TV Home Forum

Culture Secretary unveils plans for new national TV channel

Jeremy Hunt plans national Freeview channel with local content (January 2011)

This site closed in March 2021 and is now a read-only archive
FB
Fluffy Bunny Feet
Rijowhite posted:
My latest slightly amended proposal for Local and Regional News/Programming

REGIONAL NEWS
I feel the BBC and the Channel 3 franchises (ITV, STV and UTV) should both amend their Regional News coverage to 9 English TV Regions each – LONDON, SOUTH EAST, SOUTH WEST, WEST MIDLANDS, EAST MIDLANDS, EASTERN ENGLAND, NORTH WEST, YORKSHIRE AND NORTH EAST & BORDER. Under my proposal ITV Wales and ITV Channel Islands would continue to produce a 'National' News programme for their respective areas. STV and BBC would also continue to provide the News programmes they currently provide for Scotland with UTV and BBC continuing to produce News programmes for Northern Ireland. I feel both the BBC and ITV should provide 9 minutes Regional News between 6am and 9am, 3 minutes of Regional News at Lunchtime, 25 minutes on the Evening Regional News programme and 5 minutes Regional News after BBC and ITV 10:00pm (22:00) News programmes. These programmes will no longer have any sub-regions. For the Channel 3 Licences this agreement would last until 2024, with no further reduction or increase permitted at any point. All Regional News programmes must be produced within the Region they serve. By reducing the BBC's Regional News services, I feel that Local Media such as BBC Local Radio, Local Newspapers, Local News websites, the fledging Local TV services and maybe even ITV's Regional News programmes could have a chance to thrive.

OTHER REGIONAL PROGRAMMING
Under this proposal the BBC would continue to provide other Regional Programming for their Regions similar to the present arrangements. Under the new agreement, ITV plc's English and Channel Islands Channel 3 Franchises would provide at least a 30 minutes Regional Magazine Programme which would include at least 15 minutes of Politics/Current Affairs for the respective Region. ITV Wales, STV and UTV would provide 'National' programming at the current levels. All programming must be produced within the Region they serve. Like the Regional News, the agreement for the other Regional Programming would last until 2024.

NATIONAL PROGRAMMING MADE WITHIN REGIONS
I believe that the current 'Made Outside London' guidelines for Public Service Broadcasters should be scrapped in exchange for a quota that calls for 2% of all programmes to be made (1% for Channel 4) within each TV Region. Although this would essentially reduce the amount of programming made outside the Capital City, the Regional quotas would allow for the whole Nation to be better served. This would only apply to the BBC channels (excluding BBC News and BBC Parliament), ITV1 and Channel 4. Channel 5's current quota for 'Outside London' programming would continue as present.

THE FLEDGING LOCAL TELEVISION STATIONS
Jeremy Hunt's idea is to start Local TV channels via Digital Terrestrial Television (DTT). I have spoke before about Local TV opt-outs via Channel 5, however this idea like Jeremy's could also be seen as outdated. Amongst many others I now feel we must embrace the future by starting any fledging Local TV stations on IPTV (Internet Protocol Television). I also feel that this should be as part of an online Local TV network. The £25m already issued to the Local TV project from the Licence Fee could be used for the cost of advertising the Local TV services via the BBC and ITV's Regional networks, Local Newspapers (and National Newspapers with 'Regional' pull outs, Local BBC and Commercial Radio Stations and Local Resource Websites. Surely all other costs must be paid for by the Local TV franchises themselves. Like all other PSB's on regular TV, there would be certain conditions to these Licences to promote quality and diversity via a Local TV channel's programming. As with Regional TV, all programming should be made within the community that the Local TV stations serve.


So in your 3 min bully for lunch in YORKSHIRE AND NORTH EAST & BORDER, how would you devide the screentime? Does 3 mins include 1 min weather? So now you are down to 2 mins...
Non news? 30 mins of which 15 will be politcs - "Welcome to the such and such fashion show, coming up - our MP gives us his views on the latest employment figures..."
Just great TV.

As for producing outside London no reduction in percentage should be made. ITV in particular is not geared up to extra production other than what it already does.
Local TV Stations: out of the £25m you quote, how much will be left after all the advertising you recommend? Local TV is bad idea to begin with and needs no more money thrown at it. Channel M is always quoted and it was not sustainable. My little town certainly couldn't sustain it - the local rag has had the same headline on it's web site for over two weeks now.
When will folk realise that making TV is bl**dy expensive.
Reaseraching,
travelling to story,
shooting story,
travelling back,
editing,
checking with producers,
possibly checking legalities with lawyers,
studio equiping,
studio crewing,
graphics,
graphic artists,
transmission.

Every item TX'd should go through this proceedure to prevent (mostly) legal complications later.
This all makes it VERY expensive and not something that can't be reduced to a few quid because an arse of a minister who doesn't work in TV cannot grasp.
Last edited by Fluffy Bunny Feet on 23 July 2012 1:00pm
RI
Rijowhi
So in your 3 min bully for lunch in YORKSHIRE AND NORTH EAST & BORDER, how would you devide the screentime? Does 3 mins include 1 min weather? So now you are down to 2 mins...
Non news? 30 mins of which 15 will be politcs - "Welcome to the such and such fashion show, coming up - our MP gives us his views on the latest employment figures..."
Just great TV.

As for producing outside London no reduction in percentage should be made. ITV in particular is not geared up to extra production other than what it already does.
Local TV Stations: out of the £25m you quote, how much will be left after all the advertising you recommend? Local TV is bad idea to begin with and needs no more money thrown at it. Channel M is always quoted and it was not sustainable. My little town certainly couldn't sustain it - the local rag has had the same headline on it's web site for over two weeks now.
When will folk realise that making TV is bl**dy expensive.
Reaseraching,
travelling to story,
shooting story,
travelling back,
editing,
checking with producers,
possibly checking legalities with lawyers,
studio equiping,
studio crewing,
graphics,
graphic artists,
transmission.

Every item TX'd should go through this proceedure to prevent (mostly) legal complications later.
This all makes it VERY expensive and not something that can't be reduced to a few quid because an arse of a minister who doesn't work in TV cannot grasp.[/quote]

Sorry I've just realised the way I've written the proposal it suggests that Yorkshire and Tyne Tees & Border would be as one bulletin...they simply wouldn't. They would be two separate regions as they should be.

For a 30 minute Regional show, it would surely be a better version of the Magazine format that already dominates the Regional News Magazine Programmes. It's not perfect I admit but surely an improvement on what we've already got.

As for Local TV stations, I feel IF it can work then the Local TV Franchise holders should be the one's trying to make it work with their own money. The quoted £25m was totally for start up advertising, though I suspect much of that figure has been wasted already...start up advertising could surely help after all? You're right in saying TV is expensive though, hence why should the public have to pay any more after the start up costs?

I agree with you about not reducing Production outside London, but I think it will be reduced. Hence why I'd like to see a compromise where Production is spread out throughout the UK. After all most (not all I admit) Production outside London can be done anywhere, the editing, effects etc can still be done in studios like London or Salford.
Last edited by Rijowhi on 23 July 2012 10:33pm

48 days later

DA
Dave Founding member
Could we see a change of direction with local TV now Jeremy Hunt has now departed the Culture Secretary role or is the plan too far down the line?
ST
Stuart
Dave posted:
Could we see a change of direction with local TV now Jeremy Hunt has now departed the Culture Secretary role or is the plan too far down the line?

Governments of all flavours often waste taxpayers' money by cancelling plans.

Consultants make a small fortune out of such changes: they simply publish one of their alternative assumptions as the new 'way forward' and claim the fee again.

Why else do you think decisions go backwards, forwards and sideways so many times as to end up costing much more than the original estimate and delivered later than planned?
MK
Mr Kite
Dave posted:
Could we see a change of direction with local TV now Jeremy Hunt has now departed the Culture Secretary role or is the plan too far down the line?


What would you like changed?

Personally, I think this'll be still-born now Hunt's gone. It's a shame in a way, but I don't think standalone, non-networked local TV stations can work in our multi-channel, UK-wide, mostly non-PBS environment.

Though not my ideal scenario, I do think if we want more local TV, the best way to do it now would be through the BBC. Perhaps creating sub-regions in some of the larger regions, such as Scotland and the North West, in a similar vein to BBC Oxford or Look East Close Up. Being from Liverpool, I'd love at least a sub-opt from the Manchester-based news. Perhaps they could revive the petalling idea from Winter Hill and create sub-regions to correspond to the Manchester, Merseyside & Lancashire local radio regions. Perhaps even for the Isle of Man, if the local population are willing to cough up the dough for it. Say, about 10-15 minute opt outs in North West Tonight and a dedicated late bulletin.
IS
Inspector Sands
Dave posted:
Could we see a change of direction with local TV now Jeremy Hunt has now departed the Culture Secretary role or is the plan too far down the line?

I think it's too far to stop really, at least not without annoying a lot of people, wasting money and losing face. There were a lot of bids (more than expected I believe) and some of those bidders have invested a lot of money already

Here's an article from the Guardian the other day on this very subject
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/greenslade/2012/sep/06/local-tv-maria-miller?INTCMP=SRCH
IS
Inspector Sands
Fluffy Bunny Feet posted:

When will folk realise that making TV is bl**dy expensive.
Reaseraching,
travelling to story,
shooting story,
travelling back,
editing,
checking with producers,
possibly checking legalities with lawyers,
studio equiping,
studio crewing,
graphics,
graphic artists,
transmission.

Every item TX'd should go through this proceedure to prevent (mostly) legal complications later.
This all makes it VERY expensive and not something that can't be reduced to a few quid because an arse of a minister who doesn't work in TV cannot grasp.

That's a very traditional outlook on how news is made, even for a 'proper' news operation.

In reality they'll have Video Journalists, probably working from home, who will go out and film a with report a DV camera and then FTP it back to base. The studio too doesn't can be done fairly cheaply and with minimal staff these days, the technology is all there. The editorial side of things - editors and producers is of course needed but that's no more than a local newspaper.

It's still not cheap in TV terms, but it's never been cheaper. It all depends how it's done and how they want it to look. These stations can do their programming however they want, it doesn't have to fit in with the conventions of the BBC and ITV
RI
Rijowhi
Inspector Sands posted:
Fluffy Bunny Feet posted:

When will folk realise that making TV is bl**dy expensive.
Reaseraching,
travelling to story,
shooting story,
travelling back,
editing,
checking with producers,
possibly checking legalities with lawyers,
studio equiping,
studio crewing,
graphics,
graphic artists,
transmission.

Every item TX'd should go through this proceedure to prevent (mostly) legal complications later.
This all makes it VERY expensive and not something that can't be reduced to a few quid because an arse of a minister who doesn't work in TV cannot grasp.

That's a very traditional outlook on how news is made, even for a 'proper' news operation.

In reality they'll have Video Journalists, probably working from home, who will go out and film a with report a DV camera and then FTP it back to base. The studio too doesn't can be done fairly cheaply and with minimal staff these days, the technology is all there. The editorial side of things - editors and producers is of course needed but that's no more than a local newspaper.

It's still not cheap in TV terms, but it's never been cheaper. It all depends how it's done and how they want it to look. These stations can do their programming however they want, it doesn't have to fit in with the conventions of the BBC and ITV


Sound like ITV are trying to cut their Regional News costs again...could end up being a bit like the Local TV experiment set up but in HD (and hopefully high quality) Rolling Eyes .

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/greenslade/2012/sep/06/local-tv-maria-miller

These Local TV channels don't need to play the game the same as (though still not a cheap game by any standard) the the BIG channels (as long as there is some scope on quality). It doesn't need to be HDTV, it just needs to be watchable. List all Local TV stations (within the Hunt scheme) via a hub website (which could itself be advertised using the allocated Licence Fee money on the likes of ITV, C4 etc).

I now feel both the BBC and ITV Regional News and Programming should continue (In ITV's case I'd like to see them produce Regional News for 17 sub-regions as previously. I believe ITV should also be made to provide at least a weekly 1/2 hour Non-News Magazine Programming. This could cover Politics, Current Affairs and some ligher stuff). To help ITV pay for this limited Regional Programming (which needs to try and be comparable with the BBC) I believe that the Contract Rights Renewal agreement should be amended. I also agree with the idea of retransmission fees being adjusted to potentially help PSB's such as ITV produce more PSB programming such as Regional or Children's programming. See below...

Public service broadcasters, including the BBC, claim that if the US example was followed they should be paid up to £120m a year for providing rivals such as BSkyB with some of its top-rating programmes.

"Any changes in this area could affect the balance of payments between PSBs and platforms, potentially to the benefit of PSBs," said Ofcom.
BR
Brekkie
Dave posted:
Could we see a change of direction with local TV now Jeremy Hunt has now departed the Culture Secretary role or is the plan too far down the line?

Well hopefully now the Olympics and Paralympics are done and dusted the uprising will begin.
:-(
A former member
I still believe that these Local tv channels are just a complete waste of money and resource and have been designed to somehow solve a few certain member of the public and others as a vanity project with a complete disregard at actually trying to provide affordable and well funded PBS service.

I still believe there should killed all the new stations, but keep the bids which then could go onto to provide and create local programming and even the local news, which could then be place on the ITV, Ch4 networks at set times.
AN
all new Phil
A lot of things were probably a waste of money and resources when they were initially created. I think that maybe, at the moment, they haven't quite found the niche or the USP for these local channels, but that's not to say that they should be written off completely. There are some very good people backing them so there is obviously a feeling that they will work out.
GS
Gavin Scott Founding member
There's two reasons to apply for one of these franchises - you don't want to have missed the opportunity in case it is a success; and if the current government have come up with it, you can bet that it's a largely profit-driven proposition (they're certainly not known for enhancing services for the sake of it, as they would be the first to admit).

But so far, there's so little meat to the idea, it really does look like a vanity project - and the negative flip is that good media firms may well have their fingers burned on this ill-conceived wheeze and never again wish to touch the subject.

Newer posts