SW
Last night's ITV news at ten, got just a third of BBC NAT. 
Quantity does not always denote quality. Let's face it, a lot of people watch the BBC by default. The BBC could put a dot on the screen and some people would watch it.
It's true. Michael Grade once said that "quality and popularity are not mutually exclusive, and a programme which attracted 20 million viewers should be classed as equally worthy as a programme that attracted a tenth of that audience figure". At the end of the day, the main remit of the BBC and ITN is that they do their job. One of the main reasons for the stronghold of the Ten O'Clock News is because when ITV first reinstated NaT in 2001, they were woefully useless with its scheduling, whereas the BBC News started at 10pm, so viewers could regularly expect the news at a fixed time five days a week. By the time ITV properly reinstated News at Ten, the Ten O'Clock News had been running for eight years, so viewers would get used to a routine and with Sky also having a 10pm bulletin, the competition had intensified, so for ITN to get roughly three million viewers is no mean feat. After all, if ITV hadn't shot itself in the foot and axed the original News at Ten, the BBC would still have the Nine O'Clock News, which was regularly beaten in the ratings by ITN. The Ten O'Clock News only came about following ITV's own-goal.
Last night's ITV news at ten, got just a third of BBC NAT.
Quantity does not always denote quality. Let's face it, a lot of people watch the BBC by default. The BBC could put a dot on the screen and some people would watch it.
It's true. Michael Grade once said that "quality and popularity are not mutually exclusive, and a programme which attracted 20 million viewers should be classed as equally worthy as a programme that attracted a tenth of that audience figure". At the end of the day, the main remit of the BBC and ITN is that they do their job. One of the main reasons for the stronghold of the Ten O'Clock News is because when ITV first reinstated NaT in 2001, they were woefully useless with its scheduling, whereas the BBC News started at 10pm, so viewers could regularly expect the news at a fixed time five days a week. By the time ITV properly reinstated News at Ten, the Ten O'Clock News had been running for eight years, so viewers would get used to a routine and with Sky also having a 10pm bulletin, the competition had intensified, so for ITN to get roughly three million viewers is no mean feat. After all, if ITV hadn't shot itself in the foot and axed the original News at Ten, the BBC would still have the Nine O'Clock News, which was regularly beaten in the ratings by ITN. The Ten O'Clock News only came about following ITV's own-goal.
CH
I'm pretty sure the BBC were always going to move the news to 10 but moved the date forward after ITN moved its bulletin time.
After all, if ITV hadn't shot itself in the foot and axed the original News at Ten, the BBC would still have the Nine O'Clock News, which was regularly beaten in the ratings by ITN. The Ten O'Clock News only came about following ITV's own-goal.
I'm pretty sure the BBC were always going to move the news to 10 but moved the date forward after ITN moved its bulletin time.
NI
I'm pretty sure the BBC were always going to move the news to 10 but moved the date forward after ITN moved its bulletin time.
From memory, I believe the BBC announced that the Nine was moving to 10pm only after ITV admitted defeat and themselves announced NAT was "returning". I seem to recall some kerfuffle because the BBC moved to 10pm a number of weeks before ITV returned to the slot.
(Ironically, ITV's watered-down NAT actually beat the BBC's 10pm news initially and thereafter for some weeks. I presume ITV's haphazard and stupid scheduling is what made people eventually stick to BBC1 by default.)
After all, if ITV hadn't shot itself in the foot and axed the original News at Ten, the BBC would still have the Nine O'Clock News, which was regularly beaten in the ratings by ITN. The Ten O'Clock News only came about following ITV's own-goal.
I'm pretty sure the BBC were always going to move the news to 10 but moved the date forward after ITN moved its bulletin time.
From memory, I believe the BBC announced that the Nine was moving to 10pm only after ITV admitted defeat and themselves announced NAT was "returning". I seem to recall some kerfuffle because the BBC moved to 10pm a number of weeks before ITV returned to the slot.
(Ironically, ITV's watered-down NAT actually beat the BBC's 10pm news initially and thereafter for some weeks. I presume ITV's haphazard and stupid scheduling is what made people eventually stick to BBC1 by default.)
CH
I can't find it now but there was a Six O'Clock News report about the move on YouTube which suggested that the move was in the works for 2001 but was brought forward. Pretty sure it wasn't decided two weeks before - it was simply decided two weeks before to bring forward the date. Will continue to look for this clip!
Edit: Okay, not the best source, and it could be BBC boss bull, but the third line of this Daily Mail article is what I am on about. Kind of getting side-tracked here though!
Yes, the licence fee funded BBC moved it to 10pm with just two weeks notice while their commerical rival had to go through years of red tape to move their bulletin and were then pretty much forced to move it back.
I can't find it now but there was a Six O'Clock News report about the move on YouTube which suggested that the move was in the works for 2001 but was brought forward. Pretty sure it wasn't decided two weeks before - it was simply decided two weeks before to bring forward the date. Will continue to look for this clip!
Edit: Okay, not the best source, and it could be BBC boss bull, but the third line of this Daily Mail article is what I am on about. Kind of getting side-tracked here though!
Last edited by chris on 30 August 2013 10:02pm
SW
I can't find it now but there was a Six O'Clock News report about the move on YouTube which suggested that the move was in the works for 2001 but was brought forward. Pretty sure it wasn't decided two weeks before - it was simply decided two weeks before to bring forward the date. Will continue to look for this clip!
Edit: Okay, not the best source, and it could be BBC boss bull, but the third line of this Daily Mail article is what I am on about. Kind of getting side-tracked here though!
http://www.tv-ark.org.uk/mivana/mediaplayer.php?id=00d35191d732bd74e49f0452199f023f&media=bbc_9news_move_feature2000&type=mp4 Is this what you're after Chris?
Yes, the licence fee funded BBC moved it to 10pm with just two weeks notice while their commerical rival had to go through years of red tape to move their bulletin and were then pretty much forced to move it back.
I can't find it now but there was a Six O'Clock News report about the move on YouTube which suggested that the move was in the works for 2001 but was brought forward. Pretty sure it wasn't decided two weeks before - it was simply decided two weeks before to bring forward the date. Will continue to look for this clip!
Edit: Okay, not the best source, and it could be BBC boss bull, but the third line of this Daily Mail article is what I am on about. Kind of getting side-tracked here though!
http://www.tv-ark.org.uk/mivana/mediaplayer.php?id=00d35191d732bd74e49f0452199f023f&media=bbc_9news_move_feature2000&type=mp4 Is this what you're after Chris?
JW
Last night's ITV news at ten, got just a third of BBC NAT.
Quantity does not always denote quality. Let's face it, a lot of people watch the BBC by default. The BBC could put a dot on the screen and some people would watch it.
A chain-smoking dot at that!
Oh, hang on!
Last night's ITV news at ten, got just a third of BBC NAT.
Quantity does not always denote quality. Let's face it, a lot of people watch the BBC by default. The BBC could put a dot on the screen and some people would watch it.
A chain-smoking dot at that!
Oh, hang on!
IT
Last night's ITV news at ten, got just a third of BBC NAT.
Quantity does not always denote quality. Let's face it, a lot of people watch the BBC by default. The BBC could put a dot on the screen and some people would watch it.
A chain-smoking dot at that!
Oh, hang on!
LOL! Good one James
itsrobert
Founding member
Last night's ITV news at ten, got just a third of BBC NAT.
Quantity does not always denote quality. Let's face it, a lot of people watch the BBC by default. The BBC could put a dot on the screen and some people would watch it.
A chain-smoking dot at that!
Oh, hang on!
LOL! Good one James
GM
She managed it that well, to the untrained eye you wouldn't have thought anything was amiss as it was that quick and slick...
There was a slight failure with the autocue for Mary tonight. She ended up having to quickly reach for her glasses to read her script/
She managed it that well, to the untrained eye you wouldn't have thought anything was amiss as it was that quick and slick...