Originally Posted by RobbieSykes123:
“Panorama found its usual audience too, despite the smaller lead in. So why not move it to BBC2 permanently, perhaps even increasing it to an hour? Hopefully the Olympics is being used as a dry run.”
What would be the point of that? Last night's Panorama did well because it was on a populist subject, it inherited a strong non-Olympics audience from 'stEnders and presumably enjoyed a decent ABC1 lead-out from Horizon. But it's not going to get that on BBC2 every week, and there's nothing BBC1 can show in that slot that would get any bigger audience because it's opposite Coronation Street.
And I don't know how you can begrudge BBC1 showing half an hour of current affairs a week in one of its worst slots. Even ITV1 still do that.
Originally Posted by derek500:
“If they're happy with an inferior system without the extra channels, then fine. It's their choice.
There are very few homes where satellite dishes are not allowed and most of those can be overcome with different placement.”
Freeview isn't an inferior system, there are numerous advantages with it over Sky - convenience, the obvious fact it's free, the fact it's not owned by Murdoch - that for many people make it far more suitable for their needs. My parents have Freeview and it's certainly nothing to do with an inability to put up a satellite dish or even a refusal to put up a satellite dish, because there are certainly plenty in their street. They choose not to get Sky because they have more than enough to watch on Freeview and they don't wish to pay for many more channels which they're never going to watch. The same is doubtless true for many millions more. It's simply rubbish to say Freeview is inferior to Sky, for many customers it is far more appropriate for their needs.
However, I have no issue with platform nuetrality because it's an obvious fact that Freeview has less space and the number of people who are massively, massively interested in sport but don't have some kind of pay service must be very small (possibly just Brekkie). To my mind I always thought it was a bit pointless putting HD on Freeview given the space it takes up, if you were that bothered about HD you'd surely be bothered ernough to upgrade for another platform. My parents don't want HD and probably never will. Just like you had to upgrade your set to get colour. I still think for many people the change from analogue to digital (with widescreen, stereo and much sharper pictures in many areas compared to the ghosting and interference they used to have) is a bigger deal than the change from SD to HD.
Originally Posted by wizzywick:
“You'll get told off saying things like that! But I agree. It now looks unlikely Ben Ainslie will even get a medal. The Judo hopeful is out. It's now riding on the rowers and if they fail I d think at this rate we'll be lucky to match the performance of Atlanta.”
I'm sorry, I know Olympics-related chat was exhausted a bit earlier but "the Judo hopeful is out" is perhaps the least upsetting sentence in the entire Games. I think even the most fairweather fan would have accepted there might be some other countries a bit better at it than us.
The ratings-related point I do want to make, though, is that's it's ludicrous to suggest ratings are going to go down if Britain don't win gold because the Olympics aren't just one homogenous event and the athletics haven't started yet which for many people are the only reason to watch the Olympics and are far more viewer-friendly, plus there's also the track cycling that hasn't started yet either. And England being pretty rubbish hardly affected the ratings for the Euros, did it?
Originally Posted by Dancc:
“The bad... Only two of the 50 most watched shows in C5's history were shows scheduled at 10pm, and neither were dramas. Person of Interest's ratings potential just got severely downgraded with this news as there's no guarantee CSI viewers will stick around. Surely a CSI cross-city double on the previous Saturday would have been a better option, allowing PoI to take 9pm.
The good... CBB launching on a Friday for the first time since it came to C5 will also limit the ratings potential for that but it might be wise as the competition on the Wednesday and Thursday such as the England friendly and the notorious ratings banker that is Peter Kay on C4 looks a fair bit tougher.”
Dare I ask what this Peter Kay show is, knowing full well it'll be a repeat, a clip show or a repeat of a clip show, just to illustrate yet again C4's utter laziness.
I don't see why 10pm has to be such a poor slot, C5, like C4 should be trying really, really hard in that slot with the news on BBC1 and ITV and BBC2 only being able to put on half hour shows because of Newsnight. The audience - and specifically the young audience - available at 10pm is enormous, especially in the summer when people watch later in the evening anyway. Both C4 and C5 should put all their good stuff at 10pm, rather than throw stuff out earlier in the evening when BBC1 and ITV are churning out massive mainstream stuff.
(when does that air?) Wednesday EastEnders at 7:30 could be a typo?
