There NO chance in a million Years there Replace the "scotland today" brand!
there Just Scape North Tonight
I would not be so sure. Why not just stick to signing off with 'Scotland Today' then scrap 'North Tonight/Today' and then continue using 'Scotland Today' thereafter.
They have changed the sign off on BOTH programmes. That seems rather pointless if you want to make both regions have a news programme called 'Scotland Today'?
There NO chance in a million Years there Replace the "scotland today" brand!
there Just Scape North Tonight
I would not be so sure. Why not just stick to signing off with 'Scotland Today' then scrap 'North Tonight/Today' and then continue using 'Scotland Today' thereafter.
They have changed the sign off on BOTH programmes. That seems rather pointless if you want to make both regions have a news programme called 'Scotland Today'?
Oh you bunch of cynics!
They have probably just done it to save time and money, the media wouldn't let them get away with ditching the seperate programmes,and the Scottish Executive would not be happy with the inevitable job lossess at tullos if this was to occur.
I think a better compromise is STV North News/Tonight, and STV Central News/Tonight. I prefer North Tonight, Scotland Today, but if they are going to change, I'd rather it be this way.
I think a better compromise is STV North News/Tonight, and STV Central News/Tonight. I prefer North Tonight, Scotland Today, but if they are going to change, I'd rather it be this way.
Err, no. ITV Central may have something to say about that
I think the people of Scotland would rather it stayed the way it was.
I'm sure many people would indeed rather that things continued the way they are - but is that necessarily the right thing for a commercial broadcaster to do?
Scotland Today and North Tonight do not generate revenue for STV - at least none to speak of. No advertising is sold during these programmes. In commercial terms, they are expenditure and not income. While they are valued by many people, ultimately they exist to meet a legal obligation.
That means they are tightly resourced to the level necessary to meet that obligation. Within that, hard decisions need to be made about how to provide the most effective service.
There's a very real discussion to have about exactly what kind of mix of local, regional and Scottish national news STV viewers want.
My gut feeling is that people are interested in their own local news and Scottish national news - but not news which reflects the artificial boundaries of the old Scottish and Grampian areas.
SMG could argue that viewers would get a better service if it concentrated resources on one Scottish national programme but with expanded sub-opts which were, say, 10 minutes long instead of six.
As for how politicians might react - well, for the most part they only care about how often they get their own mugs on the box. Many of them protested about the end of the Grampian name but SMG had only a handful of complaints from members of the public. Do we really want to live in a country where the views of numpty politicians about tv programmes they don't watch matter more than the views of viewers and broadcasters?
However Ofcom would very definitely need to approve any radical changes to the STV news set up. Perhaps they could even approve a joint programme for an initial period of, say, six months to test the water.
As for the branding though, nobody outside this forum would be bothered about a simple name change to STV News after a few weeks as long as the programmes themselves did not change. Indeed, the short bulletins (which were called the Grampian Headlines not so long ago) might change first with the 1800 flagships following later.
I'm sure many people would indeed rather that things continued the way they are - but is that necessarily the right thing for a commercial broadcaster to do?
Scotland Today and North Tonight do not generate revenue for STV - at least none to speak of. No advertising is sold during these programmes. In commercial terms, they are expenditure and not income. While they are valued by many people, ultimately they exist to meet a legal obligation.
That means they are tightly resourced to the level necessary to meet that obligation. Within that, hard decisions need to be made about how to provide the most effective service.
There's a very real discussion to have about exactly what kind of mix of local, regional and Scottish national news STV viewers want.
My gut feeling is that people are interested in their own local news and Scottish national news - but not news which reflects the artificial boundaries of the old Scottish and Grampian areas.
SMG could argue that viewers would get a better service if it concentrated resources on one Scottish national programme but with expanded sub-opts which were, say, 10 minutes long instead of six.
As for how politicians might react - well, for the most part they only care about how often they get their own mugs on the box. Many of them protested about the end of the Grampian name but SMG had only a handful of complaints from members of the public. Do we really want to live in a country where the views of numpty politicians about tv programmes they don't watch matter more than the views of viewers and broadcasters?
However Ofcom would very definitely need to approve any radical changes to the STV news set up. Perhaps they could even approve a joint programme for an initial period of, say, six months to test the water.
As for the branding though, nobody outside this forum would be bothered about a simple name change to STV News after a few weeks as long as the programmes themselves did not change. Indeed, the short bulletins (which were called the Grampian Headlines not so long ago) might change first with the 1800 flagships following later.
John Mackay and Andrea Brymer anchoring the special programme. Great to see them back together.
Yeah up to a point. Andrea just doesn't cope as well without autocue! John's interviewing is much better, Andrea's very lightweight but hey it pretties the picture up I guess - as she finishes off her interview with Nicol Stephen ..."alright"!
I take it this is going out Scotlandwide. A taster of things to come?
She was out of her depth and looked extremely uncomfortable presenting that particular evening. Why Grampian persists in using this individual in preference to longer serving and more experienced full time staff is a mystery to many. I cannot believe that after twenty years with Grampian Norman MacLeod was playing second fiddle to her this week. I am not at all surprised Pauline has decided to leave after seven years. Pauline has been on duty every other weekend for the past year. It is just a matter of time before other established staff leave. This departure now means that Grampian have lost one third of their news staff in the last six months. The change in their news output since the head of news post at Grampian was axed is very noticeable. What happened to their claim, ‘we understand local matters’. I am sick seeing central belt presenters and stories on a news programme meant for the North East of Scotland.
