Both shows are occupying a slot that neither would usually occupy. They can both be "blamed".


They can't put Corrie on the Wednesday and run Thursday as usual. Then they would end up with Emmerdale getting slaughtered at 8pm and I'm A Celebrity getting a rubbish lead-in.

Corrie will definitely suffer, but overall, it's probably going to work out well for ITV. It's not ideal, but this is probably the best scenario for them given the hour long episode of Eastenders.

Deleted. DS is playing up again.

But like I said Corrie on a Thursday only gets about a million more viewers than Emmerdale doesn't it so who's to say it's going to perform much better than Emmerdale would in a clash with the hour long EastEnders thus being a stronger lead in for IAC. Why does IAC need a strong lead in? It's a solid brand now after how many years and wasn't exactly struggling in the ratings last year. Does it really need the support?

I reckon Emmerdale would have held around 5.5-6m against EE and Corrie will do the same. With EE about the same so it makes no difference apart from breaking the gentleman's agreement between Corrie and EE. EE is also going to be dented by the hour long Emmerdale and that is why I believe this has been done on purpose since the whole thing could have been avoided. A couple of solutions would've been to put Corrie on at 7 and Emmerdale on at half 7 for the hour as a Emmerdale vs EastEnders clash is nothing unusual and that wouldn't be breaking the agreement. Another option would've just been to move IAC back half an hour and keep to the normal schedule.

I think Corrie at 8pm, coming in off an hour long event episode of Emmerdale, is going to do considerably better (2m or so) than a single half hour of Emmerdale would have at 8pm.

If they did keep the usual gap, "soap viewers" would drift off to Eastenders and stick with it for an hour from 7.30pm to 8.30pm. They probably wouldn't return to ITV at 8pm.

IAC doesn't necessarily need the support. But it will do better with the strong lead-in. Even Britain's Got Talent gets a big boost from a Corrie lead-in.

I love it how it's ITV getting blamed for the soap clash with people seemingly forgetting that BBC1 had other options other than an hour long on Thursday. Coronation Street could move to Wednesday 7.30pm? Er, why couldn't EastEnders? What about the Tuesday 7.30pm slot, bumping Holby City to 8.30pm OR even dropping Holby City as it made up an episode a couple of weeks ago by airing on a Wednesday night.

Everyone is slating ITV, but the BBC had options but decided to instigate a soap clash anyway. Even if ITV had stuck to their usual schedule, there would've been a soap in the 9pm slot anyway. I criticised ITV openly for the stupid clash they kept causing on Tuesday's - the BBC have gone ahead and attempted the same thing, they deserve the same treatment.

Though as someone said earlier I wonder whether BBC1'll try and change things now, putting Traffic Cops at 8 and trying to get one up on I'm A Celeb? Basically the classic ITV sandwich move.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Last night: Good for BBC1 once again, though Watchdog suffered. Obviously EastEnders and New Tricks helped boost the share - no way should ITV be beaten share wise when they have 90 minutes of soaps splattering across the schedule. The Bill's stabilising again it seems.

Wednesday would not have worked for EastEnders as the BBC has Spooks and Waterloo Road. The BBC also don't like to move EastEnders to other days willy nilly apart from christmas unlike ITV with Corrie which has been all over the place lately. Corrie is just a regular half hour ITV could have moved it anywhere whereas the EastEnders episode has been written as a special. Why should BBC1 mess up their Tuesday schedule when it would've been easier just to have a one off clash with Emmerdale? There's no gentleman's agreement not to clash with Emmerdale and it's not like EastEnders and Emmerdale clashing is anything new.

I fail to see how this is the BBC's fault. What we're talking about here is the gentleman's agreement being broken and the two most popular shows of a specific genre clashing. That's the idiocy of this. Nobody cares about poor old Emmerdale it might be popular(ish) but it's not as popular or respected in the same way. Everyone had gotten used to the Emmerdale versus EastEnders clashes anyway thanks to ITV instigating them for a full year. If Corrie had not been moved forward there would have been no clash between it and EastEnders.

And don't try to tell me ITV couldn't have known about the hour long special as it's been in the BBC's provisional schedules for about 3 weeks now which ITV will have seen. ITV have instigated this clash. I work in the media and have access to these provisional schedules myself. You don't think everything is blind until 2/3 weeks before do you and that info isn't shared between both parties. Provisional schedules are often drawn up more than 3 weeks in advance. ITV knew about this.

The BBC didn't need to move it willy nilly. Tuesday night is just sitting there ready and waiting, especially as they appeared to prepare for this by having a second Holby City one week.

As for Wednesday night - it could've been covered at 7.30 for half hour, so it would still be aired two hours a week.


I don't think ITV are doing it to be awkward though - not this time. They're doing it because they see no point in splitting up I'm A Celeb. If they really wanted to cause trouble they would've kept Emmerdale where it was and moved Coronation Street to 7.30 - directly against EastEnders in it's usual slot.

The only other option ITV had (bar the 90 minute episode on Friday which would've been ridiculous IMO - Mad Maya Monday was bad enough) would've been a Sunday slot, which would've meant pointlessly ruining a well working schedule for nothing.

For me, BBC1 had more options that ITV1. Especially as they knew from the outset that Thursday night was (another) soap night on ITV1. Instead of coming to a compromise they set out to cause as many issues for soap fans as possible.

As I say - ITV were rightly criticised for clashing Emmerdale and EastEnders. The BBC should be as well when they were looking to do the same thing.

Well the BBC were only prepared to clash EastEnders with Emmerdale because they didn't have a lot of choice and it made sense to air EastEnders in its usual timeslot. Plus it's a one off. It's not as though the BBC have planned to air one hour of EastEnders every Thursday.

I take your point about having a 30 min EastEnders somewhere else but they had a big storyline culminating and decided to do a sixty minute special. Which to be fair to EastEnders is very rare you have to admit. Unlike Corrie and Emmerdale where Corrie is on for one hour every Monday and Friday and Emmerdale is on for one hour every Thursday albeit with 30 mins in between no matter what is happening in either soap. Then there's all the clashes ITV instigated between EastEnders and Emmerdale on purpose.

Though they could have planned it to come to a head for the Tuesday episode and have the hour long there. Children in Need has been the diary for a year now, so they could've easily asked for the script to be tinkered with to get it in line for an hour long Tuesday.

I agree in regards to the clashes between Emmerdale and EastEnders but now ITV have (finally ) seen sense it's typical of the big two that now the BBC go and start clashing similar genres. Can't both schedules be sane for just a little while???

If there is the time to ammend these schedules as has been suggested, I'd guess that the BBC will consider splitting the EE hour in two. It won't do much for EE's ratings - but it could be an opportunity to bequeath Gavin and Stacey a good inheritance, rather than let IAC pin it down from the start.

Speaking of Gavin and Stacey - I think some people are seriously underestimating it if they think its heading sub-4m. When it aired on BBC One last year, it had already aired on BBC Three to 1.5m+ on a first showing, and been repeated till infinity over the course of the following six months. 6.7m for the Christmas special demonstrates the market for it. Being the final series, its going to get an awful lot of press attention and I would be stunned if it didn't outrate QI, probably with something well over 5m, even against IAC.

Couldn't agree more. This hour long episode would have been planned months in advance. They weren't to know that "I'm a Celeb" was going to be brodcast during that particular week and at that time on that particular night.

Maybe Wednesday night would be a good option for EE as there is no real competition with regards to Emmerdale and Corrie who have a stranglehold on the schedules. :yawn:

Is I'm A Celeb slightly earlier this year, or Children in Need later? As stated earlier, they didn't go head to head last year - ITV aired Taggart.

Also...Danielle's death episode in EastEnders - was that an hour long? I can't remember, but if so I'm assuming that was aired before the ITV schedule revamp.


Or Tuesday maybe.

It's worth remembering that all ITV are doing is airing the episodes (and episode lengths) that are now usual for a Thursday night - albeit in a slightly different order. It's the BBC who are lengthening EastEnders.

Clearly?

Funny how they've never done so before.

Children in Need is one week later.

Anyway I think we should stop this EastEnders vs Coronation Street battle until...

a) the schedules change

OR

b) until the overnights come out on 27th November.

I've just noticed that Star Wars Episode III on ITV1 today is a (terrestrial TV) premiere - at five past four!!!

How the mighty have fallen. (Star Wars I mean, not ITV.)

Its difficult to fit all the good programmes into ITVs schedule right now. Its a 12A film, and should do well up against the BBC squuezing celebs into rubber holes or whatever nonsense they run now in early prime.

Reports suggest the line-up will be stellar compared to the very disappointing Z-listers in your beloved Hollyoaks Hokey Cokey competition.

It's been well known in the media since the start of October that EastEnders would have an hour long episode on Thursday 26th November. It was also well known that I'm a Celebrity would be on by then, but under the assumption that it would be starting at 9pm (like most other days).

For sure, EastEnders could have had an hour long on Tuesday or done something on Wednesday (although that looks difficult what with Jimmy's Food Factory occuping 7.30pm). But the BBC made a fair assumption that an hour long episode of EastEnders on the Thursday would mean a 30 minute clash against Emmerdale, not a disaster by any means as it's happened in the past many a time.

I'm a Celebrity had to be extended, which is fair enough because the day before it's not on. But there's no reason why ITV couldn't have dropped Corrie for that day and rescheduled it on another day. That's exactly what happened last year. When IAC started at 8.30pm, Corrie was dropped (never moved back half an hour) and usually rescheduled to make an extended Wednesday episode. I see no reason why they couldn't have done the same thing again.

But let's give ITV the benefit of the doubt and suppose that they really really needed to air Corrie that Thursday for whatever reason. Why not just air it on at 8.30pm as usual and IAC 9-10.30pm. That would mean no News at Ten, but that exact same scenario is happening the following day. Someone said that it's okay to move Friday's news later than normal but not Thursday's. Why is that the case? Ideally, news shouldn't be moved anyway. But if ITV are willing to move Friday's news, then I don't see why they couldn't move Thursday's news back as well.

The BBC's extension of EastEnders would have normally meant 30 mins of soap clashes. But ITV's scheduling reschuffle makes it 1hour long and EE vs Corrie, something that shouldn't really be happening. It's not as if the BBC can do much about it as the EE episode is a specially written hour long episode which is starting at the usual time. They can't just chop it and change it now, so in my opinion it's ITV's resposibility to move that Corrie 30 min episode somewhere else to ensure the "gentleman's agreement" isn't broken (assuming that there even is a gentleman's agreement).


Well I got the overnights from BARB anyway. A jump of 1.4m-->5.9m from overnight to official rating is way too high so clearly indicates that there's been an error in the way BARB's got that official rating. Maybe they added more regions to that rating so it's not only "London" News.

We've seen BARB make some mistakes in the past with certain ratings: EastEnders getting 2 ratings for 1 hour long episode, naming programmes incorrectliy, heck EastEnders was the most watched programme of 1992 with 24.30m but BARB doesn't even mention it in their "Most Watched Yearly list"!

For BGT Final, the overnights and officials match up. 17.3m--->18.3m. There's nothing suspect about BGT's rating.


I think for the Star Wars Episode II premiere, ITV had it on at 9pm but it did badly, only getting about 3m. Maybe this different approach will work better?

Which proves my point about the mighty fallen. ITV acquire a big movie and say "Nyah! Stick it on against Final Score"

I'm aware that movies on terrestrial TV don't have the pulling power they used to but Harry Potter and the Pirates Of The Carribbean films do good business and Star Wars must attract the young demographic ITV are so fond of.


They could have screened it on a Wednesday at 7 like they did recently with Harry Potter. Or giving it a slot over Christmas.

Or...

TV Burp finishes its current run on Nov 28th.
If the IAC final is on Fri 4th Dec then:
a) ITV are idiots; the final should be on the Sunday for maximum ratings (though I'd be delighted if its ratings collapsed.) and
b) they could have ran with this schedule on Dec 5th
5.20 YBF
5.50 Star Wars Episode III
8.30 X Factor

or if the IAC final is on the Sunday then
a) well done ITV, you're showing some brains; and
b) they could have had this schedule on the 5th
5.20 Star Wars
8.00 X Factor
9.15 IAC semi-final

or they could have gone with the YBF-inclusive schedule from above and added IAC at 9.45. They had both TXF and IAC running at 10pm on Saturday on occasion last year and both did very well in the ratings.

But as I say, they clearly have no desire to give SWE3 a decent slot cos it's not worth it.

Apparently, The Waters of Mars' run-time is 62 minutes, which might mean BBC One might be a few minutes behind schedule on 15th November if Waters of Mars' doesn't start until 19:01.

So then - starting early, or finishing late? No matter what, it could end up finishing at about 20:02, which if you ask me would be ITV's gift - while BBC are showing two or three trailers, The X Factor is just starting. I expect:

17:30 - BBC News
17:44 - Midlands Today
17:58 - Countryfile
18:59 - Doctor Who
20:02 - Antiques Roadshow
21:02 - Garrow's Law

As for ITV...

18:47 - Harry Hill's TV Burp
19:18 - All Star Family Fortunes
20:01 - The X Factor
21:01 - I'm A Celebrity... Get Me Out Of Here!

ITV, I think, will try and plan it so that The X Factor's music is on as soon as the Doctor Who credits come on.

Friday 6th November Overnights
BBC One
17:15- The Weakest Link: 2.21m
18:00- BBC News At Six: 4.41m (23.7%)
18:30- BBC Regional News: 5.49m (27.2%)
19:00- The One Show: 4.65m (21.8%)
20:00- EastEnders: 8.71m (38.5%)
20:30- A Question of Sport: 3.48m (14.9%)
21:00- Have I Got News For You: 4.81m (20.3%)
21:30- The Armstrong And Miller Show: 3.65m (15.9%)
22:00- BBC News At Ten: 4.00m (20.0%)
22:25- BBC Regional News: 4.13m (21.9%)
22:35- Friday Night With Jonathan Ross: 3.75m (27.0%)

BBC Two
17:15- Escape To The Country: 2.23m

ITV1
17:00- Goldenballs: 1.25m
18:30- ITV Evening News: 3.44m (17.0%)
19:00- Emmerdale: 6.72m (32.6%)
19:30- Coronation Street: 8.48m (38.6%)
20:30- Coronation Street: 8.46m (36.1%)
21:00- Benidorm: 6.01m (25.8%)

Channel 4
17:00- The Paul O'Grady Show: 2.06m

Five
17:30- Neighbours: 1.49m

Thanks to MattJ for the figures
---------------------------------------------------
Another solid 6m rating for Benidorm to finish off the series, which has averaged 5.9m in the overnights. EastEnders did well to top the day.

Interesting teatime slot figures. Escape the Country on BBC2 came out on top between 5.15-6pm! Goldenballs doing poorly.

Slightly surprising to see neither EastEnders or Coronation Street above 9m... suppose Bonfire Displays had an effect on both. Good rating for Benidorm. BBC One held up well though, again in the 9pm slot.

Will be interesting, for sure, to see how Collision does next week.

Also, Goldenballs rating looks very low - was it a repeat?

No it was new, viewers are just tired of it now and I think it's been axed. This 'series' is just burning off episodes that have been on the shelf for months.

Very good end for Benidorm, and it has been very consistent at 6m this series, as opposed to the gradual slide and boost for the finale from last year. HIGNFY seems to have taken something of a dent from it in the last few weeks. With Collision and I'm a Celebrity coming up, Io can't see it improving much.

As for Collision, I'm thinking 6.5m or so on Monday, and a gradual decline to about 5m on Friday.

Everything pretty much the same as last Friday. Benidorm has been extremely stable this series and the hour long episodes have definetely been a good thing.

One thing which does seem to stand out is the 4.7m for The One Show. I didn't realise it was doing so well up against Corrie and is probably denting it a bit and providing a good lead in to EE.

I think you are getting a bit over excited about it to be honest. The DW audience aren't going to stick with the Antiques Roadshow anyway. The family audience will switch on mass to TXF regardless of whether they miss the first 60 seconds or have to sit through a trailer. Some might even go to the toilet or put the kettle on. Or get a beer. Or talk to their family. Who knows?