The Newsroom

Armed Insurrection at US Capitol Building

Split from US ELECTIONS 2020 Coverage

This site closed in March 2021 and is now a read-only archive
JE
Jeffmister
There seems to be a school of thought that if you are watching the telly, then you wish to be informed of important events instantly. It may come as a shock to a few, that many folk switch on the TV to escape from all the crap that's going on, and not be subjected to even more of it. There's not much that can't wait until later, or the next day as information, and the Capitol events fitted that category (for UK viewers)

If someone is watching one of the 'main' channels (ie; BBC One, ITV, etc) and a significant newsworthy event happens, viewers should be notified about it. Of course the way which that notification happens (eg; on-screen banner, newsflash during an adbreak/between programs or interrupting programming) should depend on the nature of the event/story. However, suggesting that viewers shouldn't be notified about important events when they happen is just absurd.
japitts, Alfie Mulcahy and BFGArmy gave kudos
MA
Markymark
There seems to be a school of thought that if you are watching the telly, then you wish to be informed of important events instantly. It may come as a shock to a few, that many folk switch on the TV to escape from all the crap that's going on, and not be subjected to even more of it. There's not much that can't wait until later, or the next day as information, and the Capitol events fitted that category (for UK viewers)

If someone is watching one of the 'main' channels (ie; BBC One, ITV, etc) and a significant newsworthy event happens, viewers should be notified about it. Of course the way which that notification happens (eg; on-screen banner, newsflash during an adbreak/between programs or interrupting programming) should depend on the nature of the event/story. However, suggesting that viewers shouldn't be notified about important events when they happen is just absurd.


It's what the definition of 'important' is that's the crucial factor. I think the broadcasters have it about right at present (Hence no newsflashes required for the Capitol event)
RK
Rkolsen
There seems to be a school of thought that if you are watching the telly, then you wish to be informed of important events instantly. It may come as a shock to a few, that many folk switch on the TV to escape from all the crap that's going on, and not be subjected to even more of it. There's not much that can't wait until later, or the next day as information, and the Capitol events fitted that category (for UK viewers)

If someone is watching one of the 'main' channels (ie; BBC One, ITV, etc) and a significant newsworthy event happens, viewers should be notified about it. Of course the way which that notification happens (eg; on-screen banner, newsflash during an adbreak/between programs or interrupting programming) should depend on the nature of the event/story. However, suggesting that viewers shouldn't be notified about important events when they happen is just absurd.

There’s a big difference with UK TV vs US. Here we expect national networks to break in during significant events because outside of a few isolated communities CNN/MSNBC/FNC aren’t carried OTA. Where as the BBC could easily either do a push back/ticker on BBC One (or all their channels really) directing viewers to BBC News Channel as it’s available on Freeview, Freesat and on every cable and satellite platform.

Probably the only political events when it comes to the US getting major BBC One coverage would be the inauguration, a death, an assassination or impeachment guilty verdict. Now probably they could have done hourly 30 second news flash as well for insurrection as it was a significant deal.
NE
neonemesis
All this debate brings me to an interesting question - How do news organisations decide on what is newsworthy - and to what extent?

It's clear that we laypeople aren't able to come to a solid conclusion amongst us. Notwithstanding the opinions that have been as strong and as well crafted as they have been. However, the UK news organisations all made the same call.

Is it simply an editors gut? The art of news? Or are there a set of editorial tests that flow to particular decision points?
MA
Markymark
All this debate brings me to an interesting question - How do news organisations decide on what is newsworthy - and to what extent?

It's clear that we laypeople aren't able to come to a solid conclusion amongst us. Notwithstanding the opinions that have been as strong and as well crafted as they have been. However, the UK news organisations all made the same call.

Is it simply an editors gut? The art of news? Or are there a set of editorial tests that flow to particular decision points?


The extra factor is that news editors can't suddenly decide to break into one or more of their organisation's non-news channels with a Newsflash. There's a chain of command via the channel's controller or head.
LO
Londoner
Extended Media Show podcast interview with ITV's Robert Moore and his producer
https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p093x09w
CU
Cusack
A special programme on ITV tonight.




Just watched this today and it's a very interesting programme, giving background to how the the USA got to that point and then obviously just fantastic coverage by Robert Moore and his team.
BC
Blake Connolly Founding member
All this debate brings me to an interesting question - How do news organisations decide on what is newsworthy - and to what extent?

It's clear that we laypeople aren't able to come to a solid conclusion amongst us. Notwithstanding the opinions that have been as strong and as well crafted as they have been. However, the UK news organisations all made the same call.

Is it simply an editors gut? The art of news? Or are there a set of editorial tests that flow to particular decision points?


The extra factor is that news editors can't suddenly decide to break into one or more of their organisation's non-news channels with a Newsflash. There's a chain of command via the channel's controller or head.


Yep, as already discussed, the newsworthiness of an event isn't the only factor, there's also what's going on with the schedule of channel you might want to break into at the time.

I remember one time there was potential for major news (can't remember if it was a royal birth or one of the many occasions Nelson Mandela was rumoured to be gravely ill) fell on a very busy Saturday night so various contingencies were drawn up for what might happen if the news was announced at different times. But of course with most major news stories there's no possibility of forward planning so these decisions need to be made on the fly - and like with a lot of things just because one decision is made on one particular occasion, it doesn't mean the same would be done on another.
JO
Jonwo
Royal Births is a newflash at best. It’s not important enough to require ripping up the schedule for rolling coverage.
EX
excel99
Both BBC1 and ITV1 did some rolling Royal Birth coverage in the 2010's and certainly one did fall on a Saturday early evening - Princess Charlotte. Prince George coverage fell in weekday primetime, both the birth announcement and leaving hospital IIRC. Can't recall if anything of significance got replaced, or whether it was a case of only displacing repeats. Prince George as well may have been treated differently due to being directly in the line of succession
SL
Shaun Linden
I did find it funny reading the comments here questioning if there would be news flashes or interruptions.

As noted, just because something happened one occasion doesn't mean it would happen again.

ITV can barely bring itself to do a newsflash when it's something major here, so I don't know why some were expecting a break into programmes.

We have the right balance I feel in the UK.
AN
Andrew Founding member
Both BBC1 and ITV1 did some rolling Royal Birth coverage in the 2010's and certainly one did fall on a Saturday early evening - Princess Charlotte. Prince George coverage fell in weekday primetime, both the birth announcement and leaving hospital IIRC. Can't recall if anything of significance got replaced, or whether it was a case of only displacing repeats. Prince George as well may have been treated differently due to being directly in the line of succession

Yes they did, they stayed on air and postponed Emmerdale if I remember

Newer posts