, properly scheduled News at Ten (at ten pm on the dot five days a week) would wipe the floor with the BBC's Ten O'clock News.
ITN have, despite the appalling treatment they get from ITV, consistently done good work with their news. If they got a decent budget and real commitment from ITV - they'd overtake the Beeb.
And then the lovely Hollywood actress Heather Graham will phone me up and ask me out on a date.
Or perhaps not.
....Ten O'clock?
I'm convinced that a properly funded, properly scheduled News at Ten (at ten pm on the dot five days a week) would wipe the floor with the BBC's Ten O'clock News.
ITN have, despite the appalling treatment they get from ITV, consistently done good work with their news. If they got a decent budget and real commitment from ITV - they'd overtake the Beeb.
And then the lovely Hollywood actress Heather Graham will phone me up and ask me out on a date.
Or perhaps not.
BO
ITV has had this problem for years. For many years people were annoyed that a Film which started at 9.00pm would be interrupted for 40 minutes to allow News At Ten to be broadcast. Then NAT disappeared ratings weren't great, so they brought NAT, thus we have the same problem again, ditto for the 10:30 that it always splits up films and shows like The Frank Skinner Show.
So, why is news at nine such a bad idea? If news at when would be given a permanent slot at 21:00, then films could be broadcast continuously from 21:30, without interruption. What is the problem?
Quote:
ITV has had this problem for years. For many years people were annoyed that a Film which started at 9.00pm would be interrupted for 40 minutes to allow News At Ten to be broadcast. Then NAT disappeared ratings weren't great, so they brought NAT, thus we have the same problem again, ditto for the 10:30 that it always splits up films and shows like The Frank Skinner Show.
So, why is news at nine such a bad idea? If news at when would be given a permanent slot at 21:00, then films could be broadcast continuously from 21:30, without interruption. What is the problem?
JJ
Face it!
The News at Nine will never return. ITV cannot afford to take the risk of losing the ratings it currently acheives.
News and Nine would never do as well as a Drama in the 9pm slot!
If they pledged all out war with the BBC, they could bring it back to 10pm.
And they could win, provided the 9pm drama was good enough and had the ratings.
6.00 Regional News
6.30 ITV Evening News
7.00 Emmerdale
7.30 CS / Regional Programmes
8.00 Primetime Schedule
9.00 Drama / Documentary
10.00 News at Ten
10.35 Uninterrupted Films / Dramas etc
The News at Nine will never return. ITV cannot afford to take the risk of losing the ratings it currently acheives.
News and Nine would never do as well as a Drama in the 9pm slot!
If they pledged all out war with the BBC, they could bring it back to 10pm.
And they could win, provided the 9pm drama was good enough and had the ratings.
6.00 Regional News
6.30 ITV Evening News
7.00 Emmerdale
7.30 CS / Regional Programmes
8.00 Primetime Schedule
9.00 Drama / Documentary
10.00 News at Ten
10.35 Uninterrupted Films / Dramas etc
