Coincidentally, that's the story in next week's Dr Who. The Doctor must fight aliens who are trying to take over the Earth by swamping the airwaves with non-stop editions of Come Dine With Me. The Doctor must find the one the aliens call Jayunt. (I think that's what I read in the show's blurb.)

I don't get the whole 'lead in' concept. I would never just mindlessly watch the programme that started after whichever one I'd just finished watching. Are most people really that lazy/unable to think for themselves?

Age skew:


Pretty similar age profiles, The Voice skewing slightly older.

Socio-economic skew (all individuals)


Again very similar.

Gender skew


Gender is the most significant difference between the two in terms of demos. As women watch significantly more TV than men on average, a roughly 50/50 gender split for Doctor Who counts as quite male-skewing . This is not surprising as sci-fi traditionally skews male. The Voice skews more in line with the majority of primetime programmes, with a heavy skew towards women, which (IIRC) is also seen with the likes of BGT and TXF.

Note: These figures compare Doctor Who's five episodes in Sep 2012 and the full first series of The Voice (Mar-Jun 2012). Overnight figures.

The whole point of the BBC having a licence fee is that can make drama that is more about quality of programme than quantity of viewers. And it's not as if they don't have a good number of ratings-winning dramas on their books.

That's why I'm disappointed that the cut series 2 of Prisoners' Wives to 4 episodes instead of the 6 you would expect. They made that decision based on ratings and they shouldn't be doing that.

Some dramas just don't have mass audience appeal but that doesn't mean they're not quality programmes.

They are certainly fighting BBC1 hard for the supposed cosy slipper pensioner audience with a double Corrie and a 2 hour wartime drama set in the, er, late 1940s.


It's a typical Tony Grounds socially bleak drama that BBC1 feels duty bound to commission every so often. They typically get about 3-3.5m and I can't see this being any different, especially with Foyle's War (sic) as the opposition with an hour head start and Corrie lead in.

That's said, it has picked up and is actually quite "accessible" compared to some of his stuff.

The girl out of EastEnders is very good.

Yes! Albeit in the seventies, he did a chat show called Lunchtime With Wogan where he co-hosted with a St Bernard dog, and although it was a daytime show they showed a special edition of it during ITV's All Star Comedy Carnival in 1972, which used to be on YouTube. Of course for many years he had a golden handcuffs deal with the BBC which carried on right the way up until about 2001, even when he was only doing Auntie's Bloomers.


And also their best show, I don't want to see Ant and Dec do boring quizzes like Red or Black. As I mentioned I wondered if Takeaway was too long ago to make a new series viable and they should have just done something exactly the same with a different name, but it's worked out really well for them.


Hmm, maybe, although the difference between BGT and The Voice is that most of the acts on BGT are the kind of speciality acts that you don't need to see over and over again, whereas on The Voice, probablyeven more so than The X Factor, you do want to see them having some kind of depth and range because the whole point of the show is to turn out a credible artist.

I think last year Leanne's success was about 99% down to what she did in the final because she'd not really stood out at all for the rest of the series and I didn't think she was that special, but she did the best performances on the night. In many ways there are valid artistic reasons for there to be a succession of live shows, because if you'd done Pop Idol 1 like that you'd have had Gareth cleaning up but because we'd grown to know and like Will during the run it was a more satisyfing result and we clearly ended up with a more talented winner.


They don't have to do that because they don't do lottery quizzes every week and didn't show a single one between October and December. Similarly they hadn't shown Antiques Roadshow for two months until last week. And rather they have fixtures on the weekend schedules, where there's still time for ninety minute dramas and light entertainment formats, than like ITV do in midweek and flood the evening with soaps so there's only one hour free for anything else at all.


I thought they might do that a few Easters ago when they had Ashes to Ashes on Friday, Who on Saturday and Creek on Sunday, but they didn't. They should, though.


Given Andy makes a point of continually picking up criticism of ITV, I'm sure he'll cheerfully accept me picking up on him using an old myth that has been disproved many times before to slag off the BBC and spin a winning night into a failure.

It can make a difference.

For instance my mum likes Lewis and Miranda so when they clashed recently she watched Lewis and recorded Miranda because she wasn't intended to watch Mrs Brown's Boys, so it made mores sense to watch the hour long programme live and record the half hour programme which is easier to fit into a spare slot somewhere.

However, she also watches Casualty and so she ended up watching MBB on Saturdays just because we had nowhere else to go to after Casualty. And she discovered she liked MBB. So she ends up watching it because of the lead-in.

Where Dr Who can make a difference to The Voice is with people who watch Dr Who and then stay on BBC1 when they see The Voice is on next, and they miss SNT because they forget it's on. There are people who would do that.

Im not saying it wouldnt have an audience, i was just lightheartedly suggesting it may not be in place to see it.

is the voice not tainted after last years eventual floping this might even put people off starting with it and some may see doctor who and then switch over like me - the voice a tainted brand and a rip off of 22 milllion pounds of bbc funds over the two years - if it doesnt work holly's back on doi next year simples

Yes its watchable.

There are some people on this thread who will bite your head off if you dare to say anything critical about their beloved favourite channel but are quite happy to slag off other channels with childish, ill-though-out, simplistic arguments.

Thanks NeilVW for the Cheers ratings. Was wondering about the primetime showings. Oh well I'm enjoying them again.

it'll be interesting to see if it skews particularly young because it does look like a drama that I expected BBC3 to have commissioned (and that's not a criticism). I think Lacey Turner may have quite a large young, female following because of her role as Stacey in Eastenders.

ITV won last night though it was the first time this year they managed it. And BBC One didn't collapse in the face of it.

If a good show leads to another good show, then they would, but the days of people watching the same channel most of the time is largely gone. I was in the pub tonight watching the Superleague and then quite happily watched The Best of Top Gear on BBC Two, can't afford Sky Sports, but if I could, this is what would happen. You might get a few diehards who stick with the two main channels, and I live in an area which was a strong ITV area, but this has mostly gone.

If you've got a big audience at the end of a show then some should be more likely to stick around for the show following if its advertised and if its any good. It can often work, but it can also fail. Just see Coronation Street leading into Food Glorious Food. But I don't buy into Dr Who giving The Voice a leg up. They're two completely different shows with two completely different audiences. A lead in only works if its a similar kind of show, X Factor into I'm a Celebrity for example.

Lead in's generally matter when you've got a big show going into a lesser show, where the lesser show is a fairly short duration. The way the 10:35pm shows on BBC1 mop up viewers is a daily example of this.

Some people take this idea to extremes though and assume people decide on their major 9pm drama based on filler much earlier in the evening, or as a recent example, that the football lead in would effect the 2 hour Dancing on Ice final.

I cant see any other reason for sandwiching the two shows together. Doctor who is probably there to get viewers switching on to bbc one early on and then giving the voice a try. I think given the hype around the voice it will dent ant and dec's audience. But doctor who is there to bolster the audience share at the beginning of 7pm on bbc one as it reaches its peak. Ant and dec will have a poorer lead in and episode one of the voice is likely to be higher than saturday night takeaway whether it stays that way depends on how much its changed. and it needs to if they think viewers will watch lengthy episodes of earnest dull auditions. Whats wrong with an hour?

Doctor Who's "live" viewers will be low, probably no more than those who would watch Pointless "live". Add in the fact many potential Voice viewers will timeshift Doctor Who during The Voice then I can't see there being any advantage to the scheduling.

Andy, do you ever read your posts back and think "god, I really talk a lot of bollocks"?

Think that's nearly a ban-worthy post.

I've pulled down my pants and smacked my bottom.

Philys Stein - 9.

Even worse, non stop DOND and repeats of Desperate Scousewives, Shipwrecked and Celebrity Coach Trip. Should that not finish off the earth, The Jayunt will find the last two series of BB on Channel 4 to kill off any survivors.

That's definitely a ban-worthy post; the image!