« Topics
1234...151617
noggin13,972 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
roger delacroix gave kudos
kernow995 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 delacroix14 posts since 5 Dec 2018 new member
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 delacroix14 posts since 5 Dec 2018 new member
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