:-(
A former member
It wasnt Central it was Carlton.
Carlton found itself at the centre of a major controversy about truthfulness in broadcast journalism in May 1998, when The Guardian carried a series of articles alleging the wholesale fabrication of a much-garlanded 1996 Carlton documentary, The Connection, which had purported to film the route by which heroin was smuggled into the United Kingdom from Colombia. An internal inquiry at Carlton found that The Guardian's allegations were in large part correct and the then industry regulator, the ITC, punished Carlton with a record £2-million fine[12] for multiple breaches of the UK's broadcasting codes. The scandal led to an impassioned debate about the accuracy of documentary production.[13][14]
you spend all that time upgrading ITV wiki pages for nothing.
Carlton found itself at the centre of a major controversy about truthfulness in broadcast journalism in May 1998, when The Guardian carried a series of articles alleging the wholesale fabrication of a much-garlanded 1996 Carlton documentary, The Connection, which had purported to film the route by which heroin was smuggled into the United Kingdom from Colombia. An internal inquiry at Carlton found that The Guardian's allegations were in large part correct and the then industry regulator, the ITC, punished Carlton with a record £2-million fine[12] for multiple breaches of the UK's broadcasting codes. The scandal led to an impassioned debate about the accuracy of documentary production.[13][14]
you spend all that time upgrading ITV wiki pages for nothing.
IN
Which would've led to a drastically different ITV. No Granada means no Corrie (though, it could've been presented to the network by someone else - The Bill was a Yorkshire Television presentation for a while in 1993). It also means someone else would now be in charge, and the sequence of takeovers would have been different. The fate of Brookside and the channel Hollyoaks was on could've both been different too (as those two shows were made by Mersey TV, the company who bid against Granada).
MerseyTV only held a 25% stake in proposed North West TV, along with Yorkshire.
Hollyoaks was pretty much developed to Channel 4 spec (although was then 'dumped' on Channel 4's Childrens department, which meant that despite having a pub built for it they couldn't show any alcohol being consumed - that pub ended up being quite distinctive for its frosted glassware!).
I'm not sure bringing Brookside over was on the cards? Redmond certainly doesn't mention it in his biography. Doesn't Channel 4 maintain first refusal on its commissions? Otherwise surely ITV would have 'had back' things like Countdown and Come Dine With Me, wouldn't they?
The problem is, the process of choosing the contractor involved looking at the highest bidder first and deciding if they would pass the quality threshold, so the second that Sunrise passed that (with backers like Disney, LWT and having small, hired facilities), TV-am didn't get a look in.
The original legislation didn't even allow for a quality threshold, so we would have lost Granada and kept TVS
The original legislation didn't even allow for a quality threshold, so we would have lost Granada and kept TVS
Which would've led to a drastically different ITV. No Granada means no Corrie (though, it could've been presented to the network by someone else - The Bill was a Yorkshire Television presentation for a while in 1993). It also means someone else would now be in charge, and the sequence of takeovers would have been different. The fate of Brookside and the channel Hollyoaks was on could've both been different too (as those two shows were made by Mersey TV, the company who bid against Granada).
MerseyTV only held a 25% stake in proposed North West TV, along with Yorkshire.
Hollyoaks was pretty much developed to Channel 4 spec (although was then 'dumped' on Channel 4's Childrens department, which meant that despite having a pub built for it they couldn't show any alcohol being consumed - that pub ended up being quite distinctive for its frosted glassware!).
I'm not sure bringing Brookside over was on the cards? Redmond certainly doesn't mention it in his biography. Doesn't Channel 4 maintain first refusal on its commissions? Otherwise surely ITV would have 'had back' things like Countdown and Come Dine With Me, wouldn't they?
WH
It may have been a "Carlton UK Production" or whatever, but it was certainly a Central programme and they were responsible for it.
http://www.irishtimes.com/news/station-fined-2m-for-fake-tv-report-1.227224
Whataday
Founding member
It wasnt Central it was Carlton.
Carlton found itself at the centre of a major controversy about truthfulness in broadcast journalism in May 1998, when The Guardian carried a series of articles alleging the wholesale fabrication of a much-garlanded 1996 Carlton documentary, The Connection, which had purported to film the route by which heroin was smuggled into the United Kingdom from Colombia. An internal inquiry at Carlton found that The Guardian's allegations were in large part correct and the then industry regulator, the ITC, punished Carlton with a record £2-million fine[12] for multiple breaches of the UK's broadcasting codes. The scandal led to an impassioned debate about the accuracy of documentary production.[13][14]
you spend all that time upgrading ITV wiki pages for nothing.
Carlton found itself at the centre of a major controversy about truthfulness in broadcast journalism in May 1998, when The Guardian carried a series of articles alleging the wholesale fabrication of a much-garlanded 1996 Carlton documentary, The Connection, which had purported to film the route by which heroin was smuggled into the United Kingdom from Colombia. An internal inquiry at Carlton found that The Guardian's allegations were in large part correct and the then industry regulator, the ITC, punished Carlton with a record £2-million fine[12] for multiple breaches of the UK's broadcasting codes. The scandal led to an impassioned debate about the accuracy of documentary production.[13][14]
you spend all that time upgrading ITV wiki pages for nothing.
It may have been a "Carlton UK Production" or whatever, but it was certainly a Central programme and they were responsible for it.
http://www.irishtimes.com/news/station-fined-2m-for-fake-tv-report-1.227224
Quote:
In a highly critical report, the ITC said the documentary involved "a wholesale breach of trust between programme-makers and viewers" and confirmed it had seriously considered curtailing the Central broadcasting licence - the television region which produced the programme - after the documentary had breached the programme code on 10 occasions. The ITC went on to say it would have "no hesitation" in ending the licence for "similarly serious" breaches of the programme code in the future.
JA
On one note this does make me think- are they the only things still produced by ITV franchisees for Channel 4? In the early days ITV companies used to make loads of stuff for them, though obviously they were funding the channel and selling their advertising back then anyway.
Otherwise surely ITV would have 'had back' things like Countdown and Come Dine With Me, wouldn't they?
On one note this does make me think- are they the only things still produced by ITV franchisees for Channel 4? In the early days ITV companies used to make loads of stuff for them, though obviously they were funding the channel and selling their advertising back then anyway.
SW
Yes, but one of the reasons why North West TV didn't pass the quality threshold, again according to that book, was because their bid had said they were going to get Mersey TV to make loads of their programmes and the ITC thought this was too reliant on what was still quite a small company. Actually Redmond said he was convinced they were going to pass the quality threshold because they had YTV involved, but of course YTV almost didn't win because of their business plan anyway.
Under the Hammer by Andrew Davidson is another interesting book about the franchise battle. It's worth it for the stuff about the hapless LIB, the company who bid against LWT, who had just finished writing their bid document when they accidentally tripped over the wire and unplugged the computer, and of course they hadn't saved it, so they had to write it all again. Then just before they were going to hand it in they realised they'd missed a page out so had to frantically stick it back in.
MerseyTV only held a 25% stake in proposed North West TV, along with Yorkshire.
Yes, but one of the reasons why North West TV didn't pass the quality threshold, again according to that book, was because their bid had said they were going to get Mersey TV to make loads of their programmes and the ITC thought this was too reliant on what was still quite a small company. Actually Redmond said he was convinced they were going to pass the quality threshold because they had YTV involved, but of course YTV almost didn't win because of their business plan anyway.
Under the Hammer by Andrew Davidson is another interesting book about the franchise battle. It's worth it for the stuff about the hapless LIB, the company who bid against LWT, who had just finished writing their bid document when they accidentally tripped over the wire and unplugged the computer, and of course they hadn't saved it, so they had to write it all again. Then just before they were going to hand it in they realised they'd missed a page out so had to frantically stick it back in.
RI
Or even Central, who were very much the company flying high at the time.
Thames should have won, Thames and LWT should have become the big ITV companies NOT granada, but this is very old ground.
Or even Central, who were very much the company flying high at the time.
IN
Or even Central, who were very much the company flying high at the time.
Central did win though, and there was absolutely no resilience from the board at being taken over at the soonest opportunity. To be honest, from a business standpoint, they probably did exactly the right thing.
Thames should have won, Thames and LWT should have become the big ITV companies NOT granada, but this is very old ground.
Or even Central, who were very much the company flying high at the time.
Central did win though, and there was absolutely no resilience from the board at being taken over at the soonest opportunity. To be honest, from a business standpoint, they probably did exactly the right thing.
:-(
A former member
Thames should have won, Thames and LWT should have become the big ITV companies NOT granada, but this is very old ground.
Or even Central, who were very much the company flying high at the time.
Central did win though, and there was absolutely no resilience from the board at being taken over at the soonest opportunity. To be honest, from a business standpoint, they probably did exactly the right thing.
To be fair Carlton just run the as it was. Broad street was pretty much dead by 1991 anyways with nearly everything in Nottingham.
I have to wonder about that documentary , central made the cook report and other high class Doc, so I cant believe for one min the staff would be that stupid. What more likely is it was a Carlton programme but paper work went via central
SW
Well, given the paperwork was the most important bit - checking it was true - they didn't do a very good job of it, did they?
That sounds to me a bit like you're suggesting everything brilliant that came under the Carlton banner came from Central and everything rubbish came from Carlton, with is a pretty simplistic argument. There were certainly more Central people involved in the Monarchy debate than Carlton people - their head of current affairs Mike Morley was in charge, Roger Cook and John Stapleton presented - and that was a total disaster. And it's not like Central couldn't make total rubbish under their own steam, as they illustrated on their second day on air with OTT.
I have to wonder about that documentary , central made the cook report and other high class Doc, so I cant believe for one min the staff would be that stupid. What more likely is it was a Carlton programme but paper work went via central
Well, given the paperwork was the most important bit - checking it was true - they didn't do a very good job of it, did they?
That sounds to me a bit like you're suggesting everything brilliant that came under the Carlton banner came from Central and everything rubbish came from Carlton, with is a pretty simplistic argument. There were certainly more Central people involved in the Monarchy debate than Carlton people - their head of current affairs Mike Morley was in charge, Roger Cook and John Stapleton presented - and that was a total disaster. And it's not like Central couldn't make total rubbish under their own steam, as they illustrated on their second day on air with OTT.
JA
Even the best ITV companies have made plenty of crap during their time- that's just the realities of TV production!