The Ratings Thread (Part 61)

1159160162164165536

Comments

  • AoibheannRoseAoibheannRose Posts: 1,617
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    wizzywick wrote: »
    I find all this "Oh Samuel, you're derailing the thread" stuff hilarious. He isn't derailing the thread at all! He's passionate about what he feels (and he does make some bonkers statements sometimes and does tend to get carried away on occasion) and you guys just get wound up by him because he openly, honestly, and passionately supports BBC1. So what? Do trainspotters annoy you all too? Do you find people with differing opinions and ideals annoying everywhere you go? Samuel has a passion for something you guys don't.

    As a casual viewer of this thread, his posts often make me laugh because they're just so out there! I honestly can't believe that he's a 'real person'. He has to be playing a part surely (that part being a wind up merchant), something which he does very well! If he is genuine, then it's all quite sad.
  • C14EC14E Posts: 32,165
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Will the extra hour of Coronation St limit the minutes of commercials ITV can air during X Factor and Whicher that night?

    Am I right in thinking they sometimes air things like Surprise Surprise with some ad-free breaks in order to pack extra ads into X Factor and Abbey/Celeb?

    I think they should be able to air Surprise Surprise with a full complement of ads as they usually only have XF/DA after it (possibly different if DA is extended length perhaps?). It's the 10pm hour that they have very little advertising (when Life Stories aired there it sometimes had only one proper break with the others being bumpers and a trailer).

    The fact that Whicher is 2 hours long means it is an unusually long night for itv, Although Whicher being 2 hours long limits them anyway (as they get one less break for a 2 hour show than they would for 2 separate 1 hour shows). They certainly might as well get every minute they can out of Corrie now, it's function as an anchor for the night has been somewhat limited!

    I doubt they'll change long term though - Sundays seem like the obvious slot for Corrie to default to. Thursdays at 8.30pm being the only other option but that never seemed to be a comfortable fit.
  • PizzatheactionPizzatheaction Posts: 20,157
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    NeilVW wrote: »
    They're allowed 40 minutes between 6 and 11pm, and no more than 12 in a clock hour. If they use the maximum over three hours they have only 4 minutes left in the other two.
    Thank you, Neil. :)
  • AlbacomAlbacom Posts: 34,578
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Honestly, if the boost was on the other foot I really don't think you would be quite so supportive of him. Since you support the BBC it doesn't quite irritate you as much since he's talking about the channel you like. If you take his posts and swap ITV with BBC and rad again; tell me honestly that you wouldn't find his posts irritating?

    Frankly I'm fed up of his silly chat of destroying ITV, its not constructive, its not debatable and its not smart - its just trolling.

    You assume that I am I supporter of the BBC and that's that. The truth is I am a supporter of British TV in general. At present I tend to lean towards the BBC because they provide a much more varied and frankly, better output than ITV. It wasn't always the case. I was devestated, literally, when TVS closed down and changed to Meridian. My TV was on ITV the whole time my TV was on when TVS was in existence. But, ITV has declined in variety and output. It is now primarily a soap channel.

    I wouldn't find posts annoying from Samuel or anyone else if I was a supporter of ITV because at the end of the day I would bypass them. Do you not think it's just as odd to be as protective over a channel as it is to favour one? Rather than just decry Samuels posts, counter them. Tell him WHY you believe ITV doesn't deserve bashing. Tell him WHY his view is wrong. I agree that he carries things too far and some of his posts are cringe worthy, but laugh out loud funny. It's only if you take them seriously does it become a problem.

    I note that you have expressed disappointment in ITV recently. I find it sad , genuinely sad, that Britains once most watched channel has been reduced to what it is today. I long for the days when the UK has two strong channels once again. ITV need to move away from murder dramas. It's all they seem to make these days.
  • PizzatheactionPizzatheaction Posts: 20,157
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    C14E wrote: »
    I think they should be able to air Surprise Surprise with a full complement of ads as they usually only have XF/DA after it (possibly different if DA is extended length perhaps?). It's the 10pm hour that they have very little advertising (when Life Stories aired there it sometimes had only one proper break with the others being bumpers and a trailer).

    The fact that Whicher is 2 hours long means it is an unusually long night for itv, I'd imagine if they do bump up against those limits they'll save in the 10pm hour where they typically don't advertise. Although Whicher being 2 hours long limits them anyway (as they get fewer breaks for a 2 hour show than they would for 2 separate 1 hour shows). They certainly might as well get every minute they can out of Corrie now, it's function as an anchor for the night has been somewhat destroyed!

    I doubt they'll change long term though - Sundays seem like the obvious slot for Corrie to default to. Thursdays at 8.30pm being the only other option but that never seemed to be a comfortable fit.
    Thanks, C14E. :)
  • C14EC14E Posts: 32,165
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Thanks, C14E. :)

    You're welcome, although Neil did it far more succinctly than my rambling!

    Thanks for those numbers Neil, I'd forgotten the exact limits.
  • jlp95bwfcjlp95bwfc Posts: 18,259
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    I have to say I'm quite disappointed that the GBBO tonight morphed into X Factor/Big Brother with producer manipulation/editing causing a Twitter meltdown leading to the online abuse of a contestant. It should be a fun family show but tonight's episode was clearly edited in order to create controversy. There may be a short term ratings boost but the show's integrity was damaged tonight.
  • grahamzxygrahamzxy Posts: 11,920
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    As a casual viewer of this thread, his posts often make me laugh because they're just so out there! I honestly can't believe that he's a 'real person'. He has to be playing a part surely (that part being a wind up merchant), something which he does very well! If he is genuine, then it's all quite sad.

    SamuelW brings more content to this thread than many here - if posters don't like him, then put him on ignore or skim past him, but to the complainers here - there is nothing worse than a stuck record - we get that you don't like his posts - for one maybe consider stopping quoting them, secondly ignore or debate them - your choice.

    I doubt SamuelW wants or needs strangers to feel sad - I know this thread doesn't. I have a couple of other posters here on permanent ignore, the thread flows a lot better without certain negative input. I don't necessarily support anyone's agenda here - moaning does jar though.......
  • guestofsethguestofseth Posts: 5,303
    Forum Member
    I wondered when the GBBO thing would be spun that way by someone on here. Surprised it's taken so long, can't say I'm surprised by the poster doing it though.

    It was portrayed in the same way other incidents like this have been in the past, like when Deborah stole Howard's custard or when Sue elbowed his muffins (the ridiculousness of this sentence is why I love the show so much. :D) It's nothing new at all.
  • jlp95bwfcjlp95bwfc Posts: 18,259
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    I wondered when the GBBO thing would be spun that way by someone on here. Surprised it's taken so long, can't say I'm surprised by the poster doing it though.

    It was portrayed in the same way other incidents like this have been in the past, like when Deborah stole Howard's custard or when Sue elbowed his muffins (the ridiculousness of this sentence is why I love the show so much. :D) It's nothing new at all.

    You think it's acceptable for the producers to edit the show in a way that is blatantly going to lead to the (most probably unfair) online abuse of an old woman?

    My post isn't spin at all. It is my opinion. The Twitter abuse is fact and has drawn response from the presenters of the show.
  • Andy ParishAndy Parish Posts: 527
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    johnnymc wrote: »
    Danny Cohen revealed in his interview at the television festival in Edinburgh, that he had no plans to move "Top Gear" to BBC one. It had been subject to discussion over the years but he doesn't feel its the right move. Its nothing to do with the presenters, if he says its moving it moves. The show isnt going to change channels.

    Clarkson will be lucky to stay on air at all. I agree he should go. Cohen did not do enough.
    Why hasn't it moved it then? Every other successful BBC2 show tends to switch. Cohen knows full well that Top Gear has been the biggest BBC export for several years now, he is fully aware it brings in the most money and is key to the 'BBC brand' Worldwide. He also knows the show would not be the success it is now if it moved channels.

    It's not shifted to BBC One because (a) The format would have to change (dumb down) (b) Clarkson and maybe May/Hammond would leave (c) We'd get boring (I'm never going to say anything wrong presenters) (d) The show would quickly lose it's unique appeal and die.

    It's staying on BBC2 because it 'works in the current format' it makes loads of cash for BBC Worldwide and the viewers love the presenters! If that's not the case, the beeb would have got rid of Clarkson years ago!
  • cylon6cylon6 Posts: 25,483
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    johnnymc wrote: »
    Danny Cohen revealed in his interview at the television festival in Edinburgh, that he had no plans to move "Top Gear" to BBC one. It had been subject to discussion over the years but he doesn't feel its the right move. Its nothing to do with the presenters, if he says its moving it moves. The show isnt going to change channels.

    Clarkson will be lucky to stay on air at all. I agree he should go. Cohen did not do enough.

    They've tried to move Top Gear for several years before Danny Cohen was at The BBC. The presenters have always said they resisted it. There was a period where BBC1 was doing awful numbers on Sunday and were desperate for it. It never moved.
  • Andy ParishAndy Parish Posts: 527
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    cylon6 wrote: »
    They've tried to move Top Gear for several years before Danny Cohen was at The BBC. .. It never moved.
    Top Gear gear is the BBC's biggest brand. Johnnymc reckons they should have got rid of Clarkson! :confused: The fact that they didn't get rid of him after all of his silly 'tongue-in-cheek' gaffs says it all really.
  • JCRJCR Posts: 24,028
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Why hasn't it moved it then? Every other successful BBC2 show tends to switch. Cohen knows full well that Top Gear has been the biggest BBC export for several years now, he is fully aware it brings in the most money and is key to the 'BBC brand' Worldwide. He also knows the show would not be the success it is now if it moved channels.

    It's not shifted to BBC One because (a) The format would have to change (dumb down) (b) Clarkson and maybe May/Hammond would leave (c) We'd get boring (I'm never going to say anything wrong presenters) (d) The show would quickly lose it's unique appeal and die.

    It's staying on BBC2 because it 'works in the current format' it makes loads of cash for BBC Worldwide and the viewers love the presenters! If that's not the case, the beeb would have got rid of Clarkson years ago!

    Clarkson owned 30% of the Top Gear brand till 2012, when Worldwide bought him out for £8.4 million. Presumably it would have been impossible to move it before that point if Clarkson was against it.
  • AlbacomAlbacom Posts: 34,578
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    jlp95bwfc wrote: »
    You think it's acceptable for the producers to edit the show in a way that is blatantly going to lead to the (most probably unfair) online abuse of an old woman?

    My post isn't spin at all. It is my opinion. The Twitter abuse is fact and has drawn response from the presenters of the show.

    Twitter response aside, of course producers are going to manipulate a programme for effect. That's why they're producers. The simple fact is, why didn't Diane put his ice cream into the freezer? It was mean, but nevertheless a TV show will create drama when there isn't one. All types of shows like this do it. Do you complain about those? I can't and won't discuss the twitter thing though. I loathe Twitter and I find it utter horrid.
  • rr22rr22 Posts: 7,618
    Forum Member
    Top Gear gear is the BBC's biggest brand. Johnnymc reckons they should have got rid of Clarkson! :confused: The fact that they didn't get rid of him after all of his silly 'tongue-in-cheek' gaffs says it all really.


    "Top Gear" isn't the BBC's biggest brand. I understand that "Top Gear" has its fans in Clarkson but he should have gone, he was already warned about racist comments and then he did it again. I'm sure a better replacement presenter could easily be found without those awful stereotypical views, he doesn't have a place in a public broadcasting environment and I look forward to when he is no longer on television.
  • ftvftv Posts: 31,668
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    The BBC has confirmed filming has finished on Waterloo Road, the last ten episodes will be screened next year.

    Caroline Flack is the latest celebrity unveiled for SCD

    -The Sun
  • tony-wtony-w Posts: 487
    Forum Member
    jlp95bwfc wrote: »
    ... causing a Twitter meltdown...

    Oh, I had to laugh at that statement, If one was to go out in the street and shout their views, they would deemed 'mental'.
    Post the same garbage via Twitter and suddenly you are a part of a debate..never more has the roll eyes emoticon been so needed :)
  • NeilVWNeilVW Posts: 8,635
    Forum Member
    SCD definitely seem to be aiming for a younger demographic this year: maybe a response to the high average age of BBC One?
  • nick202nick202 Posts: 9,919
    Forum Member
    ftv wrote: »
    The BBC has confirmed filming has finished on Waterloo Road, the last ten episodes will be screened next year.

    Caroline Flack is the latest celebrity unveiled for SCD

    -The Sun

    That's a really naff signing - someone who's most 'famous' for having it off with someone from One Direction. We're still missing those bigger, more established names that the audience will know - Felicity Kendal, etc.
  • rr22rr22 Posts: 7,618
    Forum Member
    NeilVW wrote: »
    SCD definitely seem to be aiming for a younger demographic this year: maybe a response to the high average age of BBC One?

    I think you are right. There's a large part of the cast that are skewing younger this year. Also having Claudia there as a new presenter revitalises it. I think they want younger viewers as well as their original audience. Its feels like a response to the BBC Trust.
  • FuddFudd Posts: 166,867
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    Damn you BBC One - now you've moved Strictly I'm going to have to rethink next week's DSRPG schedule. :mad::D

    If I'm right this will be the first full clash since 2009? It's going to be interesting considering what both shows have been through since.
  • D.M.N.D.M.N. Posts: 34,167
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    As much as we all agree that ITV's Summer has been absolutely shocking, surely we also agree then a stronger ITV means a stronger ITV in the longer term?

    A weaker ITV means that BBC can rest on its laurels in key slots because there is no competition in my opinion. It would be frankly boring if one channel thrashed the other day in, day out in every single shot. We need a competitive commercial market, and that includes Channel 4, 5 and Sky, for the BBC to prosper.
  • ftvftv Posts: 31,668
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    As one who watches neither programme it seems churlish and plain stupid for both broadcasters to indulge in this sort of pettiness as there must be a considerable audience overlap between the two.It is not the BBC's job to try and decimate ITV's ratings but to provide entertainment for its licence payers. How strange that in 336 hours of broadcasting this is the only slot that can be found for these two programmes.Danny Cohen at the BBC is supposed to take the overall view of programmes and scheduling - any chance he might actually do his job for once ?
  • rr22rr22 Posts: 7,618
    Forum Member
    ftv wrote: »
    As one who watches neither programme it seems churlish and plain stupid for both broadcasters to indulge in this sort of pettiness as there must be a considerable audience overlap between the two.It is not the BBC's job to try and decimate ITV's ratings but to provide entertainment for its licence payers. How strange that in 336 hours of broadcasting this is the only slot that can be found for these two programmes.Danny Cohen at the BBC is supposed to take the overall view of programmes and scheduling - any chance he might actually do his job for once ?

    He's not running BBC one scheduling.
This discussion has been closed.