Yes but Sky came along *before* the 1993 act which turned ITV's auctions into a "throw as much money at the govt as possible please" concept. Hence how Central managed to clevery get away with their £5000 bid whilst Tyne Tees pissed away all their capital in an attempt to prevent Granada from getting the North East.
It's not completely down to the increased competition that we ended up in this situation.
Yes but Sky came along *before* the 1993 act which turned ITV's auctions into a "throw as much money at the govt as possible please" concept. Hence how Central managed to clevery get away with their £5000 bid whilst Tyne Tees p*** away all their capital in an attempt to prevent Granada from getting the North East.
It's not completely down to the increased competition that we ended up in this situation.
Central bid £2000 actually - so even more clever/cheeky - if a little risky!
ITV has actually made a pretty decent recovery after the awful Charles Allen era. Incidentally, have you seen that he's doing exactly the same at Global Radio?
The switch to digital was the excuse - not the cause. Now pretty much the whole of the UK has switched and internet there is still nothing to back up the argument that because we've got digital TV people don't want regional content.
The costs are a factor of course but in reality most regional news programmes get ratings on a par with a hit show on a digital network, and most digital channels find the funds for at least one or two breakout hits a year. If there was a will they'd be a way - the trouble is there is no will.
JJ
jjne
The excuse often given is that the regional news is watched by older people, but this conveniently ignores the fact that the news was only a very small part of regional commitment.
I don't see live music programming, sports coverage, independent film commissions or locally-produced soap operas as an older generation thing.
And ITV is still pulling audiences roughly half that of 1990. Coupled with the fact that programmes are cheaper to produce than they used to be in real terms, the only justification for reduced PSB coverage in general is improved dividends for shareholders.
67 days later
:-(
A former member
Quote:
he only outstanding issues are understood to be whether a new ITV franchise for Wales needs to be carved out, from the Wales and west of England region, and an adjustment made in the Borders region, so that people in southern Scotland can receive a Scottish news service from STV.
he only outstanding issues are understood to be whether a new ITV franchise for Wales needs to be carved out, from the Wales and west of England region, and an adjustment made in the Borders region, so that people in southern Scotland can receive a Scottish news service from STV.
Has these two issues been resolved yet?
Unlikely - it's only been a week since the announcement!
I feel the East Midlands gaining a decent Regional News service should also be considered alongside Scottish and Welsh services. I never understood Ofcom allowing ITV to get rid of their East Midlands News, as unlike the other Regions that were scrapped it is an official Government Region. The News service should surely be broadcast from the East Midlands too (as before 2005)?
he only outstanding issues are understood to be whether a new ITV franchise for Wales needs to be carved out, from the Wales and west of England region, and an adjustment made in the Borders region, so that people in southern Scotland can receive a Scottish news service from STV.
Has these two issues been resolved yet?
Unlikely - it's only been a week since the announcement!
Yes but Sky came along *before* the 1993 act which turned ITV's auctions into a "throw as much money at the govt as possible please" concept.
Your dates are a bit out, the Broadcasting Act was in 1990 and Sky/BSB started in 1989/90 so only just before.
Although both satellite companies were in development for a few years before 1990 and competition was inevitable from somewhere, even if not Sky (it wasn't certain it would survive that early on)
