The Interceptor is so bad that it's bad. You can't even take any enjoyment from watching it because it's bad.

Neither would have done well on BBC1. In The Flesh would have had a chance on BBC2. Don't Tell The Bride rated better than both on BBC3.


This is the problem. It doesn't skew that young now and probably won't as they've changed the tone slightly. It also isn't a big enough brand, it will be new to many people. They saw the trailer and thought no thanks. Put it on BBC2, if it builds an audience there THEN you transfer to BBC1.

Also when BBC1 took Ground Force, Changing Rooms and The Apprentice they pretty much left them alone. They should have done that with Don't Tell The Bride too. Cack-handed mismanagement by BBC1 of Don't Tell The Bride.

Would anybody have any ratings for Jermey kyles' emergency room on ITV in the afternoons?

Indeed, it's different if they put it on early or on a different night because there is a real chance that viewers who don't buy TV guides or switch off the minute the credits begin won't realise and miss it. But later on the same night, it should be impossible to miss it, because when you switch on at the usual time they'll tell you when it's on.


I know Backchat and Good News moved to BBC2 because those are post-watershed comedy shows and BBC2 has a tradition of post-watershed comedy and they sit perfectly well alongside things like Mock The Week. That does not neccessarily mean that every programme in every genre would also move across so seamlessly.

You say baking and sewing work on BBC2 but these programmes are, at their heart, factual shows with information and advice in them, they are of the same ilk as Gardeners' World and the various cookery programmes that have had a space on BBC2 since their inception. They're more light hearted and they can transfer to BBC1 but they fit in the lineage of BBC2 because at the heart of them they're about offering practical advice on baking and sewing and gardening that viewers can learn from.

Don't Tell The Bride is not a show that offers instruction, it's following members of the public messing about and you learn nothing from it (other than some men are pretty stupid). I can't think of any similar show on BBC2. Things like The Apprentice can be funny but that's a business show. Bake Off is a cookery show. Sewing Bee is about crafts. BBC2 primetime has always been about learning, it might be lightly worn but education and information have always been the key.

You can easily say Don't Tell The Bride "should" have gone on BBC2 and it "would" have rated better but there's no way of knowing that for sure because it hasn't been on BBC2. It could just as easily been the case that the BBC2 audience, expecting something with a bit of practical advice in it, would look at it, go "what the hell is this stupid series doing on BBC2?" and switch off. Easy to say it would do better on BBC2 when it's not on BBC2 so you can't be proven wrong.


Hmm, well, in terms of the changes the only real change has been introducing older couples, which makes sense if you're transferring it from a channel aimed at younger people to one aimed at absolutely everyone. I wonder if it skewed particularly old by BBC3 standards anyway, as I say my mum enjoyed it and she doesn't generally enjoy many things on BBC3. The preview of next week's Radio Times suggests that this is having a minimal effect on the show itself because the grooms are just as stupid and immature as they were on BBC3. That's the only change, isn't it?

The trailers on BBC1 also seem to be promoting it as if it's a new show, which in terms of BBC1 it is of course, rather than a continuation of the BBC3 series.


Well, I'm delighted to meet your high standards. This is perhaps the greatest criticism anyone can ever make on this forum, but if you put a "mark my words" in that post it would have been an excellent impression of Samuel. Yep. I said it.

Sorry, I wasn't having a go at you or AlexiR.

I watched the film, got narked that it felt like a waste of my time, then read various reviews that told me, if I didn't find it hilariously funny, then I hadn't "got the joke" - it was those reviews that I was ranting about. All good.

DS report confirms 1.68m (9.8%) with +1 included for the pussies programme.

It'll be interesting how Celebs on Benefits does, it been promoted In the tabloids and also on This Morning

Probably the most talked about C5 programme of the week in the media, with tons of online articles about it as well. So it's likely to do OK, which is annoying for those of us that would like to see the back of these benefits programmes sooner rather than later.

I wouldn't be surprised if it beats or at least matches Psycho Pussies.

Temperatures next week could make for some very low ratings across the board...

Do we ever get anything else these days?

Confirmation of the shake-up at ITV News who think we want an American-style
news programme (probably along the same lines as GMB)as the ratings continue to tumble.......

http://corporate.itn.co.uk/press.php...ontent_id=1422

Note: A recent edition of ITV's News at Ten was beaten in the ratings by BBC Breakfast

Not a great week for BBC1 with two of their 9pm dramas flopping very badly. At least The Syndicate is doing well on Tuesday so there is some light in the schedule. I've actually been watching Strange & Norrell and it seems alright, well at least not mid 1 millions material anyway.

Given recent ratings trends a change of some kind was inevitable, but I'm far from convinced this will boost ratings for NaT. I don't like Bradby as a presenter personally, think he's better suited to a reporting role.

Also a shame to see someone as talented at Etchingham effectively reduced to cover presenter, but there you go.

News At Ten will continue to do poorly, just with a new format.

I don't think Thursday at 8pm is the best idea for that.

If they need extra time to show the characters reacting to the news, it would be better to extend the normal Wednesday episode, rather than having an episode on an unusual day and time.

It is and has been a difficult time for many of the Coronation St cast and crew, and I'm not convinced they'd be thrilled to know their loss was seemingly being used as an excuse to bash EastEnders with an hour-long Emmerdale.

As a scheduling department, when you know you're going to have an episode brought about by sad circumstances, I'm not sure it's healthy for the first or any subsequent thought to be to use it to attempt to create a soap clash.

Fresh Viacom re-brand can't come soon enough, The channel needs a new start with a different name and a new programming team. As for benefits programmes that is just the old idea of the channel that needs a change. I won't be watching it alongside so called Big Brother which isn't really

I agree, Wednesday evening is free and Im sure that a 30 minute Emmerdale, followed by 90 minutes of Corrie would have worked better (including a 30 minute tribute programme)

Where abouts does it say that ITV News will be an American style programme along the same line as GMB?

Why do you keep banging that drum about News at Ten and Breakfast like its a big deal? I must have read that 10 times by now.

It won't be around for much longer, if that's any consolation. What last night's episode told me is that Big Brother can't be saved now. The rot set in last year and now it's totally lost the plot, to the point whereby it can't possibly be salvaged. Any ratings recovery will be temporary and it will be cancelled as soon as it starts failing to hit 1m on a regular basis which surely won't be long, even if that's before the contract is due to end, and that will be that.

People will blame C5 for this that or the other when that happens of course, but this is Endemol's baby and they are entirely responsible for the decline in quality and the increasing focus on nastiness, which they've not only allowed to go on, but even actively encourage via tasks with the sole purpose of causing ructions but also this week a new low of putting in an ex housemate purely with a view to creating conflict with another ex housemate, also there for the very same reason.

Some viewers must like manufactured drama but most of us don't and they are alienating more and more of us by the week. Even if they were to suddenly realise the error in their ways which is unlikely - they wouldn't have even contemplated bringing back Helen in any shape or form if they'd learnt anything from last year - and try and correct it for next series, it's much too late for that now and it would bomb because the viewers that have turned off will not return no matter what they do. They are gone for good, utterly repulsed by what it's become and not wishing to have their memories of it tainted further, so they might as well carry on as they are now and give the viewers with short attention spans what they want else risk speeding up the show's demise even further.

It's a pity because even now there are glimmers of the show it used to be, the show it could still be. Precious little moments that remind you what you loved about Big Brother in the first place. But before long BB is busy unleashing its latest scheme to piss off the remaining viewers, and they rarely fail.

So for once I agree with you, it's not Big Brother. Because BB should be about the housemates and this year it's not, it's about manufactured drama involving some ex reality TV stars. And whilst I think Nikki coming back was great for the show and almost certainly helped avert a ratings crisis, I do not remotely approve of the length of her stint and the fact they are relying so much on the past speaks volumes. There are certain things I can forgive - for example, the lack of a live feed (is it viable? I don't believe it is, especially now, and Ofcom are too strict about what can be shown anyway to make it a worthwhile product that people would want to buy in sufficient numbers) and occasional tweaks to the usual format I shrug my shoulders at.

But this series I simply cannot defend. What we're seeing now is definitely too far removed from the original BB concept for my liking and much too nasty. I will watch the remainder of this series and continue to watch CBB, but at this point it's highly unlikely I will ever watch another series of BB. And if I feel like that, then you know things are bad !

It's ironic that Breakfast and News at Ten on ITV does the worst in comparisons to the BBC alternatives.

Whatever I might think of Tom Bradby, they need to inject some life into News At Ten, to try and attract viewers. They have to do something, why they waited five plus years to try and boost ratings, I don't know.

Viacom has been rolling out their rebrands throughout the week so I guess we'll see the 5 rebranding either tomorrow or Monday. I'd like to see drop the circle and just have a 5 numeral.

Not a very high bar to clear; having said that the news at 6.30 does quite well, with 20% share sometimes, despite being opposite strong regional news opposition on BBC One.

Tom Bradby is the last person that should host News At Ten. Okay as a correspondent but a lead anchor? Why are they giving the job to him?

I'm worried it's going to be ghastly. I think they should have handled the rebranding in-house - the team at 5Creative are very talented. Why look any further? New ideas and a new perspective on things are all well and good but will an external company get the brand as much as they do, or case as passionately about the end result? We'll see.

But if the channel name is changing again - I'd like it to not include the number 5 at all, as mad as that might sound. Let's be honest the C5 brand doesn't have the best of reputations - breaking away from that might not be such a bad thing and in the digital era the channel number really doesn't need to be reinforced in that way, the advantage of being fifth is inherent - the very prominent EPG position is always going to be there. You literally can't miss Channel 5, but some might miss their output it if in their heads they automatically think "that sounds interesting but it's on Channel 5 so it's bound to be crap."