Points of View

Schedules aren't being disrupted though. The BBC especially have been accommodating these events into their schedules for decades, and traditionally they occupy the schedules at a low-ratings point in the year.

Standard programming isn't commissioned for these periods due to these events - it's only the soaps which for some stupid reason are commissioned to keep running throughout the tournaments, but have to be moved around the schedules accordingly.

Now, for Euro 2008 really there has been relatively minor disruption - and this year for the Olympics with the live coverage being overnight and during the day there won't be too much impact on primetime too.


Also, as Gavin said even if you're not into sport you have to acknowledge the importance of such events, just as sports fans have to acknowledge there is a place for soaps and drama too. You can't seriously say that London 2012 should be shunted off to BBC3 and BBCi.

The thing is there's an alternative. I may not give two hoots about Euro 2008 so I choose to watch something else. There's another four channels on analogue and hundreds of satellite and if there's absolutely nothing else on why not stick in a video or DVD? The BBC has to cater for everyone, football fans or not and thus it should remain on the BBC regardless, just as, for example, the opera and The Apprentice should stay for those people that like those programmes.

Besides schedule changing happens at every sporting event - Wimbledon, Olympics, Football. You'd have thought the moaners would have got used to it by now.

But by 2012 these channels you refer to as "low-grade digital" will have equal availability to all. I fail to see why it would be necessary to move the normal schedule from the main channel to somewhere else, simply to be replace by a 'special event' as has been suggested.

Yes, give due prominence to the event. Insert highlights into the schedule on main channels and during news reports...but it's not really necessary to replace or reduce other genres for the sake of saturation broadcasting during prime time hours.

I appreciate that current rights agreements for sporting events require broadcasters to carry it on their main terrestrial channel. But that situation can change.


There is an alternative. But rather than ask that people who want to watch a 'special event' make an effort to turn to a special channel or a lesser watched minor channel, you are suggesting that somebody who doesn't want to watch should make alternative arrangements during that period instead. Isn't that rather selfish?

I imagine you are the sort of person who would want to drive a brand new BMW 630i Sport Coupé unhindered up the middle lane of the M6 on account of it being 'special', and to hell with everyone else, let them walk!

You seem to have contradicted your own point of BBCs 3 and 4.

Even after DSO they will still be "lesser watched" and "minor" channels as you put it.

Its not about being "selfish", its about having a sense of occassion. Lets get a touch of perspective here - its right to 'big-up' the games on BBC One, of course it is! The Olympics (both this year and in 2012) are SPECIAL. They pre-date soap operas by a fairly long way and will outlive most of them.

No one is losing out by flicking over to a "lesser watched" channel to keep up to date with their soaps.



Hmm. You had a different perspective when I got on my soap box about those who choose to drive any kind of car when they could take public transport - but lets stick to the subject..!

They will still be the poor relations of the BBC though, just as BBC2 is to BBC1 now. And the BBC is paying a significant amount for these events too - hence they need to get maximum exposure.


It's years and years of poor scheduling decisions in relation to the soaps which have resulted in people believing their regular fix of EastEnders and Corrie is one of their fundamental human rights.

In other countries, notably America and Australia, the big events like the Olympics take precedence over everything and their entire prime time schedules are dropped to accommodate them. Fair enough in America it's less of an issue because these events normally fall outside the ratings season, but in Australia they use it to their advantage, planning a decent cliffhanger to ensure viewers return once the tournament is over.


It's not necessary this time due to the time differences, but come 2012 I would expect the BBC1 primetime schedule to be fully devoted to live coverage of the games - but I'm sure we'll be forced to take half an hour breaks and switch channels to accomodate episodes of EastEnders, which due to the games being in the East End will probably try and pretend they're real with dodgy storylines of how the Kenyan atheletics team are using the laundrette to wash their kits.

It would be much better all round for the show to take a complete break for the two week period, meaning sports fans can watch the biggest event every to be staged in the UK uninterrupted, and EastEnders fans are not hunting around the schedules for it.

I can't be doing with people who complain about schedules being disrupted. It adds a bit of variety, we already have Bank Holiday Mondays looking like any other Monday, plus it's not as if the sporting events are on 24 hours a day. The soaps are still on, and anybody with a listings mag can easilly find where they have been moved to

Plus these are the same schedules that the rest of the year are complained about for being 'the same old rubbish week in week out'

I expect we will get the same next week when Wimbledon is scheduled on two channels at once for a few hours every afternoon

UFO rocks !

(Incidently has the episode 'The Long Sleep' been shown in the current daytime runs, or is it still a 'no no'? It was shown in it's original ITV4 primetime run ISTR)

The thing is these events are special and are infrequent, usually every four years so it is understandable that they take precedence. Come DSO then by all means put them on a separate channel but for the time being they can, rightfully so, stay on the main channels and those that don't want to watch (including myself) can switch over and watch alternative programming. I wouldn't say that's selfish, more accomodating for special events. Just think, everyone that doesn't want to watch Eastenders for example switches over the other 50 weeks of the year so it's not that much of an inconvenience for the Eastenders viewers to switch over for two weeks whilst the sport is on..



Well if it's special why not show it off! Saying that, I'm a bus man myself.

Odd analogy, so you'd rather force them to drive up the A6 instead because everyone else wants to drive on the M6?

(I'm assuming the A6 follows a similar route to the M6)

In what way have I contradicted myself about BBC3 and ITV4?

I understand the need to celebrate with a 'sense of occasion', and I haven't said that these events shouldn't be broadcast. After DSO it will cause far less disruption to place wall-to-wall coverage on one of the minor channels. The basic logic being that you are disrupting fewer viewers by doing so.

I have said repeatedly that my point wasn't about maintaining the schedule for soaps. BBC One and ITV1 normally offer (or attempt to offer) a well rounded schedule; that ethos is thrown out of the window during 'special events' because of the historical need to show them on the main terrestrial channels. That shouldn't apply after DSO when all channels will be equally available.

The BBC have already accepted this idea in part by using BBC Parliament's bandwidth to allow streaming of the Beijing Olympics during this summer.

It's sensible to ask those wanting to watch a 'special event' to do so on another channel where the displaced schedule will inconvenience fewer people. The alternative is to transfer the entire schedule of the main channel to the minor channel for the requisite period, which isn't always possible on all platforms.


Not that odd. Surely if someone wanted to drive their 'special car' at 120mph (legally) on a public road for the day, it would cause less disruption to close the A6 rather than stop all other cars travelling on the M6 which is far busier.

It isn't a question of "logic". That's where the "sense of occassion" comes into it.

Yes, it "inconveniences" more people to put the Olympics on One - but it is SPECIAL, and it is treated as such.

Ironically the "Special Olympics" are less special and so are shunted off to one of the lesser watched channels.

That's the crayzeee world of television for you.

* fin *

So a few weeks of primetime sport every couple of years can't be part of a well rounded schedule then?

Well in that case EastEnders, Casualty, Casualty 2.0 and Casualty 3.0: Police Edition should all be shunted off to BBC3 as they're intruding on the prime time schedule.