CH
You are guilty of doing the opposite - exaggerating the changes. The BBC Three service is not closing down. There will still be content - how it's accessed is what's changing. Of course there will be less content but don't make out BBC Three is disappearing when it isn't.
No it bloody well isn't. It can't be said enough times - there's no linear schedule, and what they're offering online would have still been there if the TV channel continued. They can use smoke and mirrors all they want, but at the end of the day we know the truth - it's closing down. 
You are guilty of doing the opposite - exaggerating the changes. The BBC Three service is not closing down. There will still be content - how it's accessed is what's changing. Of course there will be less content but don't make out BBC Three is disappearing when it isn't.
IN
And what precisely is the point of a linear schedule when your broadcast capacity has been taken from you?
I don't disagree with the rest of your post by the way (although I shalln't miss BBC Three one bit), I just find the concept of the current BBC Three continuing online only with a linear stream, especially given they can't include Family Guy/American Dad on that, pretty stupid.
No it bloody well isn't. It can't be said enough times - there's no linear schedule, and what they're offering online would have still been there if the TV channel continued. They can use smoke and mirrors all they want, but at the end of the day we know the truth - it's closing down.
And what precisely is the point of a linear schedule when your broadcast capacity has been taken from you?
I don't disagree with the rest of your post by the way (although I shalln't miss BBC Three one bit), I just find the concept of the current BBC Three continuing online only with a linear stream, especially given they can't include Family Guy/American Dad on that, pretty stupid.
IN
You are guilty of doing the opposite - exaggerating the changes. The BBC Three service is not closing down. There will still be content - how it's accessed is what's changing. Of course there will be less content but don't make out BBC Three is disappearing when it isn't.
It's not exactly a halfway house though, is it?
In supermarket terms it'd be like a branch of Tesco being replaced by a one|stop and them trying to spin that doesn't represent a diminishment in service.
No it bloody well isn't. It can't be said enough times - there's no linear schedule, and what they're offering online would have still been there if the TV channel continued. They can use smoke and mirrors all they want, but at the end of the day we know the truth - it's closing down.
You are guilty of doing the opposite - exaggerating the changes. The BBC Three service is not closing down. There will still be content - how it's accessed is what's changing. Of course there will be less content but don't make out BBC Three is disappearing when it isn't.
It's not exactly a halfway house though, is it?
In supermarket terms it'd be like a branch of Tesco being replaced by a one|stop and them trying to spin that doesn't represent a diminishment in service.
NG
You are guilty of doing the opposite - exaggerating the changes. The BBC Three service is not closing down. There will still be content - how it's accessed is what's changing. Of course there will be less content but don't make out BBC Three is disappearing when it isn't.
When the budget for a service drops from £85m to £25m, and the platforms through which the vast majority of the audience consume that content cease to exist, it is difficult not to call it a closure, particularly when all the long form content will be seen mainly on BBC One and BBC Two.
The brand continues, the service doesn't. It's being reduced to a BBC Switch-type of operation...
noggin
Founding member
No it bloody well isn't. It can't be said enough times - there's no linear schedule, and what they're offering online would have still been there if the TV channel continued. They can use smoke and mirrors all they want, but at the end of the day we know the truth - it's closing down.
You are guilty of doing the opposite - exaggerating the changes. The BBC Three service is not closing down. There will still be content - how it's accessed is what's changing. Of course there will be less content but don't make out BBC Three is disappearing when it isn't.
When the budget for a service drops from £85m to £25m, and the platforms through which the vast majority of the audience consume that content cease to exist, it is difficult not to call it a closure, particularly when all the long form content will be seen mainly on BBC One and BBC Two.
The brand continues, the service doesn't. It's being reduced to a BBC Switch-type of operation...
LL
And we all know what happened to that...
The brand continues, the service doesn't. It's being reduced to a BBC Switch-type of operation...
And we all know what happened to that...
CH
You are guilty of doing the opposite - exaggerating the changes. The BBC Three service is not closing down. There will still be content - how it's accessed is what's changing. Of course there will be less content but don't make out BBC Three is disappearing when it isn't.
When the budget for a service drops from £85m to £25m, and the platforms through which the vast majority of the audience consume that content cease to exist, it is difficult not to call it a closure, particularly when all the long form content will be seen mainly on BBC One and BBC Two.
The brand continues, the service doesn't. It's being reduced to a BBC Switch-type of operation...
The content is being reduced as I said in my post. It's not completely disappearing as JAS84 implied.
No it bloody well isn't. It can't be said enough times - there's no linear schedule, and what they're offering online would have still been there if the TV channel continued. They can use smoke and mirrors all they want, but at the end of the day we know the truth - it's closing down.
You are guilty of doing the opposite - exaggerating the changes. The BBC Three service is not closing down. There will still be content - how it's accessed is what's changing. Of course there will be less content but don't make out BBC Three is disappearing when it isn't.
When the budget for a service drops from £85m to £25m, and the platforms through which the vast majority of the audience consume that content cease to exist, it is difficult not to call it a closure, particularly when all the long form content will be seen mainly on BBC One and BBC Two.
The brand continues, the service doesn't. It's being reduced to a BBC Switch-type of operation...
The content is being reduced as I said in my post. It's not completely disappearing as JAS84 implied.
TR
The other problem with BBC Three's new online stuff is that they're making shows like "rise of the vloggers" and "rise of e-gaming" which the target audience is already more educated than the BBC about.
Those programmes, if anything, should be on BBC Four to educate a different audience about vloggers. Putting it on BBC Three is desperately trying to appeal to the yoof - exactly the reason BBC Three is dreadful. The Daily Drop is dire.
Those programmes, if anything, should be on BBC Four to educate a different audience about vloggers. Putting it on BBC Three is desperately trying to appeal to the yoof - exactly the reason BBC Three is dreadful. The Daily Drop is dire.
DO
You are guilty of doing the opposite - exaggerating the changes. The BBC Three service is not closing down. There will still be content - how it's accessed is what's changing. Of course there will be less content but don't make out BBC Three is disappearing when it isn't.
When the budget for a service drops from £85m to £25m, and the platforms through which the vast majority of the audience consume that content cease to exist, it is difficult not to call it a closure, particularly when all the long form content will be seen mainly on BBC One and BBC Two.
The brand continues, the service doesn't. It's being reduced to a BBC Switch-type of operation...
The content is being reduced as I said in my post. It's not completely disappearing as JAS84 implied.
Quoting noggin, because you seem to be ignoring what he said:
BBC Three, the television service, is closing. Shut. Off the air. Not coming back.
The BBC Three name will be used around an small number of programmes. Nothing more.
It's nonsense to suggest that BBC Three as we know it is continuing in any way.
You are guilty of doing the opposite - exaggerating the changes. The BBC Three service is not closing down. There will still be content - how it's accessed is what's changing. Of course there will be less content but don't make out BBC Three is disappearing when it isn't.
When the budget for a service drops from £85m to £25m, and the platforms through which the vast majority of the audience consume that content cease to exist, it is difficult not to call it a closure, particularly when all the long form content will be seen mainly on BBC One and BBC Two.
The brand continues, the service doesn't. It's being reduced to a BBC Switch-type of operation...
The content is being reduced as I said in my post. It's not completely disappearing as JAS84 implied.
Quoting noggin, because you seem to be ignoring what he said:
Quote:
The brand continues, the service doesn't.
BBC Three, the television service, is closing. Shut. Off the air. Not coming back.
The BBC Three name will be used around an small number of programmes. Nothing more.
It's nonsense to suggest that BBC Three as we know it is continuing in any way.
CH
When the budget for a service drops from £85m to £25m, and the platforms through which the vast majority of the audience consume that content cease to exist, it is difficult not to call it a closure, particularly when all the long form content will be seen mainly on BBC One and BBC Two.
The brand continues, the service doesn't. It's being reduced to a BBC Switch-type of operation...
The content is being reduced as I said in my post. It's not completely disappearing as JAS84 implied.
Quoting noggin, because you seem to be ignoring what he said:
BBC Three, the television service, is closing. Shut. Off the air. Not coming back.
The BBC Three name will be used around an small number of programmes. Nothing more.
It's nonsense to suggest that BBC Three as we know it is continuing in any way.
We're going round in circles here and arguing over semantics. There will still be some BBC Three content - it is not going completely. That's all I'm trying to say.
When the budget for a service drops from £85m to £25m, and the platforms through which the vast majority of the audience consume that content cease to exist, it is difficult not to call it a closure, particularly when all the long form content will be seen mainly on BBC One and BBC Two.
The brand continues, the service doesn't. It's being reduced to a BBC Switch-type of operation...
The content is being reduced as I said in my post. It's not completely disappearing as JAS84 implied.
Quoting noggin, because you seem to be ignoring what he said:
Quote:
The brand continues, the service doesn't.
BBC Three, the television service, is closing. Shut. Off the air. Not coming back.
The BBC Three name will be used around an small number of programmes. Nothing more.
It's nonsense to suggest that BBC Three as we know it is continuing in any way.
We're going round in circles here and arguing over semantics. There will still be some BBC Three content - it is not going completely. That's all I'm trying to say.
BR
Yeah! What are the BBC thinking? The amount of twenty-somethings who eagrely study the BBC Three column of the Radio Times the moment it drops through their door...
Sadly no longer a 20-something but really dispute that - I actually found out about 3 or 4 shows on TV this week through a quick glance at the weeks TV Guide this morning that I had no idea were airing.
How useful it is when a channel is listed in the TV guide and you can see what they're showing.
Yeah! What are the BBC thinking? The amount of twenty-somethings who eagrely study the BBC Three column of the Radio Times the moment it drops through their door...
Sadly no longer a 20-something but really dispute that - I actually found out about 3 or 4 shows on TV this week through a quick glance at the weeks TV Guide this morning that I had no idea were airing.
NG
And what precisely is the point of a linear schedule when your broadcast capacity has been taken from you?
If the BBC is so keen to move BBC Three online, then why not carry a linear BBC Three online, as they do now? They would still have the iPlayer CDN delivery route which carries all the main BBC channels live at the moment.
Answer - it's not the reduced broadcast capacity (and playout costs) that is delivering the bulk of the saving, it's ceasing to commission a huge amount of content.
It isn't because they don't have the broadcast capacity, it's that they don't have the content...
noggin
Founding member
No it bloody well isn't. It can't be said enough times - there's no linear schedule, and what they're offering online would have still been there if the TV channel continued. They can use smoke and mirrors all they want, but at the end of the day we know the truth - it's closing down.
And what precisely is the point of a linear schedule when your broadcast capacity has been taken from you?
If the BBC is so keen to move BBC Three online, then why not carry a linear BBC Three online, as they do now? They would still have the iPlayer CDN delivery route which carries all the main BBC channels live at the moment.
Answer - it's not the reduced broadcast capacity (and playout costs) that is delivering the bulk of the saving, it's ceasing to commission a huge amount of content.
It isn't because they don't have the broadcast capacity, it's that they don't have the content...