TV Home Forum

BBC Three

(July 2012)

This site closed in March 2021 and is now a read-only archive
MI
Mike516
Quote:
A senior BBC executive told RadioTimes.com that the decision is likely to be waived through by the Trust but that the regulator may insist that the channel’s slated online budget is increased. According to the executive, a number of BBC programme-makers hope that the the Trust will only give the proposed move online the go-ahead if the programming budget is increased from the BBC's current proposed figure of £30m a year to a figure approaching its current spend, which currently stands at £55m.

That's from RadioTimes.com

"likely to be waived through" is an interesting choice of language from a BBC Executive. Also it does start to make the whole process a farce if the budget has got to be increased for "BBC Three Online"; together with the launch of BBC One+1 and a licence fee freeze, I'm not sure where the money is going to come from.

However it is a point I raised during the consultation - going online has its merits, but without the budget of Netflix for content and the marketing clout of Sky promoting its online catch up and box sets service, as well as its internet service Now TV and the power of other internet content providers, BBC Three online could easily fall off the radar.

Incidentally, research has shown the 11-15 age group as the most likely to be streaming content, so why is the BBC planning to extend CBBC for the benefit of the oldest part of its age group? Using the same reasoning as is used for BBC Three, it shouldn't be ...
DA
davidhorman
Quote:
That's from RadioTimes.com
"likely to be waived through" is an interesting choice of language from a BBC Executive.

Completely off-topic, but isn't it "waved through"? Sounds like someone picked the cleverer-sounding of two spellings without stopping to check which was one was right.*


*a bit like what I'm doing here, but by acknowedging it I've robbed you all of any sense of superiority you might have felt for pointing out I'm wrong later. Hah!
JA
JAS84
a516 posted:
Incidentally, research has shown the 11-15 age group as the most likely to be streaming content, so why is the BBC planning to extend CBBC for the benefit of the oldest part of its age group? Using the same reasoning as is used for BBC Three, it shouldn't be ...
CBBC hasn't targeted teenagers for years...
:-(
A former member
Quote:
"likely to be waived through"

Completely off-topic, but isn't it "waved through"?

No, it is the correct spelling as in waive away one's rights.
BA
bilky asko
Quote:
"likely to be waived through"

Completely off-topic, but isn't it "waved through"?

No, it is the correct spelling as in waive away one's rights.

Are you sure? "Wave through" makes sense as an idiom and makes more sense in that context.
MI
Mike516
JAS84 posted:
a516 posted:
Incidentally, research has shown the 11-15 age group as the most likely to be streaming content, so why is the BBC planning to extend CBBC for the benefit of the oldest part of its age group? Using the same reasoning as is used for BBC Three, it shouldn't be ...
CBBC hasn't targeted teenagers for years...

I think you misunderstood.

CBBC's extension is primarily for the "oldest part of its age group". Its age group goes to 12.

Research shows 11-15 year olds have drifted the most from linear TV. Therefore this includes CBBC's oldest target audience.
JA
JAS84
Quote:
"likely to be waived through"

Completely off-topic, but isn't it "waved through"?

No, it is the correct spelling as in waive away one's rights.

Are you sure? "Wave through" makes sense as an idiom and makes more sense in that context.

In this context, waive is correct. http://grammar.about.com/od/alightersideofwriting/a/Waive-And-Wave-glossary.htm
DA
davidhorman

Nothing on the linked page indicates that "waive through" is correct. To waive is to defer, while "to wave through" is to (metaphorically) make a gesture to indicate that something may pass, which is the sense the text is trying to convey. You'd get waved through security at an airport, for example.
LL
London Lite Founding member
At the weekend, BBC Three repeated Happy Valley. An odd choice for the youth channel.
MA
Markymark
At the weekend, BBC Three repeated Happy Valley. An odd choice for the youth channel.


The series (far darker than you might imagine) has a major plot thread that relates to drug taking and dealing in a small Yorkshire town, so it's actually very relevant to a young audience.

It was one of the best dramas on BBC 1 (or any channel) last year, (IMHO) up there with Line of Duty
JA
Jake
At the weekend, BBC Three repeated Happy Valley. An odd choice for the youth channel.


The series (far darker than you might imagine) has a major plot thread that relates to drug taking and dealing in a small Yorkshire town, so it's actually very relevant to a young audience.

It was one of the best dramas on BBC 1 (or any channel) last year, (IMHO) up there with Line of Duty


Exactly the sort of thing they should be showing really.
LL
London Lite Founding member
Jake posted:
At the weekend, BBC Three repeated Happy Valley. An odd choice for the youth channel.


The series (far darker than you might imagine) has a major plot thread that relates to drug taking and dealing in a small Yorkshire town, so it's actually very relevant to a young audience.

It was one of the best dramas on BBC 1 (or any channel) last year, (IMHO) up there with Line of Duty


Exactly the sort of thing they should be showing really.


Yet it flopped on Saturday evening with 0.16m.

Newer posts