What will happen on telly when the Queen dies?

I am very surprised by the comments on the announcements following the death of Mrs Windsor.

Please correct me if I am wrong, but I thought that tradition demanded that the announcement be

"The Queen is dead. Long live the King!"

Or have I overlooked something?

What a few people here are forgetting is that whatever you think about the Monarchy, The Queen is our head of State, as well as being head of the Commonweath and the Anglican church. The important one being head of State.

A lot more important that the Queen Mum. So expect a bit more than just a few hours of news reports.

If anyone has any doubts about the true nature of the B@st ards who make up the english aristocracy they should read the new book about the mutiny on the bounty. Bligh was the good guy from humble stock - fletcher christian the bankrupt aristo who couldn't take being second in command - he may well have been the original lord lucan .

It's a very interesting question to pose after we've seen the growth in popularity of 24-hr news channels (and minority channels in general) and the death of the Queen Mother and Diana. As people have said, if there's a whiff of a news story other than "peacefully in her sleep" then we'll be bombarded with it otherwise I just see it as being announcement...look at her life...the future for Charles and for those daring, the debate over keeping royalty. Obviously, the main channels will be pretty standard stuff but it's the smaller channels I'd be interested in - what's BBC Three/Four's policy? And ITV2's?

I don't really know if that was a joke, but if it wasn't, then you really have no idea about present day Britain. What I mean is that the mutiny on the Bounty happened in the 17th or 18th century, a time socially incomparable to now. Also, in regard to comments stating that the monarchy are somehow different to everyone else, I can only comment that they are human too - with the same desires and urges as everyone else. Anyway, nowadays, there is very little difference between upper bourgeoire and aristocracy.

I am not a royalist, and believe that when the queen dies a referendum should be held, asking if Britain should become a republic. But, it is absurd to state that the aristocracy are somehow alien!
If anything, those who have had money and power for a long time are more human, and certainly kinder and more socially inclusive than anyone else - they have nothing to prove.

[quote="Lee M"]

Not really. When Diana was initally injured, BBC ONE and BBC TWO had news reports interrupting programmes around 1am with Martyn Lewis. When BBC ONE was due to close down that night, they didn't, and instead joined BBC World (which at that time of course was the BBC's only 24 hour TV news channel).

ITN on ITV didn't have a programme on air until around 5am I think.

Then at around 6.30am, after it had been confirmed Diana had died, the BBC World overnight team signed off, and all BBC TV channels took the programme from the national news studio, with Martyn Lewis again.

quote]

Errrr, actually, as I have it all on tape, ITN were on the air way before 5am and Dermot Murnaghan was presenting. I was getting ready to go to a club and stayed home after watching it on ITV, I then began flicking and saw Gowing on BBC. This was just after 4am.

Er, no it wasn't.

WIth the Queen mum the 2 main channels went back to near-normal programming after about an hour of announcing the death. Some programmes changed in the week before the funeral, but not that many.

Diana was diffrent as it was a sudden, totally unexpected death and was therefore a huge news story. A lot of programmes did change and there was livecoverge of all the connected events that week but it was certainly not 'non-stop documentaries'


the death of Diana changed everything. It was the first major royal death for several decades and was therefore the first main test of the obit procedures for all broadcasters. The event changed the way that TV and radio covers Royal deaths and this was seen last year with Margaret and the Queen Mum. If Diana hadn't have happened in 1997, the coverage in 2002 would have been much more intense.

But then again context is everything. If the Queen was to die in an accident or assasination the coverage would be intense for several days. If she died like the Queen Mum did or after a long illness - i.e. when everyone had been expecting it the coverage will be a lot less.

Then again that event would also co-incide with a new monarch and everything that brings.... that will get huge coverage

I've met several people in the past few weeks who are convinced he is about to kark it..... But then I remember about 4 years ago my then bosses being so convinced of the same thing that we virtually had the tribute tapes loaded and ready to go!

He'll go on for ages, just like the Queen Mum

This is a fairly fascinating article on the subject:

Please God, not on my shift

From Guardian Unlimited.

The continuity announcement preceding the Beeb's announcement of the Queen Mother's death was, iirc, "We're interrupting this programme for an important announcement."

So obviously despite Lorraine Hegessey's promise that the announcement would be low-profile (as no-one in Britain would care), the anomalous use of the word 'important' remained.

And dispite all that planning, the BBC's tv broadcast turned into a complete shambles, probably Peter Sissons worst bulletin of his long career!

If someone on the staff had communicated that Mary Rhodes had been at the QM's bedside as she'd died; if the Daily Mail hadn't been so rabidly anti-BBC, everything would have been fine.

From that article, it is very telling to read



So do you not think that probably nobody will be watching the BBC since it has already been reported on B$kyB or even ITV?