« Topics
1234...16171819...414243
noggin14,116 posts since 26 Jun 2001

Yes. The 'move online' was really a way of coping with such a massive budget cut that a linear channel would have been impossible to sensibly schedule with such little original content.


Yes. In fact BBC 4 struggles to fill its schedule, I often spot a programme of interest, then realise
I saw it a few months ago. In fact there's stuff on my PVR that comes round again 'live' before I've watched it.

The audience profile of BBC 4 is not as 'on line savvy' as 3's is, so the same trick probably wouldn't work (not that I'm saying the BBC 3 move has worked necessarily )


Yes - and BBC Four shows are lower budget by their very nature (and the channel budget is lower than BBC Three's was when it was a linear channel)
1
kernow1,134 posts since 18 Jan 2006
Sorry mate but there is a connection between BBC Three's closure and BBC Scotland, I remember that the BBC closed BBC Three because they needed to save £30 milion pounds then one year later the news comes of the launch of BBC Scotland and the new channel has a budget of....surprise surprise £30 milion pounds The same amount of money the BBC supposedly saved by closing BBC Three! If to you that is not a connection....

The BBC Three closure announcement was made in 2014, and the announcement of the BBC Scotland channel was made in 2017. And the savings made by closing BBC Three were said to be over £50m.

Do you have a link? I thought they saved £30 milion pounds


The total saving was over £50m, with £30m of that going to BBC One drama

https://www.bbc.co.uk/mediacentre/latestnews/2014/bbc-three-tv-closure.html
roger delacroix
London London
The BBC Three closure announcement was made in 2014, and the announcement of the BBC Scotland channel was made in 2017. And the savings made by closing BBC Three were said to be over £50m.

Do you have a link? I thought they saved £30 milion pounds


The total saving was over £50m, with £30m of that going to BBC One drama

https://www.bbc.co.uk/mediacentre/latestnews/2014/bbc-three-tv-closure.html

Thanks mate I needed a link
Matrix2,538 posts since 13 Feb 2004
London London
Sorry mate but there is a connection between BBC Three's closure and BBC Scotland, I remember that the BBC closed BBC Three because they needed to save £30 milion pounds then one year later the news comes of the launch of BBC Scotland and the new channel has a budget of....surprise surprise £30 milion pounds The same amount of money the BBC supposedly saved by closing BBC Three! If to you that is not a connection....


I'm going to jump in and, I hope, provide a little difference in perspective.

For my two pence, the BBC's decision to close BBC Three came at a time when the corporation was being asked to make specific cuts. It is operating in a politicised environment, and part of that was the need (as I once heard it described) to operate within its suitcase (cf. envelope). I think there is a rationale that actually BBC 3 content, and audience, are much more adept at a Netflix style, on-demand service.

At the same time, the BBC is also responding to a clear increase in national sentiment in Scotland. I'd argue it actually follows a well established root of catering to dedicated national audiences, such as BBC An La et al. The cost of it is actually relatively small (I mean, BBC Three was being run on a shoe string towards the end) and if it gives the BBC some leverage in such a contested environment - and it meets its core aims - then I think it's probably a good thing.

As for BBC 3, and speaking as one of their demographic, I have to confess: I've not really missed it being a dedicated channel. I'll occasionally watch something via iPlayer (and why BBC 3 wasn't just merged as part of the iPlayer brand I don't know...) but I'd say there hasn't been the same level of disquiet as when BBC 6 Music was threatened with closure.

All in all, looks like a good move for the BBC and I'm quite looking forward to it.

''there hasn't been the same level of disquiet as when BBC 6 Music was threatened with closure.'' Then can you please explain why so many people were against the closure of BBC 3, there was a lot of criticism from notable parties, including Greg James, Matt Lucas and Jack Whitehall. and can you also please explain why after the move online a recent survey by Ofcom has discovered that only 8% of 16 to 34 year old people watch BBC Three content each week? https://www.a516digital.com/2018/10/ofcom-report-reveals-young-people.html


I suppose the ultimate proof was in the pudding, or rather station staying afloat. 6 Music was an example of audiences, participants, and broader civic society responding in such a way as to cause the BBC to re-think.

I suppose, for me, this just sums up the approach to a digital age. Rightly, or wrongly, there is an assumption that audiences BBC 3 attract would more readily access online only content in such a way that BBC 4 audiences wouldn't (or couldn't).

It's not for me to explain anything, not least to someone who clearly has such strident views. I'm not speaking for the BBC, nor as an expert in digital campaigns but it rather strikes me that the central problem with BBC 3 is its offering; no matter what platform it is on.
1
Alex Plain-Later gave kudos
roger delacroix
London London

I'm going to jump in and, I hope, provide a little difference in perspective.

For my two pence, the BBC's decision to close BBC Three came at a time when the corporation was being asked to make specific cuts. It is operating in a politicised environment, and part of that was the need (as I once heard it described) to operate within its suitcase (cf. envelope). I think there is a rationale that actually BBC 3 content, and audience, are much more adept at a Netflix style, on-demand service.

At the same time, the BBC is also responding to a clear increase in national sentiment in Scotland. I'd argue it actually follows a well established root of catering to dedicated national audiences, such as BBC An La et al. The cost of it is actually relatively small (I mean, BBC Three was being run on a shoe string towards the end) and if it gives the BBC some leverage in such a contested environment - and it meets its core aims - then I think it's probably a good thing.

As for BBC 3, and speaking as one of their demographic, I have to confess: I've not really missed it being a dedicated channel. I'll occasionally watch something via iPlayer (and why BBC 3 wasn't just merged as part of the iPlayer brand I don't know...) but I'd say there hasn't been the same level of disquiet as when BBC 6 Music was threatened with closure.

All in all, looks like a good move for the BBC and I'm quite looking forward to it.

''there hasn't been the same level of disquiet as when BBC 6 Music was threatened with closure.'' Then can you please explain why so many people were against the closure of BBC 3, there was a lot of criticism from notable parties, including Greg James, Matt Lucas and Jack Whitehall. and can you also please explain why after the move online a recent survey by Ofcom has discovered that only 8% of 16 to 34 year old people watch BBC Three content each week? https://www.a516digital.com/2018/10/ofcom-report-reveals-young-people.html


I suppose the ultimate proof was in the pudding, or rather station staying afloat. 6 Music was an example of audiences, participants, and broader civic society responding in such a way as to cause the BBC to re-think.

I suppose, for me, this just sums up the approach to a digital age. Rightly, or wrongly, there is an assumption that audiences BBC 3 attract would more readily access online only content in such a way that BBC 4 audiences wouldn't (or couldn't).

It's not for me to explain anything, not least to someone who clearly has such strident views. I'm not speaking for the BBC, nor as an expert in digital campaigns but it rather strikes me that the central problem with BBC 3 is its offering; no matter what platform it is on.

I never said I disrespect your views
globaltraffic24444 posts since 23 Jun 2013
STV Central Reporting Scotland
The main challenge the BBC faces is its inability to address a changing media landscape. The answer most public broadcasters seem to have to this is to create more outlets, rather than rationalising what they have. This was most pronounced on my recent trip to Sweden. SVT's former news and sports channel SVT24 has faced a raft of cuts over the years and been relaunched more times than I would care to imagine. The result is a truly bizarre channel showing repeats and occasional news updates. It now isn't even 24 hours a day!

National PBs need to look at their entire offering and scale back to their core products. In the case of the BBC, this needs to be BBC1 and BBC2. BBC2 should be the home of a combination of regional programming, international drama and extensive news coverage, while BBC1 can continue its current mandate. On radio, BBC Radio 1 and BBC Radio 2 are finding their feet, so we're finally seeing those stations meet their real criteria. Radio 4 has it's clear place, but 5 Live should become a national/regional hybrid, allowing it to take up FM spectrum and be super-served locally. All other radio operations need a big re-think, regardless of the dreaded online petition community.

There's a simple fact in life - you can't do more with less. Something has to give. We're now witnessing this with BBC1. Interesting reading a previous post about how the savings from BBC3 went to BBC1's drama output - arguably now the only strong point in the channel's schedule, and clear evidence that the broadcaster is massively over-stretching itself.
2
Brekkie and all new Phil gave kudos
roger delacroix
London London
The main challenge the BBC faces is its inability to address a changing media landscape. The answer most public broadcasters seem to have to this is to create more outlets, rather than rationalising what they have. This was most pronounced on my recent trip to Sweden. SVT's former news and sports channel SVT24 has faced a raft of cuts over the years and been relaunched more times than I would care to imagine. The result is a truly bizarre channel showing repeats and occasional news updates. It now isn't even 24 hours a day!

National PBs need to look at their entire offering and scale back to their core products. In the case of the BBC, this needs to be BBC1 and BBC2. BBC2 should be the home of a combination of regional programming, international drama and extensive news coverage, while BBC1 can continue its current mandate. On radio, BBC Radio 1 and BBC Radio 2 are finding their feet, so we're finally seeing those stations meet their real criteria. Radio 4 has it's clear place, but 5 Live should become a national/regional hybrid, allowing it to take up FM spectrum and be super-served locally. All other radio operations need a big re-think, regardless of the dreaded online petition community.

There's a simple fact in life - you can't do more with less. Something has to give. We're now witnessing this with BBC1. Interesting reading a previous post about how the savings from BBC3 went to BBC1's drama output - arguably now the only strong point in the channel's schedule, and clear evidence that the broadcaster is massively over-stretching itself.

If the broadcaster is over-stretching itself, is it possible that it may collapse one day?
JamesM0984
Central (East) East Midlands Today
Personally, I've always believed that the remit of 6Music could be merged into Radios 1 and 2 and give them a point of difference from the commercial sector.

Then you've got BBC Four, which has some cracking content but again, could be merged with BBC Two.

Radio 3 is a difficult one - it's easy for me to say "I don't like it/listen to it so get rid of it" but I question it taking up valuable FM space when we've one, soon to be two, stations in the commercial sector doing roughly the same thing and doing it very well. Be bold. Take it DAB only and hand the spectrum over for something more populist - a national FM outlet for Virgin or Absolute for example?
London Lite10,003 posts since 4 Jan 2003
London London


Radio 3 is a difficult one - it's easy for me to say "I don't like it/listen to it so get rid of it" but I question it taking up valuable FM space when we've one, soon to be two, stations in the commercial sector doing roughly the same thing and doing it very well. Be bold. Take it DAB only and hand the spectrum over for something more populist - a national FM outlet for Virgin or Absolute for example?


Radio 3 has already lost some of their FM spectrum in Wales to increase coverage of the English language BBC Radio Wales.
62305823,190 posts since 19 Aug 2005
STV Central Reporting Scotland
Does BBC 3 have any school radio programmes on it anymore? I do agree BBC radio 3 just seems like a bust. I would also move Newsnight to BBC News channel, and free up the space on BBC 2 for BBC4 programmes. Im sure Totp repeats would do better than more Road trip.
Is the next post dreaded?
JKDerry1,351 posts since 15 Oct 2016 Recently warned
UTV Newsline
Does BBC 3 have any school radio programmes on it anymore? I do agree BBC radio 3 just seems like a bust. I would also move Newsnight to BBC News channel, and free up the space on BBC 2 for BBC4 programmes. Im sure Totp repeats would do better than more Road trip.

No schools programming at all airs on BBC Radio 3. It is now pure classical music, classical concerts and focusing on classical music content.
No further posts are being accepted for this topic