Of course BBC1 needs to try. If they didn't try, they'd be down to an 8% share just like ITV, there's plenty more channels to choose from. The fact that they do try in almost every slot means they're pretty much constantly above 20%.

Ah, thanks.

I think the Sherlock audience was pretty stable through the broadcast. I'll need to check that one. Also a later start on a hot day can benefit Doctor Who.

I mean that they don't need to put as much effort in. When ITV is weak,viewers more often that not turn to BBC1.

Something like Fake Britain and The Sheriffs are Coming are rpt's this week but will rate well despite this.

DW ratings usually rise during an episode, and the highest rated episodes since its return (apart from the very first Eccleston episode) have been longer than 45 minutes.

The highest rated Xmas Special (2007) was also the longest (70 minutes). The only time DW has been No 1 in the ratings (Tennant's last full season, 2008) was with a 55 minute ep. And of course Day of the Doctor, the highest rated drama of last year, was 75 minutes long.

DW this year would almost certainly have significantly higher ratings in October with an SCD lead-in, but it's not likely to suffer from having too long an opener.

Really? Certainly a lot of people on my feeds complained of the plot not going anywhere and turned off after each of the many wedding stories in 'The Sign of Three'. I must've misremembered that as being reflected in the national trends, my apologies

ITV now more than ever are about making money as we have seen with all of their production company purchases. The programmes are getting better, certainly drama wise. But they have tentpole shows and not not enough decent performers to fill I'm the gaps in the schedule. With BBC1 it's the opposite, lots of solid performers but not that many regular big shows.

Brothers In Arms is getting 5-star reviews in the press this morning, although it probably had a low rating because it clashed with Kylie's performance.

ITV at its best is very good, but there isn't enough quality to fill the schedule.

Yes all that's very true but what I really meant was how likely are the 'ooh a new Doctor, let's give him a chance' casual audience to stick it out for a full hour and a half? All reports of the episode from fans so far are very positive but that might not stop stop non-fans who tuned in 'just to see what it's like' getting bored. The three previous 'Nu-Who' first Doctor episodes have been between 45 minutes and 65 minutes, so the casual 'new Doctor' audience being risked on a feature-length episode with 'slower moments' is unchartered territory IMO.

A later start and Strictly lead in would be balanced out by facing X Factor. They will be facing each other and anything could happen.

It was a brilliant documentary,shame it was on so late,think it would have got a reasonable audience at 9.00.

Well, we'll see - but I do think that a longer running time is a bonus, not a detriment, as is the later starting time (assuming that it airs at 7.35, the same time as the cinema screenings). On August Saturdays the peak overall TV audience is likely to be around 8.30 to 9 pm, so the longer and later DW runs the better it is likely to rate.

And, again from the cinema screenings, it does not look as though the episode will be a full hour and a half. It seems to be between 75 and 80 minutes in length, not 90.

ITV Media is claiming that ITV are brining back Sunday Night At The Palladium this Autumn for 6 episodes starting in September.

It's clearly going ahead as they're advertising for sponsorship of it, but I'm surprised they didn't announce it earlier.

Wow - an ITV variety show featuring people who actually are talented?

Seriously, I will definitely give this a go, if only to see the revival of such a central part of TV history. I hope they find space for Bruce Forsyth to make an appearance (as the original presenter in the 1950s) though it probably would not be good idea to make him the anchor...

ITV trying to mix it up, I like that. But where will it go? Is it an hour or 90 minutes? 7 or 8pm start?

However I do wish that ITV light entertainment was more than just reviving old shows.

6 x 60 minute episodes apparently. My guess is that it'll be at 7pm leading into The X Factor. Could possibly dent the Strictly results if they overlap.

I do think these revivals are getting a bit out of hand though. Sunday Night At The Palladium is a good one to do but I don't see the point in Celebrity Squares coming back.

Oh, I adored Celebrity Squares back in the day - is it really coming back? Great!

SCD red carpet - to be recorded Tuesday 2nd September
SCD premiere show - to be recorded Wednesday 3rd September

http://www.bbc.co.uk/showsandtours/s...carpet_2sept14

I could understand if it was next year for ITV's 60th anniversary. There comes a point where it is just lazy.

It is and hosted by Warwick Davis.

They must have all the contestants signed then.

That's a week earlier than I expected, although I'm not sure why as it's the same week as last year.

Tumble being extended to 7 episodes (which seems to be the case as this also says 1 of 7 now) does make more sense now. Tumble runs 9th August to 20th September, then Strictly starts on the 27th, although surely they'd have known Strictly's likely start date when they commissioned Tumble.

If Tumble is doing well then 6th September will be a very good night for BBC One, if it's not then it'll be interesting to see if they move Tumble earlier to give Strictly the better slot or try to boost it with a Strictly lead in.

Isn't that the same as usual though - 3 weeks between preview show and main launch? (Assuming that the preview airs the Saturday after filming.)

Interesting. So Tumble is now a 7 part series. Increased to take it up to the start of Strictly no doubt. I also saw Phil Heyes was directing Tumble. He's an excellent light entertainment director. Won two BAFTAs for directing on The X Factor I think.

Yes. Usually three weeks to give couples a chance to train. A Bruce free Strictly, a revamped X Factor. Who will come out on top?