The thing is, though, that there isn't anything to learn. This all stems from the catastrophic mistake of axing News at Ten in 1999. The BBC stole their thunder at 10pm and now no matter what ITV does it will never be able to regain its dominance at 10pm. Until BBC News becomes an inferior product, no matter how good ITV's News at Ten is it will never win the ratings. So, ITV might as well try something else. Maybe that's what they've learned?
News at Ten won't benefit at all from The Nightly Show as a lead in
Odd statement considering you've not seen this new show.
Just common sense and years of having a far too healthy interest in TV ratings. All this will do is damage News at Ten further - it'll take it months to recover from weeks being shunted out of its slot and basically gifts it's small but loyal audience to the BBC. They will almost certainly opt for BBC News over the Nightly Show.
You think people are desperate for news, specifically at 10pm?
I would say there's a much bigger potential audience for an alternative. 10pm for many people is time to flick around and see if there's anything else on (there usually isn't). For every one person who wants to watch the news, there are probably five who don't.
I think the strength ITV have this time is that the news service hasn't been dumbed down unlike the infamous News at When era, so that if people really like the Bradby format, they'll wait an extra 30 minutes after the chat show to watch it.
However, it'll be up against Newsnight, which the politicos watch. I'd expect News at Ten to win the slot against Newsnight, although it'll still be an irrelevance.
The damage done by rescheduling News at Ten has been done.
You think people are desperate for news, specifically at 10pm?
I would say there's a much bigger potential audience for an alternative. 10pm for many people is time to flick around and see if there's anything else on (there usually isn't). For every one person who wants to watch the news, there are probably five who don't.
1999 and 2004 suggest differently, and those were at a time when linear TV was much more dominant than it is now.
I agree there is an audience for an alternative, but it isn't the ITV audience. This move isn't going to bring in that audience but it is going to send away the audience they do have now.
This all stems from the catastrophic mistake of axing News at Ten in 1999. The BBC stole their thunder at 10pm and now no matter what ITV does it will never be able to regain its dominance at 10pm. Until BBC News becomes an inferior product, no matter how good ITV's News at Ten is it will never win the ratings.
Obviously ITV vacating 10pm back in 1999 brought about it's decline, however, it probably just expedited BBC's move to the more logical 10pm. I don't think there is any way that in 2016 we'd have BBC One news at 9pm & ITV at 10pm. Could you imagine BBC One drama's starting at 9.45pm, with ITV playing theirs out at 9pm ?
Arguably one of the best decisions the BBC ever made was moving the news to 10pm. Not only did it tick the box of those missing having news at that time, it gave them a great hour slot from 9pm for all sorts of shows (hour dramas, half hour comedies etc. - even 8.30pm start for shows like Sherlock). ITV threw that away in '99 and will never get it back. And it doesn't matter how many times they 'permanently' bring back NAT, its slot will never be guaranteed again. For every head putting their faith in a revamped version of the programme, they'll be another who will happily bump it back 30mins/1hr at the drop of a hat.
