The difference being that neither broadcaster is trying to dictate where the rival soap is scheduled.

So, why are ITV attemping to dictate Strictly's scheduling?

Both the BBC and ITV want their entertainment shows in the heart of the primetime schedule, so why don't they just alternate the broadcast times each week between early primetime (18:00-20:00) and later primetime (20:00-22:00). For Example:

Week 1 - Strictly then X Factor
Week 2 - X Factor then Strictly
Week 3 - Strictly then X Factor...

By doing this both shows can get an advantage and the viewers will be pleased.

I've already addressed the soaps situation in my previous post.

As for SCD/XF last year, ITV did not attempt to dictate where the BBC could schedule SCD last year.

There is no problem with broadcasters reacting to one another's schedules, and scheduling their own programmes accordingly.

However, what would be a problem, is what you're advocating: the BBC and ITV sitting down together and schedule-fixing.

It's the same situation. The agreement is that they will not clash the soaps and Cowell/ITV want a similar gentlemans agreement for the 2 entertainment shows (and believed that such an agreement already existed as they have now avoided each other for almost 2 series with ITV deliberately scheduling XF outwith the Strictly slot wherever possible). When ITV schedule Corrie at 8.30pm on Thursday, they "dictate" that the BBC cannot schedule Eastenders there. They don't go to the BBC and ask for permission, they just do it and trust that the agreement will still stand.

Applying that idea to XF/SCD, when ITV schedule X Factor for 8pm, they "dictate" that the BBC cannot schedule Strictly there. It doesn't matter where else it goes. It can be 6pm Saturdays, 8.30pm Fridays or 4.30am on Monday mornings. Just so long as it doesn't clash. When the BBC eventually add a 5th episode of Eastenders, if they put it at 7.30pm on Wednesday, they dictate that ITV cannot schedule Corrie there. And if the BBC schedule Strictly at 6pm, ITV would not move The X Factor to clash with it. The problem here is that the BBC have moved and extended Strictly first and done so in a way that is exceptionally difficult to avoid.

The BBC have made changes that they knew would result in a negative reaction from the media. They're getting that reaction. Plus, they're losing the ratings war which they have instigated.

It's also worth noting that ITV aren't saying much at all. They are supposedly offering to move and Cowell suggested doing whatever was required to avoid a clash.

The ship has sailed now and the BBC cannot go back on what they have done. They have to make do with the negative press and the lower ratings. But if the BBC were to move Strictly back to 6pm next year, they wouldn't even need to phone ITV or discuss it. ITV would simply react to that and schedule The X Factor for a slot where no clash occurred.

But WHY does it have to be SCD that has to take the early slot? It gives the impression that TXF is somehow superior and more important and deserves the later slot. Both shows are of the same stock and deserve to have a fair chance of attracting as many viewers as possible which is beneficial to the viewing public. That is an advantage of being at the heart of primetime

The reason that the onus is on BBC to move (back) is that they are the ones that moved and instigated the clash. Strictly has been on early for years. And it did better there than it did with this move.

Similarly, if ITV scheduled an hour long Corrie for 7.30pm on Mondays and there was a media backlash, ITV would be expected to back down and return Corrie to its former slot. You wouldn't expect the BBC to move Eastenders from its established slot just because ITV broke the "agreement". So in this case, you wouldn't expect ITV to suddenly rearrange their schedule at this late stage just because Strictly has moved. (it's not practical either, ITV have commissioned for Saturdays nights assuming the same schedules as the past few years)

I understand that, but why does TXF have a right to a later time slot? SCD and TXF have moved around the schedules the entire time. It's not as if they always have a set time slot like the soaps (for example).

Me neither. A quick MediaGuardian search shows it premiered on C4 back in November 2007 with an unimpressive 2.5 million viewers and a 12% share.

In the past year, it has been shown EIGHT times in total across C4's channels. (excluding +1s)

With that in mind, I wouldn't be surprised if it's sub 1m on Monday with all the competition elsewhere.

Strictly has almost always occupied the earlier slot. It's never regularly had a later slot.

And for all the crowing about it performing better in a later slot, this move has only disadvantaged Strictly. For all the controversy they've done themselves no favours at all.

I actually agree with you to an extent about that, but one could also argue that the new format has affected it's ratings, hence the drop in ratings from Friday to Saturday.

No they won't - nothing worse than programmes moving around the schedule week in week out, like we saw with Merlin last year, switching from 5.50pm one week to 7.35pm the next.

And for viewers like myself who just watch the one (X Factor in my case), all I care about is what time The X Factor is one. I don't particularly care if it's 6pm or 9pm, but expect some consistency week in, week out.


It's all publicity though at the end of the day, and anyone who thinks otherwise is rather naive. Simon Cowell couldn't care less whether the show is against Strictly or not.

There have always been light entertainment clashes on a Saturday night. IIRC the ratings for Larry Grayson's Generation Game were hit in the early eighties when ITV screened their new show Game For A Laugh up against it. And in the 90s we had Noel's House Party against Blind Date. So what's the big difference here?

This is about ITV bullying - of expecting the BBC to roll over and play dead. It's Simon Cowell having an over-inflated opinion of his own self-importance. It's ITV not having confidence in their own programme. They obviously kicked up a fuss because they expected to lose. Well, you didn't, so shut the f*** up and just get on with it.

BBC1 drew up exactly the right schedule for their programmes. The family adventure series first, not too early that it only has 3m viewers. The light entertainment event at the centre of the evening.

There are occasions when two programmes I like clash and, you know what, I live with it: I record one programme or iplayer it or watch the repeat later in the week. Or I miss one of the programmes - and life goes on


You might like to send this suggestion to Simon Cowell and Jay Hunt though I'm not sure the last 5 words would be entirely accurate.

He would if it was having a detrimental effect. As it is, I'd say the effect of Strictly being on the other side has been negligible. And crucially, TXF (and ITV1) won the ratings war and by a respectable margin as well.

It's nothing to do with confidence in their own programme. Considering the slot they gave it, they obviously had confidence in it. ITV won comfortably. But the ratings (for everyone) could be better if they implemented some common sense scheduling.


Exactly the right schedule... yet they have lost viewers? Surely, if this is a great scheduling move, the BBC shows should have increased their year-on-year ratings?

This isnt the 1980's. ITV is fighting for its survial. The BBC is trying to kill its biggest show for its own purposes. Alas it didnt work and now the BBC has dug a big PR hole for itself. And it keeps digging. Oh what delicious irony.

Couldn't agree more.

This is what irritates me. Cowell, ITV and the tabloids all think that TXF (and BGT) are the best TV shows ever created in the history of British TV and they all take it way too seriously anyway, they all somehow think TXF deserves a later, more exclusive, timeslot. It's just a jumped up karaoke contest with deluded wannabe's, just like strictly is a show about B-list celebs trying to ressurect their careers.

Cowell, ITV and the tabloids need TXF for their own reasons and will do anything to tarnish the opposition as long as it keeps TXF strong and the public lap it all up. The hysteria that surrounds it is ridiculous.

But that's all they are, TV shows, hyped up to the extreme. These types of shows would be more enjoyable if they stopped taking themselves so seriously.

How dare anyone criticise the BBC? Its so hard to get by on £3bn a year.

And what wonderful irony again to attack ITV for celeb's when its SCD that is full of Z list celebs.

The BBC fans really are angry tonight. Must be a sign of how badly BBC mangt did today. I think they are using Iain Paisleys PR firm

"NO!!!!, NO!!!!!!!!!!, NOOOOOOOOOO!! NEVER!!!!!! NOT AN INCH!! NO SURRENDER!!!!!!!!

What chance an agreement by Good Friday?

I'm not pro or anti BBC and I'm not pro or anti ITV. Both institutions have strengths and weaknesses. For me, this is an argument about TV shows, not networks.

Nobody from ITV, Syco or Talkback Thames or anyone on the show has ever said that. It's not a matter of deserving the timeslot because it's better, as has been explained time and time again.

Why is it that in this more exclusive timeslot, Strictly lost viewers?


Then watch Xtra Factor. It spends a considerable amount of time joking about the hysteria on the main show. Indeed, the ITV1 show even got in on it by taking the pi*s out of the dramatic shots of the judges the other week.

Sounds good. I'll have to give it a go

A break from the XF / SCD talk for a moment, can't we just have a laugh about Live from Studio Five's dismal performances ?

I mean 230,000

Five need to do the decent thing, put it out of it's misery.

I wonder if the ratings will drop any further

I had the misfortune of catching this the other day. Ian Wright always looks like he's about to jump up from out of his chair, but he just can't make it.

No, it isn't, because ITV are not (yet, anyway!) trying to dictate where EastEnders can or can't be scheduled.


Trying to keep two soaps apart, is not the same as actively dictating where a rival broadcaster's entertainment show can or cannot be scheduled.


No dictating, there. Just ITV hoping Coronation St will be given an easy ride.


Moving The X Factor to 8pm was an attempt at a pre-emptive land grab, in the hope of keeping SCD out of primetime. No harm in trying, and nothing wrong with trying. ITV took a gamble and it didn't work out. But, instead of accepting it, they instead chose to move into bully-boy tactics, by trying to dictate SCD should be moved out of a slot it has every right to be in.



Everything the BBC does gets a negative reaction from the media, because the media wants to tear the BBC down. However, the media's reaction does not make the BBC's scheduling wrong.


ITV shouldn't be saying anything at all, because it is not their place to dictate the BBC's schedules.


They probably don't want to. The schedule is working very well for the BBC, for ITV, and for the viewers.


There will always be negative press, because that's the way the press treat the BBC. Lower ratings than what? Certainly not lower than the 2m Weakest Link audience the previous Saturday.


Really? ITV were perfectly happy to schedule X Factor against early SCD starts in the past. There's nothing to suggest they wouldn't do it again.

I wouldn't be entirely surprised if it was Sky1, they seem to be buying lots of FOX shows over the past 2 years or so (Lie To Me, Fringe, House, 24, Prison Break, Bones).

Glee does seem a bit out of keeping with those and does skew young which is why I'd have thought E4.

Whoever gets it, hopefully they promote it well.


Around about that, I think. More important is the 18-49 number and I've seen 1.8 mentioned quite often (1.5 being a bare minimum). To be down there within a week is a bit of a worry as nobody expects him to improve over the season. He should recover a bit tonight. Better lead-in and probably weaker competition on ABC and CBS who both go with new series.


It can't be long until we get a presenter change.

I really can't get my head around the choice of presenters. It just makes the show seem so trashy yet they're not big enough names to draw in viewers anyway (if that was the plan).

Why didn't they get some professional presenters or even a comedian or two?

Bit of a wild accusation there, George.