I wouldn't say tonight's briefing is any more important than any others recently - the last few days they've clearly been about announcing things to distract from the Cummings debacle rather than matters of public health and it's right the media are not falling for it.
It did cover the Track and Trace scheme which starts tomorrow, and did actually include the instructions if you are contacted. So better than the last week or so, where it's just the same old stuff reheated each day
Indeed given the fairly big change announced in the press briefing, it makes sense that the information is shared to as many as possible rather than it being confined to a news channel many won’t access.
And if previous briefings were any guide, it’s not as if airing today’s briefing in full would delay the schedule much.
But clearly airing the One Show on time takes priority
I actually think it's better how they do it and they should keep having the bulletin at 6. Arguably more people will get the key information from the bulletin, which contains the information - followed by analysis, rather than the increasingly drawn out press briefings which after the initial announcements tend to be more about rhetoric and what 'the line' is, rather than clear facts being dispensed.
People didn't like the dropping of the family film on Bank Holiday and do want light entertainment to give them a break from the news. However, sometimes BBC One has a duty to provide important stories that people need to know rather than just what they want to know. People would not switch over to the News Channel en masse if it was not also on BBC One, the coverage therefore (I am speaking of the Bank Holiday) needed to be on BBC One to make people watch it, even if they didn't want to. So the argument there's a News Channel, why duplicate it on BBC One (thereby, effectively, reducing people's choice) - that's the reason why it should also be on BBC One in my view. Though I am biased as I am one of the far fewer people that watch the news, and post on TV discussion forums, and therefore disrupt other's BBC One viewing by dragging them to our favourite News Channel as opposed to allowing them to watch what they want. But in my, and maybe the schedulers', high-minded view, people need to watch the news on this as it is an important story and therefore has to be force-fed (even if people don't like it much or it wasn't sugary-sweet entertainment or film programming) as people otherwise wouldn't generally watch it and would be poorer in knowledge of current affairs if they didn't - therefore they should watch it in the public interest, and are made to by having 'interrupt' BBC One, rather than what interests the part of the public that want a break from the news. I'm sorry - it was too important and BBC One is there to set the agenda and establish what's important, and to do that by simulcasting the news channel so that people watch it. Remember - as regards the 'force-feeding' - left to their own choices, people generally don't make good choices and would choose sugary sweets, cake and chocolates as they taste nice and would be even more obese than they already are. Sometimes people need to be made to take the fruit and veg.
Hmm, Yes, I concede she did overstep the regulations. But to take her off the show is appalling. What would have been better in my opinion is that she should have been on tonight and opened with a clarification.
It's all in Newsnight's DNA, I remember during the Falklands war, Thatcher getting upset because of the use of 'British' rather than 'Our' forces. I think she wanted Peter Snow locked up for treason.
The government narrative since pretty much Saturday has been to blame the media for reporting the events rather than the perpetrator, and this plays right into their hands.
The response as usual to calling out the truth by the BBC has once again been swayed by the supposed need for "impartiality" where blatant lies are to be accepted unconditionally as truth.
How about you think of it another way. BBC One, and it’s schedulers run that channel. They have an obligation to fulfil their channel remit the way they see fit.
They also have to balance a schedule - the National and Local news - in all nations and regions - and maintain a peak time entertainment schedule - and lord knows that is needed right now.
BBC News did what you would expect of the News Channel and carried it uninterrupted and in full.
It’s a case of dammed if you do - dammed if you don’t.
I’ve lost count of the number of people that have said to me - in and out the industry “Why is it on BBC One when you have a news channel”
And now look....
They completely wrecked the Bank Holiday Monday prime time schedule, pulling the family film to show a news special and airing unbilled filler programming for another hour only two day ago.
Tonight the most they would have done would have been to disrupt The One Show
Sorry but it still doesn’t make sense and isn’t in any way consistent
Indeed on a ratings standpoint don’t the daily briefings usually rate quite well on BBC One?
The options seemed to me to be:
A) Remove the one show for one day only and air the briefing, News (Not) At 6 and regional news as normal then as you were for the remaining programmes
B) Air the briefing and run a reduced News at 6/regional news after so the One Show and primetime runs as normal.
C) Not air the Briefing on BBC One and stick to the planned schedule.
The BBC did C but I can’t help thinking A or B were the better option especially since it was the One Show following the 6 O’Clock News so hardly Strictly or some other lynchpin programme.
Logistics of getting all the BBC regional news presenters to present late? Therefore leaving the press conference and going to the News at Six on BBC One was the option chosen to stick with the schedule. And people informed that the conference is still continuing on the News Channel if they wanted to, a bit like the News Channel itself when it goes away from Parliament coverage. The situation on Monday - BBC One couldn't help that Dominic Cummings was late and probably felt, when BBC One had waited around for it, best to keep the coverage on BBC One rather than switch it to BBC Two, as the coverage was planned to be on BBC One, but then overran (just like a football match I suppose which also irritates those that don't want matches interrupting their schedule, at non-Coronavirus times at least). Having overran, this left no time to show the film. Tonight was a little different as the conference was late so ran into the News at Six - the main story was the Prime Minister however and not the conference, therefore kept BBC One on track by going to the News at Six as normal. People told continues on news channel (as opposed to Monday's BBC One joins for a press conference from Mr Cummings only not to have the conference at all when it had specifically joined to broadcast - important to have that on BBC One as planned even if it starts late, it was the news some people wanted to know whereas today's Coronavirus conference was a distraction away from the main news and therefore probably rightly stopped by BBC One). Broadcasting the conference and then having the regional news run late - would have required all however many regional and national areas there are to be contacted and told to re-arrange their presenters to present late.
I just tried to find the thread of when that happened but stumbled upon this one instead. Interesting how times change.
That's a great find! Still stand by the early comments though, if I was to be kind it would be to say that "Emily never had the right format" but the truth is that she grew into what she is today. I don't think there's anyone better to hold court in a live interview panel situation. Perhaps apart from Kay Burley.