“The alternative of not closing BBC3 [as a broadcast service] would have been the closure of another service (or other services) with a greater impact on overall audience performance given the lack of commensurate mitigation options.”
That BIB which I added to the BBC's quote would be contextually correct. This is underlined by this quote from the BBC Trust consultation page:
In summary, the Executive is proposing to close BBC Three as a broadcast channel and to reinvent it online. The proposed online service will target the 16-34 age group.
They may not be closing it now, but we all know it's coming. I'm going to guess they use poor iPlayer ratings as justification. Bet they won't admit it though...
BBC claim they are 'closing' it in their justification.
“The alternative of not closing BBC3 would have been the closure of another service (or other services) with a greater impact on overall audience performance given the lack of commensurate mitigation options.”
Well that horse sh!t, considering the closure of BBC Three isn't actually going to save any money, the reasoning that something else would have to be axed instead in nonsense.
I think he is referring to the fact that BBC iplayer is accessible on a number of different platforms, i.e. iOS, android, xbox etc. At the last count this was about 24, I think.
Ahh! Program (as in iPlayer itself), not programme (as in the things shown on iPlayer) Right?
Will BBC 4 HD be moving to PSB3 as part of these proposals after all BBC 3 will no longer be using the capacity and it would save the BBC money paying for com7?
BBC 4 HD should be broadcast nationally NOT just from com7 transmitters.
Will BBC 4 HD be moving to PSB3 as part of these proposals after all BBC 3 will no longer be using the capacity and it would save the BBC money paying for com7?
BBC 4 HD should be broadcast nationally NOT just from com7 transmitters.
That is a point. Axing one of there channels will save money that way.
Will BBC 4 HD be moving to PSB3 as part of these proposals after all BBC 3 will no longer be using the capacity and it would save the BBC money paying for com7?
BBC 4 HD should be broadcast nationally NOT just from com7 transmitters.
That would make sense and, as you say, would potentially save money.
However, isn't the intention to launch BBC 1+1 which will save no transmission costs at all? And leave many without BBC4 in HD?
I actually think it's a good thing that our national broadcaster is trying non-linear broadcasting for a channel, but they're lying if they suggest it's going to contribute anything to the BBC's savings.
I actually think it's a good thing that our national broadcaster is trying non-linear broadcasting for a channel, but they're lying if they suggest it's going to contribute anything to the BBC's savings.
Let's suppose that you needed to buy a new car but did not have enough cash. You cannot work longer hours, you don't have the option for overtime (i.e. your income is fixed). You'd then probably seek to make savings within your monthly spending (*such as going out less, buying cheaper food items etc) in order to be able to afford that car.
Well, this is much the same with the BBC - for example, they want to (need to, as instructed by the BBC Trust) improve BBC one drama, so are seeking savings in other areas in order to be able to afford those improvements.
Robbing Peter to pay Paul.
Even big businesses do a similar thing - big supermarkets cut costs in one area (i.e. save money) in order to finance other things (such a permanent price cuts)
From reading that it isn't really clear why they need to close BBC3. When the proposal was to use the channel's space to show extended CBBC and an evening BBC1+1, it was obvious what was taking BBC3's place. Now BBC1+1 is going to be 24 hours on a different stream and CBBC is extending by two hours, so what fills the rest of the current BBC3 channel space after 9pm?
Yes, but generally they don't try and lie about it, and claim it's saving money, when it isn't.
Anyway, Danny Cohen claimed that the iPlayer original content budget is (at least partially) going to be handed to BBC Three, so it's possible the saving will come from that pot.
(And if one could speculate, one might speculate that this manoueve had been simplified down to cutting BBC Three for political reasons, and that the BBC might be trying to curry political favour amongst certain pretentious non-BBC Three loving types with the move...)
From reading that it isn't really clear why they need to close BBC3. When the proposal was to use the channel's space to show extended CBBC and an evening BBC1+1, it was obvious what was taking BBC3's place. Now BBC1+1 is going to be 24 hours on a different stream and CBBC is extending by two hours, so what fills the rest of the current BBC3 channel space after 9pm?
The BBC's inconsistency on this could hurt them badly. Previously I've been up in the air on this but on balance if the BBC want youth programming to be the next TOTP it WILL bite them in the posterior and there could conceivably be a move by the tories to get them to give up the channel space. So even if they don't have the money to do anything but show Indiana Jones films, Family Guy and Doctor Who repeats they should probably hang on to it.
Also as much as young people probably spend most of their time online it isn't on the i-player and most kids I know still do their TV viewing in a linear fashion. There's a real need for the BBC to attract teenage viewers to their programmes and get them off American series like Violetta or tele-reality bshows as they are the future viewers of tommorow.
All they need to do to save money and close a channel for their beloved BBC One +1 is to merge the childrens channels.
5am - 7am Cbeebies
7am - 9am CBBC
9am - 3pm Cbeebies
3pm - 7pm (or 9pm) CBBC
On weekends and holidays make it more of a general childrens channel with the younger programming up until noon and gradually after 5pm aim it squarely at 10 year olds +
All ages are catered for and nobody looses out. This also 'helps' citv and the rest of the commercial sector as there is less competition from the BBC.
I pretty much gave them this simple piece of advice on my consultation form, saving everybody millions of pounds in 'research'
All they need to do to save money and close a channel for their beloved BBC One +1 is to merge the childrens channels.
5am - 7am Cbeebies
7am - 9am CBBC
9am - 3pm Cbeebies
3pm - 7pm (or 9pm) CBBC
On weekends and holidays make it more of a general childrens channel with the younger programming up until noon and gradually after 5pm aim it squarely at 10 year olds +
All ages are catered for and nobody looses out. This also 'helps' citv and the rest of the commercial sector as there is less competition from the BBC.
I pretty much gave them this simple piece of advice on my consultation form, saving everybody millions of pounds in 'research'
It's a nice idea, but it won't go down well with many parents, most of whom absolutely love CBeebies and the hours it covers. It is favoured far and above its rivals as there are no advertisements, it is of a very high standard and they trust the brand to be able to leave their kids watching it without close supervision while they get on with other things.
Having said all that I am seriously doubtful that this whole thing to take BBC Three off as a TV channel is really going to save that much money. We're talking about a saving of £30million a year at most. I know the BBC has been shafted by the current government and has been forced to cut budgets by about 20-25%, but £30m is a drop in the ocean. I don't know if this will be a repeat of 6 Music saga or if there is complex politics involved which is aimed to prove the popularity of BBC services, but none of it makes sense and I hope it doesn't backfire on the BBC exec, who I largely support and sympathise with: they are in an invidious position.
I would like CBBC to go 24 hours and after 9pm show some classic children's TV. Not going to happen but still. lol
The problem with merging CBBC and CBeebies is that the BBC would argue that they are two separate brand and that children would get confused. In away I would agree with that. If they were to merge I think the line up would be more;
In terms of BBC 3 I think it has a place on TV. If I am honest BBC 1,3,4 have their own personality to offer something different. As good as BBC 2 is all their content could merge in to the other channels very easily compared to others. I think going from newsnight into family guy on BBC 2 just would not sit right. If i was in charge I would merge 2 into 4 and move 2 into BBC 3 place and move BBC 3 into BBC 4 place. BBC must pay a lot to have the channel 2 licence and I think this is money not well spent.
In reality I think if BBC 3 stays then it would start at 9pm with CBBC taking the other 2 hours and BBC 3 would commission less content. But I would still rather have this than having BBC 1+1. If I miss a show I got to iPlayer or go to BBC 1 online. Where I can watch live and rewind up to 2-3 hours. So in my eyes BBC 1+1 is just silly and I would not benefit from it. I can see who can but it's not enough in my eyes.
I would happily give up BBC Parliament for BBC 1+1. All Parliament streams are online and they could do a today at Parliament on the BBC News channel. The fact on a Wednesday the BBC show Pm's questions on BBC 2, News and Parliament and radio is just stupid.
All they need to do to save money and close a channel for their beloved BBC One +1 is to merge the childrens channels.
5am - 7am Cbeebies
7am - 9am CBBC
9am - 3pm Cbeebies
3pm - 7pm (or 9pm) CBBC
For the same reason they could never merge BBC3 and BBC4; or BBC4 and BBC1. Different demographics and service licenses.
Will BBC 4 HD be moving to PSB3 as part of these proposals after all BBC 3 will no longer be using the capacity and it would save the BBC money paying for com7?
BBC 4 HD should be broadcast nationally NOT just from com7 transmitters.
CBBC HD timeshares with BBC Three HD on the PSB3 multiplex and under the proposals CBBC HD will broadcast until 21.00 taking some of BBC Three HD broadcast hours.
A solution which would please fans of BBC Four and pre school children but would be unpopular with older children would be to swap the frequencies of the HD channels moving BBC Four HD / Cbeebies HD from Com 7 to PSB3 and CBBC HD from PSB3 to COM7.
For the same reason they could never merge BBC3 and BBC4; or BBC4 and BBC1. Different demographics and service licenses.
They are different demographics but in the interest of saving money (forgetting the licences for this post) there's no reason why a new CBBC or Childrens BBC couldn't exist. The iPlayer option is still there and it seems odd that the current CBBC audience is at school during most of it's broadcast hours.
I don't want to see the closure of any BBC service but it does seem the most obvious solution to keep the majority happy and keeping future licence fee payers as viewers who will stay with the BBC brand, hopefully for life.
Could BBC save costs by closing down CBBC Monday to Friday between 09.00 - 15.00 during term time and use the capacity for an additional looped Red Button Service which also could be used as extra capacity during the day as an extra sport stream. It seems pointless the BBC are broadcasting children's programmes for older children when they are at school. The BBC could use the capacity when CBBC closes at 19.00 or 21.00 for BBC Two + 1
Comments
That BIB which I added to the BBC's quote would be contextually correct. This is underlined by this quote from the BBC Trust consultation page:
BBC 4 HD should be broadcast nationally NOT just from com7 transmitters.
That is a point. Axing one of there channels will save money that way.
That would make sense and, as you say, would potentially save money.
However, isn't the intention to launch BBC 1+1 which will save no transmission costs at all? And leave many without BBC4 in HD?
I actually think it's a good thing that our national broadcaster is trying non-linear broadcasting for a channel, but they're lying if they suggest it's going to contribute anything to the BBC's savings.
Well, this is much the same with the BBC - for example, they want to (need to, as instructed by the BBC Trust) improve BBC one drama, so are seeking savings in other areas in order to be able to afford those improvements.
Robbing Peter to pay Paul.
Even big businesses do a similar thing - big supermarkets cut costs in one area (i.e. save money) in order to finance other things (such a permanent price cuts)
Anyway, Danny Cohen claimed that the iPlayer original content budget is (at least partially) going to be handed to BBC Three, so it's possible the saving will come from that pot.
(And if one could speculate, one might speculate that this manoueve had been simplified down to cutting BBC Three for political reasons, and that the BBC might be trying to curry political favour amongst certain pretentious non-BBC Three loving types with the move...)
BBC Red Button 2???????
Also as much as young people probably spend most of their time online it isn't on the i-player and most kids I know still do their TV viewing in a linear fashion. There's a real need for the BBC to attract teenage viewers to their programmes and get them off American series like Violetta or tele-reality bshows as they are the future viewers of tommorow.
5am - 7am Cbeebies
7am - 9am CBBC
9am - 3pm Cbeebies
3pm - 7pm (or 9pm) CBBC
On weekends and holidays make it more of a general childrens channel with the younger programming up until noon and gradually after 5pm aim it squarely at 10 year olds +
All ages are catered for and nobody looses out. This also 'helps' citv and the rest of the commercial sector as there is less competition from the BBC.
I pretty much gave them this simple piece of advice on my consultation form, saving everybody millions of pounds in 'research'
It's a nice idea, but it won't go down well with many parents, most of whom absolutely love CBeebies and the hours it covers. It is favoured far and above its rivals as there are no advertisements, it is of a very high standard and they trust the brand to be able to leave their kids watching it without close supervision while they get on with other things.
Having said all that I am seriously doubtful that this whole thing to take BBC Three off as a TV channel is really going to save that much money. We're talking about a saving of £30million a year at most. I know the BBC has been shafted by the current government and has been forced to cut budgets by about 20-25%, but £30m is a drop in the ocean. I don't know if this will be a repeat of 6 Music saga or if there is complex politics involved which is aimed to prove the popularity of BBC services, but none of it makes sense and I hope it doesn't backfire on the BBC exec, who I largely support and sympathise with: they are in an invidious position.
I would like CBBC to go 24 hours and after 9pm show some classic children's TV. Not going to happen but still. lol
The problem with merging CBBC and CBeebies is that the BBC would argue that they are two separate brand and that children would get confused. In away I would agree with that. If they were to merge I think the line up would be more;
6am - 7am Cbeebies
7am - 8:30am CBBC
8:30am - 3:30pm Cbeebies
3:30pm - 9pm CBBC
In terms of BBC 3 I think it has a place on TV. If I am honest BBC 1,3,4 have their own personality to offer something different. As good as BBC 2 is all their content could merge in to the other channels very easily compared to others. I think going from newsnight into family guy on BBC 2 just would not sit right. If i was in charge I would merge 2 into 4 and move 2 into BBC 3 place and move BBC 3 into BBC 4 place. BBC must pay a lot to have the channel 2 licence and I think this is money not well spent.
In reality I think if BBC 3 stays then it would start at 9pm with CBBC taking the other 2 hours and BBC 3 would commission less content. But I would still rather have this than having BBC 1+1. If I miss a show I got to iPlayer or go to BBC 1 online. Where I can watch live and rewind up to 2-3 hours. So in my eyes BBC 1+1 is just silly and I would not benefit from it. I can see who can but it's not enough in my eyes.
I would happily give up BBC Parliament for BBC 1+1. All Parliament streams are online and they could do a today at Parliament on the BBC News channel. The fact on a Wednesday the BBC show Pm's questions on BBC 2, News and Parliament and radio is just stupid.
CBBC HD timeshares with BBC Three HD on the PSB3 multiplex and under the proposals CBBC HD will broadcast until 21.00 taking some of BBC Three HD broadcast hours.
A solution which would please fans of BBC Four and pre school children but would be unpopular with older children would be to swap the frequencies of the HD channels moving BBC Four HD / Cbeebies HD from Com 7 to PSB3 and CBBC HD from PSB3 to COM7.
Just notice. Sorry
They are different demographics but in the interest of saving money (forgetting the licences for this post) there's no reason why a new CBBC or Childrens BBC couldn't exist. The iPlayer option is still there and it seems odd that the current CBBC audience is at school during most of it's broadcast hours.
I don't want to see the closure of any BBC service but it does seem the most obvious solution to keep the majority happy and keeping future licence fee payers as viewers who will stay with the BBC brand, hopefully for life.