DA
It's hardly a good thing for viewers. Long may we continue to have 20th century based scheduling.
How cool. Welcome to the 21st century, British television!
It's hardly a good thing for viewers. Long may we continue to have 20th century based scheduling.
JO
It's hardly a good thing for viewers. Long may we continue to have 20th century based scheduling.
Why do you not think it a good thing?
How cool. Welcome to the 21st century, British television!
It's hardly a good thing for viewers. Long may we continue to have 20th century based scheduling.
Why do you not think it a good thing?
DA
It's hardly a good thing for viewers. Long may we continue to have 20th century based scheduling.
Why do you not think it a good thing?
I don't really have a problem with channels doing it occasionally but it's obviously designed to stop viewers changing channel. If every channel did it, you might turn over at the end of Come Dine with Me to watch something on ITV1 to find that it has already started because they didn't have adverts either. Currently, if you turn over at the end of a programme on one channel, you tend to get either the end of a programme or adverts, so you know you haven't missed the programme you turned over to view.
I know this style of scheduling happens on many US channels with some programmes even starting while the credits for the previous one are still running, especially when it is back to back episodes of the same programme. What do other countries do? Are the US unique in how they run schedules or is that the norm and we are unique in having adverts between programmes?
How cool. Welcome to the 21st century, British television!
It's hardly a good thing for viewers. Long may we continue to have 20th century based scheduling.
Why do you not think it a good thing?
I don't really have a problem with channels doing it occasionally but it's obviously designed to stop viewers changing channel. If every channel did it, you might turn over at the end of Come Dine with Me to watch something on ITV1 to find that it has already started because they didn't have adverts either. Currently, if you turn over at the end of a programme on one channel, you tend to get either the end of a programme or adverts, so you know you haven't missed the programme you turned over to view.
I know this style of scheduling happens on many US channels with some programmes even starting while the credits for the previous one are still running, especially when it is back to back episodes of the same programme. What do other countries do? Are the US unique in how they run schedules or is that the norm and we are unique in having adverts between programmes?
IS
Yes but in my experience the junctions on US channels tend to all match up almost exactly, a channel like Discovery starts their programmes directly after the previous one ends but if you turn over to Comedy Central they're doing the same thing. The fact that there are no junctions means that they all had to tighten up their timing so not to be left out. I believe that it's also partially a convention that derives from terrestrial licenses which have to ID themselves at the top of the hour - hence they all start their programmes bang on xx:00.
I don't think it's a bad thing at all if Channel 4 (or anyone else) does it more regularly, it was quite refreshing to have one programme roll into another like that. They did a lot more than an American channel too, some cable channels (Discovery again is a good example) don't show anything between programmes, not even a logo sting
I don't really have a problem with channels doing it occasionally but it's obviously designed to stop viewers changing channel. If every channel did it, you might turn over at the end of Come Dine with Me to watch something on ITV1 to find that it has already started because they didn't have adverts either.
I know this style of scheduling happens on many US channels with some programmes even starting while the credits for the previous one are still running, especially when it is back to back episodes of the same programme.
I know this style of scheduling happens on many US channels with some programmes even starting while the credits for the previous one are still running, especially when it is back to back episodes of the same programme.
Yes but in my experience the junctions on US channels tend to all match up almost exactly, a channel like Discovery starts their programmes directly after the previous one ends but if you turn over to Comedy Central they're doing the same thing. The fact that there are no junctions means that they all had to tighten up their timing so not to be left out. I believe that it's also partially a convention that derives from terrestrial licenses which have to ID themselves at the top of the hour - hence they all start their programmes bang on xx:00.
I don't think it's a bad thing at all if Channel 4 (or anyone else) does it more regularly, it was quite refreshing to have one programme roll into another like that. They did a lot more than an American channel too, some cable channels (Discovery again is a good example) don't show anything between programmes, not even a logo sting
LI
I guess Staples have paid extra as a sponsor to not have other ads beforehand, but not even an ident? How odd for Channel 4. Never seen a show's starting time as "in a few seconds".
IS
Absolutely, they managed to ID the channel about 3 times - on the end credits, between the programmes and then on the sponsorship sting of the next one.
Just Channel 4's or idents in general?
I've said it before but the concept of always having an ident (as we know them now) and announcement before every programme is very outdated
I suppose you could count the breakbumper as some form of ID
Absolutely, they managed to ID the channel about 3 times - on the end credits, between the programmes and then on the sponsorship sting of the next one.
Brekkie posted:
I'm all in favour of "accelerated flow" between programmes - but keep the idents please.
Just Channel 4's or idents in general?
I've said it before but the concept of always having an ident (as we know them now) and announcement before every programme is very outdated
DV
The problem with the lack of idents before and after programmes is that encourages, even dictates, the use of DOGs. Something that shouldn't be encouraged at all.