WE
Im sure part of the problem was, the 15 companies were used to getting one feed from one place, but still hard control over what got broadcast in the local area. So if LWT sent something down the line STV could opt out to broadcast local news.
BUT TVAM had full control over all 15 areas, and could only provide a single feed, there had no way of providing local opt outs. from 0915 - 0930 BT used to change over the lines to give ITV station back control. I bet back then the Unions would have wanted more money if there had to start switching feeds between local companies etc..
One election year(1987?), opt outs were provided during TVAM's coverage, by the regional stations!
My mum and late dad prefered Breakfast Time to TV-am for one thing, regional news. TV-am, for techinical reasons, couldn't provide it, BBC could. So what were the techincal reasons, as GMTV were able to provide regional news?
Im sure part of the problem was, the 15 companies were used to getting one feed from one place, but still hard control over what got broadcast in the local area. So if LWT sent something down the line STV could opt out to broadcast local news.
BUT TVAM had full control over all 15 areas, and could only provide a single feed, there had no way of providing local opt outs. from 0915 - 0930 BT used to change over the lines to give ITV station back control. I bet back then the Unions would have wanted more money if there had to start switching feeds between local companies etc..
One election year(1987?), opt outs were provided during TVAM's coverage, by the regional stations!
IS
I don't think there were any technical reasons why they couldn't have done it in one way or another. If the will had been there from either TVam or TVam and the regional stations then there could have been regional news slots. TVam did do regional advertising, although as mentioned in the book linked to above, the system to play them out wasn't working at launch.
TVam was a separate national franchise and a rival to the ITV companies so I can understand them not wanting to involve them. It would also have cost a lot of money, in fact it was a good job they didn't do it from day 1 as they weren't even getting in enough money for their national programming. Even when the station was doing well it wasn't affecting their ratings or income (at one point it was the worlds most profitable TV company) so I assume they saw no need to introduce it.
GMTV promised it in their license application and so introduced it. It was more 'ITV' - being owned by a couple of ITV companies so presumably had more sway in getting everyone to do a deal for news provision
My mum and late dad prefered Breakfast Time to TV-am for one thing, regional news. TV-am, for techinical reasons, couldn't provide it, BBC could. So what were the techincal reasons, as GMTV were able to provide regional news?
I don't think there were any technical reasons why they couldn't have done it in one way or another. If the will had been there from either TVam or TVam and the regional stations then there could have been regional news slots. TVam did do regional advertising, although as mentioned in the book linked to above, the system to play them out wasn't working at launch.
TVam was a separate national franchise and a rival to the ITV companies so I can understand them not wanting to involve them. It would also have cost a lot of money, in fact it was a good job they didn't do it from day 1 as they weren't even getting in enough money for their national programming. Even when the station was doing well it wasn't affecting their ratings or income (at one point it was the worlds most profitable TV company) so I assume they saw no need to introduce it.
GMTV promised it in their license application and so introduced it. It was more 'ITV' - being owned by a couple of ITV companies so presumably had more sway in getting everyone to do a deal for news provision
Last edited by Inspector Sands on 2 February 2013 10:45am
IS
TVam bypassed the usual ITV companies but that's no reason why they couldn't have done regional opt outs, after all they did do regional advertising, also GMTV got to air in a similar way. The switch between TVam/GMTV and ITV is irrelevant - everything would be configured at 6am and then changed at 9:25. Even then there's no 'switching of control' - it's just one video feed being changed for another, no 'control' at all.
The union point is kind of relevant though, the ITV companies probably would have had no or minimal staffing at 6am until the introduction of 24 hour TV. Their news operations too only really had to be in to write something basic for 9:25 or 10:25. Breakfast bulletins would have needed staff and they would have to be paid for.
Im sure part of the problem was, the 15 companies were used to getting one feed from one place, but still hard control over what got broadcast in the local area. So if LWT sent something down the line STV could opt out to broadcast local news.
BUT TVAM had full control over all 15 areas, and could only provide a single feed, there had no way of providing local opt outs. from 0915 - 0930 BT used to change over the lines to give ITV station back control. I bet back then the Unions would have wanted more money if there had to start switching feeds between local companies etc..
BUT TVAM had full control over all 15 areas, and could only provide a single feed, there had no way of providing local opt outs. from 0915 - 0930 BT used to change over the lines to give ITV station back control. I bet back then the Unions would have wanted more money if there had to start switching feeds between local companies etc..
TVam bypassed the usual ITV companies but that's no reason why they couldn't have done regional opt outs, after all they did do regional advertising, also GMTV got to air in a similar way. The switch between TVam/GMTV and ITV is irrelevant - everything would be configured at 6am and then changed at 9:25. Even then there's no 'switching of control' - it's just one video feed being changed for another, no 'control' at all.
The union point is kind of relevant though, the ITV companies probably would have had no or minimal staffing at 6am until the introduction of 24 hour TV. Their news operations too only really had to be in to write something basic for 9:25 or 10:25. Breakfast bulletins would have needed staff and they would have to be paid for.
Last edited by Inspector Sands on 2 February 2013 10:28am - 2 times in total
NM
Im sure part of the problem was, the 15 companies were used to getting one feed from one place, but still hard control over what got broadcast in the local area. So if LWT sent something down the line STV could opt out to broadcast local news.
BUT TVAM had full control over all 15 areas, and could only provide a single feed, there had no way of providing local opt outs. from 0915 - 0930 BT used to change over the lines to give ITV station back control. I bet back then the Unions would have wanted more money if there had to start switching feeds between local companies etc..
One election year(1987?), opt outs were provided during TVAM's coverage, by the regional stations!
This certainly happened in '83 - TV Ark has clips of the Thames opt:
http://www2.tv-ark.org.uk/itvlondon/thames-news1.html
My mum and late dad prefered Breakfast Time to TV-am for one thing, regional news. TV-am, for techinical reasons, couldn't provide it, BBC could. So what were the techincal reasons, as GMTV were able to provide regional news?
Im sure part of the problem was, the 15 companies were used to getting one feed from one place, but still hard control over what got broadcast in the local area. So if LWT sent something down the line STV could opt out to broadcast local news.
BUT TVAM had full control over all 15 areas, and could only provide a single feed, there had no way of providing local opt outs. from 0915 - 0930 BT used to change over the lines to give ITV station back control. I bet back then the Unions would have wanted more money if there had to start switching feeds between local companies etc..
One election year(1987?), opt outs were provided during TVAM's coverage, by the regional stations!
This certainly happened in '83 - TV Ark has clips of the Thames opt:
http://www2.tv-ark.org.uk/itvlondon/thames-news1.html
PC
But what worked for foreign viewers wouldn't necessarily work for a British audience. Both breakfast programmes would have taken elements from the likes of Good Morning America, but the format had to be a unique British one. There was no precedent as to what that format was or what the viewing public wanted.
It strikes me that the original launch of ITV PLC's Daybreak was inspired partially by The One Show but also partially by US breakfast show, with more of a lifestyle push and glamorous female presenters.
The problem was that people quite enjoyed The One Show as they'd just got home and were ready to relax with it, whereas in the morning they would not be so forgiving, and that viewers want to be able to relate to presenters on UK TV, not aspire to be them. People are in a bad enough mood in the morning getting ready to go out to their crap job, they don't want the first face to meet them on TV being someone who's making a fortune, who looks great and is going out with a footballer to rub it in.
Had TVAM collapsed it's not necessarily the case that someone else would have jumped in, although that is the more likely case. The IBA may have decided it was not financially viable, or everyone else may have withdrawn their interest. In Ireland RTE doesn't have a strong tradition of breakfast television, partially down to union problems, and has left it a bit late to establish itself. Admittedly, that's a far smaller potential audience.
At the time, morning shows were already quite popular not just in the United States, but also in Australia and Canada. There were
plenty
of precedents they could have learned from.
But what worked for foreign viewers wouldn't necessarily work for a British audience. Both breakfast programmes would have taken elements from the likes of Good Morning America, but the format had to be a unique British one. There was no precedent as to what that format was or what the viewing public wanted.
It strikes me that the original launch of ITV PLC's Daybreak was inspired partially by The One Show but also partially by US breakfast show, with more of a lifestyle push and glamorous female presenters.
The problem was that people quite enjoyed The One Show as they'd just got home and were ready to relax with it, whereas in the morning they would not be so forgiving, and that viewers want to be able to relate to presenters on UK TV, not aspire to be them. People are in a bad enough mood in the morning getting ready to go out to their crap job, they don't want the first face to meet them on TV being someone who's making a fortune, who looks great and is going out with a footballer to rub it in.
Had TVAM collapsed it's not necessarily the case that someone else would have jumped in, although that is the more likely case. The IBA may have decided it was not financially viable, or everyone else may have withdrawn their interest. In Ireland RTE doesn't have a strong tradition of breakfast television, partially down to union problems, and has left it a bit late to establish itself. Admittedly, that's a far smaller potential audience.
NL
But what worked for foreign viewers wouldn't necessarily work for a British audience. Both breakfast programmes would have taken elements from the likes of Good Morning America, but the format had to be a unique British one. There was no precedent as to what that format was or what the viewing public wanted.
It strikes me that the original launch of ITV PLC's Daybreak was inspired partially by The One Show but also partially by US breakfast show, with more of a lifestyle push and glamorous female presenters.
The problem was that people quite enjoyed The One Show as they'd just got home and were ready to relax with it, whereas in the morning they would not be so forgiving, and that viewers want to be able to relate to presenters on UK TV, not aspire to be them. People are in a bad enough mood in the morning getting ready to go out to their crap job, they don't want the first face to meet them on TV being someone who's making a fortune, who looks great and is going out with a footballer to rub it in.
Had TVAM collapsed it's not necessarily the case that someone else would have jumped in, although that is the more likely case. The IBA may have decided it was not financially viable, or everyone else may have withdrawn their interest. In Ireland RTE doesn't have a strong tradition of breakfast television, partially down to union problems, and has left it a bit late to establish itself. Admittedly, that's a far smaller potential audience.
An excellent response, Thank You. The loss of TV-AM would have been a huge embarrassment to the IBA but maybe not the ITV companies themselves. ITV was then a federation of companies with limited contact with each other.
TV-AM's demise probably wouldn't have impacted much on Yorkshire et al. Whereas if Daybreak had gone bust the united ITV we have now might have been more seriously affected.
However the other possibility is that the IBA may have offered the breakfast contract to another company with the tacit understanding that they do what they thought was right.
Eg. A consortium of ITN, Disney and LWT would probably go for a more populist mix of cartoons and maybe the odd comedy with ITN providing the "hard news".
Such a re-offering may very well have been a poisoned chalice but such a lineup as described above may have been the "antidote"
At the time, morning shows were already quite popular not just in the United States, but also in Australia and Canada. There were
plenty
of precedents they could have learned from.
But what worked for foreign viewers wouldn't necessarily work for a British audience. Both breakfast programmes would have taken elements from the likes of Good Morning America, but the format had to be a unique British one. There was no precedent as to what that format was or what the viewing public wanted.
It strikes me that the original launch of ITV PLC's Daybreak was inspired partially by The One Show but also partially by US breakfast show, with more of a lifestyle push and glamorous female presenters.
The problem was that people quite enjoyed The One Show as they'd just got home and were ready to relax with it, whereas in the morning they would not be so forgiving, and that viewers want to be able to relate to presenters on UK TV, not aspire to be them. People are in a bad enough mood in the morning getting ready to go out to their crap job, they don't want the first face to meet them on TV being someone who's making a fortune, who looks great and is going out with a footballer to rub it in.
Had TVAM collapsed it's not necessarily the case that someone else would have jumped in, although that is the more likely case. The IBA may have decided it was not financially viable, or everyone else may have withdrawn their interest. In Ireland RTE doesn't have a strong tradition of breakfast television, partially down to union problems, and has left it a bit late to establish itself. Admittedly, that's a far smaller potential audience.
An excellent response, Thank You. The loss of TV-AM would have been a huge embarrassment to the IBA but maybe not the ITV companies themselves. ITV was then a federation of companies with limited contact with each other.
TV-AM's demise probably wouldn't have impacted much on Yorkshire et al. Whereas if Daybreak had gone bust the united ITV we have now might have been more seriously affected.
However the other possibility is that the IBA may have offered the breakfast contract to another company with the tacit understanding that they do what they thought was right.
Eg. A consortium of ITN, Disney and LWT would probably go for a more populist mix of cartoons and maybe the odd comedy with ITN providing the "hard news".
Such a re-offering may very well have been a poisoned chalice but such a lineup as described above may have been the "antidote"
:-(
A former member
I still wonder why it took till 1984 for the Wide awake club to be brought? Roland rat that got the viewers in, so why not in the weekend aswell..
SW
Because they had other kids shows at the weekend before the Wide Awake Club- Data Run was the big one, but they also had Summer Run (the same, but in the summer, and the first show hosted by Timmy Mallett) and SPLAT. But in 1984 they were axed and The Wide Awake Club arrived in its place - the first production of Nick Wilson as new Head of Children's Programmes, who'd replaced Anne "Teletubbies" Wood.
I still wonder why it took till 1984 for the Wide awake club to be brought? Roland rat that got the viewers in, so why not in the weekend aswell..
Because they had other kids shows at the weekend before the Wide Awake Club- Data Run was the big one, but they also had Summer Run (the same, but in the summer, and the first show hosted by Timmy Mallett) and SPLAT. But in 1984 they were axed and The Wide Awake Club arrived in its place - the first production of Nick Wilson as new Head of Children's Programmes, who'd replaced Anne "Teletubbies" Wood.
:-(
A former member
I still wonder why it took till 1984 for the Wide awake club to be brought? Roland rat that got the viewers in, so why not in the weekend aswell..
Because they had other kids shows at the weekend before the Wide Awake Club- Data Run was the big one, but they also had Summer Run (the same, but in the summer, and the first show hosted by Timmy Mallett) and SPLAT. But in 1984 they were axed and The Wide Awake Club arrived in its place - the first production of Nick Wilson as new Head of Children's Programmes, who'd replaced Anne "Teletubbies" Wood.
I never know that, do you know what time Splat started? As Michael Parkinson has Saturday show which rated well.