FN
When "Tyne Tees TV" rebranded as "Channel 3 North East" why did they keep the Tyne Tees Television name under the new logo and name?
JO
Technacalities. If YTV had got their way it would have been dropped altogether but as the North East franchise was licensed to Tyne Tees Television, the ITC ruled that the name could not be scrapped completely. Had GMG not bought YTV and its assests, the name would have almost certainly been dropped a few years down the line.
Of course this left a confusing situation for announcers and viewers and further tarnished the C3NE brand. Announcers were frequently heard saying: 'This is Tyne Tees Television, broadcasting to the North East on Channel 3'.
FromtheNorth posted:
When "Tyne Tees TV" rebranded as "Channel 3 North East" why did they keep the Tyne Tees Television name under the new logo and name?
Technacalities. If YTV had got their way it would have been dropped altogether but as the North East franchise was licensed to Tyne Tees Television, the ITC ruled that the name could not be scrapped completely. Had GMG not bought YTV and its assests, the name would have almost certainly been dropped a few years down the line.
Of course this left a confusing situation for announcers and viewers and further tarnished the C3NE brand. Announcers were frequently heard saying: 'This is Tyne Tees Television, broadcasting to the North East on Channel 3'.
FN
Surely the ITC wouldn't care what the station was called (within reason) as long as the output lived up to its promises, technical standards and financial performance?
:-(
At the time the rules were much more strict than they are now. It's arguable that if the ITV companies hadn't pushed the limits of the rules of the time, they would never have been allowed to rebrand to ITV across most of the network as they did.
I'm starting to wonder if the rumours about the renaming of the YTV side of things wasn't vetoed by the ITC rather than YTTTV itself. Think about it -- rebranding one region to "C3 North East" still maintains a regional element to the service, but renaming two stations allows a slippery slope to form where more and more branding is totally pooled between the two channels.
Perhaps YTTTV were only allowed to rebrand one station, so chose the smaller outpost. To be honest that rings true more than the reasons put about on the net.
Bear in mind that ten years prior to this, when TSW bought the last five months of the Westward franchise (and the company itself), they were not allowed to use the TSW branding at all , and had to broadcast as Westward for the full period. So it can be seen that even in that ten year period, the ITC had brought about a diluted form of regulation compared with the iron fist(!) the IBA had employed.
A former member
FromtheNorth posted:
Surely the ITC wouldn't care what the station was called (within reason) as long as the output lived up to its promises, technical standards and financial performance?
At the time the rules were much more strict than they are now. It's arguable that if the ITV companies hadn't pushed the limits of the rules of the time, they would never have been allowed to rebrand to ITV across most of the network as they did.
I'm starting to wonder if the rumours about the renaming of the YTV side of things wasn't vetoed by the ITC rather than YTTTV itself. Think about it -- rebranding one region to "C3 North East" still maintains a regional element to the service, but renaming two stations allows a slippery slope to form where more and more branding is totally pooled between the two channels.
Perhaps YTTTV were only allowed to rebrand one station, so chose the smaller outpost. To be honest that rings true more than the reasons put about on the net.
Bear in mind that ten years prior to this, when TSW bought the last five months of the Westward franchise (and the company itself), they were not allowed to use the TSW branding at all , and had to broadcast as Westward for the full period. So it can be seen that even in that ten year period, the ITC had brought about a diluted form of regulation compared with the iron fist(!) the IBA had employed.
FN
Maybe the ITC were unhappy with YTV and Tyne Tees having the same "Channel 3" branding - Who knows.
But they'd merged their back office operations and presentation (?) -the news programmes remained independent - Surely the name shouldn't matter.
- Did the ITC keep minutes? Are they available to view anywhere?
But they'd merged their back office operations and presentation (?) -the news programmes remained independent - Surely the name shouldn't matter.
- Did the ITC keep minutes? Are they available to view anywhere?
RU
Well this is what the ITC said about Central in the 2000 ITC Annual Report (based on the year 1999)
For those who wondered what they said about Westcountry...
russnet
Founding member
FromtheNorth posted:
Surely the ITC wouldn't care what the station was called (within reason) as long as the output lived up to its promises, technical standards and financial performance?
Well this is what the ITC said about Central in the 2000 ITC Annual Report (based on the year 1999)
Quote:
Major changes to the programme service for the East, West and South Midlands happened in 1999. The Central name was mostly erased from Midlands screens, in favour of rebranding as Carlton. While this did not affect programme content, which remained strongly focused on the region, the ITC regretted the decision to drop a separate regional identity. The regional service was of high standard overall and featured 11 new series. There were improvements in a number of areas, such as current affairs and multicultural output.
Disappointingly, Central experimented only on Fridays with regional programming in the newly designated 5.30pm weekday slots. Central’s supply of programmes to the ITV network was much reduced but Midlands facilities were used in the production of programmes for other services. The service complied with the licence conditions.
Disappointingly, Central experimented only on Fridays with regional programming in the newly designated 5.30pm weekday slots. Central’s supply of programmes to the ITV network was much reduced but Midlands facilities were used in the production of programmes for other services. The service complied with the licence conditions.
For those who wondered what they said about Westcountry...
Quote:
The television service in South West England went through fundamental change in 1999. Not only were there new formats or slots for some regional programmes, but Westcountry Television adopted the name of its parent company and became known as Carlton. The loss of a familiar and carefully nurtured regional brand was a matter of regret to the ITC. Westcountry provided a regional service of generally high quality, though to a lesser extent than last year
JO
Well this is what the ITC said about Central in the 2000 ITC Annual Report (based on the year 1999)
For those who wondered what they said about Westcountry...
Ah so that's why the ITC was replaced by ofcom, because they did at least acknowledge the regio ns in some way
russnet posted:
FromtheNorth posted:
Surely the ITC wouldn't care what the station was called (within reason) as long as the output lived up to its promises, technical standards and financial performance?
Well this is what the ITC said about Central in the 2000 ITC Annual Report (based on the year 1999)
Quote:
Major changes to the programme service for the East, West and South Midlands happened in 1999. The Central name was mostly erased from Midlands screens, in favour of rebranding as Carlton. While this did not affect programme content, which remained strongly focused on the region, the ITC regretted the decision to drop a separate regional identity. The regional service was of high standard overall and featured 11 new series. There were improvements in a number of areas, such as current affairs and multicultural output.
Disappointingly, Central experimented only on Fridays with regional programming in the newly designated 5.30pm weekday slots. Central’s supply of programmes to the ITV network was much reduced but Midlands facilities were used in the production of programmes for other services. The service complied with the licence conditions.
Disappointingly, Central experimented only on Fridays with regional programming in the newly designated 5.30pm weekday slots. Central’s supply of programmes to the ITV network was much reduced but Midlands facilities were used in the production of programmes for other services. The service complied with the licence conditions.
For those who wondered what they said about Westcountry...
Quote:
The television service in South West England went through fundamental change in 1999. Not only were there new formats or slots for some regional programmes, but Westcountry Television adopted the name of its parent company and became known as Carlton. The loss of a familiar and carefully nurtured regional brand was a matter of regret to the ITC. Westcountry provided a regional service of generally high quality, though to a lesser extent than last year
Ah so that's why the ITC was replaced by ofcom, because they did at least acknowledge the regio ns in some way
:-(
A former member
Its a shame we don;t have the ITC anymore!
JO
I think a lot of people will disagree with that!
Although in fairness they did have a backbone to start with in which they nearly evoked GMTV's licence if they didn't pick their act up and they slated Carlton.
Government pressures? Under the Tories they liked to privatise anything public, in some ways the same happens with Labour now
russnet posted:
623058 posted:
Its a shame we don;t have the ITC anymore!
I think a lot of people will disagree with that!
Although in fairness they did have a backbone to start with in which they nearly evoked GMTV's licence if they didn't pick their act up and they slated Carlton.
Government pressures? Under the Tories they liked to privatise anything public, in some ways the same happens with Labour now
RU
Government pressures? Under the Tories they liked to privatise anything public, in some ways the same happens with Labour now
Who knows although the first lot of ITC chairmen and ladies were made up of 75% of the IBA chairpeople.
Here are some choice cuts from the 1993 Annual Report about Carlton
This is about GMTV
russnet
Founding member
Johnny83 posted:
Government pressures? Under the Tories they liked to privatise anything public, in some ways the same happens with Labour now
Who knows although the first lot of ITC chairmen and ladies were made up of 75% of the IBA chairpeople.
Here are some choice cuts from the 1993 Annual Report about Carlton
Quote:
In succeeding Thames with its formiable programming record, Carlton faced an especially difficult task as the new licensee for the London Weekday service.
The company's network peformance, however, was well below expectations. The application contained ambitious proposals for network programmes, but only a small number of these were commissioned by the Network Centre for transmission.
As a new, major company whose programmes are comissioned from external suppliers, Carlton was unlikely to enjoy an easy first year. As a new entrant to the ITV syhstem and with no track record, it is not surprising that many of the programme prosposals contained in the application were rejected by the network.
However, those network programmes which were shown - including a substantial number not mentioned in the application - were, with some exceptions, not distinctive or of noticeable high quality. The ITC wishes to see a significant improvement in 1994 and beyond.
The company's network peformance, however, was well below expectations. The application contained ambitious proposals for network programmes, but only a small number of these were commissioned by the Network Centre for transmission.
As a new, major company whose programmes are comissioned from external suppliers, Carlton was unlikely to enjoy an easy first year. As a new entrant to the ITV syhstem and with no track record, it is not surprising that many of the programme prosposals contained in the application were rejected by the network.
However, those network programmes which were shown - including a substantial number not mentioned in the application - were, with some exceptions, not distinctive or of noticeable high quality. The ITC wishes to see a significant improvement in 1994 and beyond.
This is about GMTV
Quote:
Over the year as a whole GMTV's programme performance as the national Channel 3 breakfast-time licensee was unsatisfactory. The handover between TV-am and GMTV was smooth in technical terms but the content of the inital service was poor.
GMTV's first year year performance did not match to a significant degree the service promised in the license application. Despite the problems associated with the start of any new service and the unexpected strength of competition from Channel 4 (The Big Breakfast) and notwithstanding the improvements made later in the year, GMTV failed in a number of significant respects to provide the breakfast service it proposed in the application and which the license required.
For 1994, the ITV agreed to a licence variation to take more account of the rolling nature of a breakfast service. In the light of tghe performance in 1993 the ITC has given GMTV a formal warning trhat the licence conditions now applicable to 1994 must be met in full and impovements made in certtain aspects of the service notably in respect of the quality of current affairs and children's programming.
GMTV's first year year performance did not match to a significant degree the service promised in the license application. Despite the problems associated with the start of any new service and the unexpected strength of competition from Channel 4 (The Big Breakfast) and notwithstanding the improvements made later in the year, GMTV failed in a number of significant respects to provide the breakfast service it proposed in the application and which the license required.
For 1994, the ITV agreed to a licence variation to take more account of the rolling nature of a breakfast service. In the light of tghe performance in 1993 the ITC has given GMTV a formal warning trhat the licence conditions now applicable to 1994 must be met in full and impovements made in certtain aspects of the service notably in respect of the quality of current affairs and children's programming.