RM
I've always thought that the so-called "West of England" region is totally imaginary. Even the northern-most point of the Bristol-based TV region is more than 50% of the way south within England as a whole!
For anything to be described as "West of England" it would surely have to be directly opposite East Anglia? (i.e. if we slimmed down our definition of "the midlands", then something like Shropshire + Staffordshire + Herefordshire would be the true "West of England"!!!) Or if Wales were a "region of England", rather than a separate country/principality (or whatever it is), then it would be the true "West of England".
The "West" is surely the single-most artificial TV region going!
Doesn't the "South West political/government/EU region" thingy comprise of the equivalent of TV's "southwest" and TV's "west" combined? So, the so-called "West" is really the northern half of the wider South West!
True enough, although as I have said before they can't design transmitters that adhere strictly to geographical regions! The main transmitters are placed more for topographical reasons; so that everywhere can pick up a decent TV signal (in theory). The television regions correspond more to that fact, rather than political boundaries
I suppose ITV might argue that ITV West is based on the historic Wessex region-- doesn't excuse ITV West's news programme for being (reputedly) cack though!
Genuine question here: Is there a good argument for ITV West to be absorbed by ITV Westcountry? It seems to make more sense to me, since ITV Westcountry and ITV West are both owned by the same company now-- I believe they share a lot of regional programming too.
<pendant> Incidentally: "For anything to be described as "West of England" it would surely have to be directly opposite East Anglia?"...... The south-west of England has been called "the West Country" for many years, even though it isn't anything like directly east of East Anglia!! Then again, Land's End in Cornwall is the most westerly point in England </pendant>
brotherton sands posted:
I've always thought that the so-called "West of England" region is totally imaginary. Even the northern-most point of the Bristol-based TV region is more than 50% of the way south within England as a whole!
For anything to be described as "West of England" it would surely have to be directly opposite East Anglia? (i.e. if we slimmed down our definition of "the midlands", then something like Shropshire + Staffordshire + Herefordshire would be the true "West of England"!!!) Or if Wales were a "region of England", rather than a separate country/principality (or whatever it is), then it would be the true "West of England".
The "West" is surely the single-most artificial TV region going!
Doesn't the "South West political/government/EU region" thingy comprise of the equivalent of TV's "southwest" and TV's "west" combined? So, the so-called "West" is really the northern half of the wider South West!
True enough, although as I have said before they can't design transmitters that adhere strictly to geographical regions! The main transmitters are placed more for topographical reasons; so that everywhere can pick up a decent TV signal (in theory). The television regions correspond more to that fact, rather than political boundaries
I suppose ITV might argue that ITV West is based on the historic Wessex region-- doesn't excuse ITV West's news programme for being (reputedly) cack though!
Genuine question here: Is there a good argument for ITV West to be absorbed by ITV Westcountry? It seems to make more sense to me, since ITV Westcountry and ITV West are both owned by the same company now-- I believe they share a lot of regional programming too.
<pendant> Incidentally: "For anything to be described as "West of England" it would surely have to be directly opposite East Anglia?"...... The south-west of England has been called "the West Country" for many years, even though it isn't anything like directly east of East Anglia!! Then again, Land's End in Cornwall is the most westerly point in England </pendant>