Brian D not logged in
Guest
|
Post by Brian D not logged in on May 6, 2004 21:32:38 GMT
Why doesn't BBC4 use some of the middle of the night or pre 7pm time (when it is not currently broadcasting) to show some of the stuff in the BBC archive which does exist but will never apparently see the light of day? How about The Lotus Eaters, or A Pin to See the Peepshow as very different examples of quality 70s drama?
The whole scheduling policy of BBC3 and BBC4 seems bizarre to me. I can't see why a programme which was on at say 9pm is then repeated the following 1am.
|
|
|
Post by Jeff on May 6, 2004 21:48:37 GMT
This sounds like an excellent idea to me. Perhaps the TV companies are wary of screening stuff from their archives for fear of showing up the abysmal quality of the fare which is dished up to-day.....great dollops of make-over , "junk-in-your-attic",fly-on-wall type programmes, soaps and a core-collection of about 150 films which are constantly served up at regular intervals. So much TV.....So little worth watching!
|
|
|
Post by Laurence Piper on May 7, 2004 7:25:11 GMT
It's an great idea! I'd be all for it myself. No doubt someone will now shoot that idea down in flames, saying why copyright / royalty agreements will not allow it! Well said, that man though.
|
|
|
Post by Kieran Seymour on May 7, 2004 9:42:25 GMT
Why doesn't BBC4 use some of the middle of the night or pre 7pm time (when it is not currently broadcasting) to show some of the stuff in the BBC archive which does exist but will never apparently see the light of day? The main reason they can't do that before 7pm is the fact that they've got two digital channels, which are effectively split into four by having CBBC and Cbeebies broadcasting between 7am and 7pm, and BBC Three and BBC Four between 7pm and the wee small hours. Bearing in mind that the only way they could go 24/7 without causing national uproar is to acquire the necessary bandwidth on all digital platforms, I can't see it happening anytime soon. Showing stuff in the early hours is an idea, but as they're not exactly awash with viewers during the hours they currently transmit, I can't see how they'd justify the expense.
|
|
|
Post by Laurence Piper on May 7, 2004 12:30:39 GMT
Knew it!
|
|
|
Post by Kieran Seymour on May 7, 2004 17:52:43 GMT
Knew it! Line me up a target and I'm more than willing to start shooting at it ;-)
|
|
|
Post by Jeff on May 7, 2004 20:20:26 GMT
Line me up a target and I'm more than willing to start shooting at it ;-) Here's another then, Kieran:- >:(Those responsible for the monotonous pap which constitutes a large part of today's TV schedules
|
|
|
Post by Gareth R on May 8, 2004 0:39:28 GMT
Knew it! We know that *you* don't want to hear the actual reasons why things aren't likely to happen, Laurence, but there might be those who don't understand the legal and financial issues surrounding archive television for whom an explanation might be interesting and enlightening... and I'm sure you'd never want to stand in the way of enlightenment, would you?
|
|
|
Post by Gareth R on May 8, 2004 0:53:36 GMT
The whole scheduling policy of BBC3 and BBC4 seems bizarre to me. I can't see why a programme which was on at say 9pm is then repeated the following 1am. It's pretty straightforward - it's to try and maximise the number of viewers for any given show by offering people more chances to see it. 9pm is a perfect example, because it's a busy and important timeslot, and most channels use it to show key programmes. If BBC-4 only showed programme X at 9pm and didn't repeat it, they'd potentially be missing out on a significant number of viewers, because of the competition they would be facing from other channels -and it's a basic fact of life that most people give priority to other channels before BBC-4. Come 1am, though, it's a whole different ball game. The major programmes on the more popular channels have ended, and it's a perfect time for people to set VCRs or PVRs to record BBC-4 with much less fear of clashing with anything they want to record on a different channel.
|
|
|
Post by Laurence Piper on May 8, 2004 8:39:03 GMT
I'm sure you'd never want to stand in the way of enlightenment, would you? I'd never want to stand in the way of enlightenment, Gareth - just in the way of you shooting your mouth off in a superior manner to the rest of us
|
|
Brian D not logged in
Guest
|
Post by Brian D not logged in on May 8, 2004 14:00:26 GMT
It's pretty straightforward - it's to try and maximise the number of viewers for any given show by offering people more chances to see it. 9pm is a perfect example, because it's a busy and important timeslot, and most channels use it to show key programmes. If BBC-4 only showed programme X at 9pm and didn't repeat it, they'd potentially be missing out on a significant number of viewers, because of the competition they would be facing from other channels -and it's a basic fact of life that most people give priority to other channels before BBC-4. Come 1am, though, it's a whole different ball game. The major programmes on the more popular channels have ended, and it's a perfect time for people to set VCRs or PVRs to record BBC-4 with much less fear of clashing with anything they want to record on a different channel. Look, this is a real doctrine of despair. What it is saying in effect is that until we have TV channels willing to accept an audience of 500 or so, we will NEVER get a chance to see our programmes again (unless we live in London, but that's another matter). If BBC4 thinks its target audience is people who will video a programme about Smetana at 1am because at 9 pm their VCR is busy recording Footballers' Wives, then there is something up with its audience research - and there is just as much likelihood nowadays for something equally attractive to be being shown on another channel at 1am anyway. To tabloid - and even some 'quality' - journalists, BBC4 is a cultural ghetto anyway. So it might as well act like one!
|
|
|
Post by Kieran Seymour on May 8, 2004 14:06:33 GMT
Here's another then, Kieran:- >:(Those responsible for the monotonous pap which constitutes a large part of today's TV schedules Don't get me started - I could bore for England on the subject!
|
|
|
Post by Gareth R on May 8, 2004 16:43:03 GMT
Look, this is a real doctrine of despair. What it is saying in effect is that until we have TV channels willing to accept an audience of 500 or so, we will NEVER get a chance to see our programmes again It's certainly something of a vicious circle. Archive television, especially drama, can be extremely expensive to clear - and if you've only got 500 viewers, how are you going to justify the cost of clearance? Sooner or later, probably sooner, the money is going to run out. It might be do-able, however, on a subscription basis. The subscription would probably be high, though - perhaps £40-50 per month just for one channel. I'm afraid you've fallen into the classic elitist trap - assuming that any household that watches BBC-4 couldn't possibly contain anyone who likes programming such as Footballers' Wives. Sadly, in the real world you'll find millions of households containing people with massively contrasting viewing tastes. My wife, for example, likes a bit of Footballers' Wives, while I'd rather tear out my own fingernails than watch it... and conversely, I like a lot of the documentaries on BBC-4, while my wife would prefer to watch paint dry. And some nights, it's not a matter of contrasting tastes. Thursdays are a prime example at the moment - my wife and I both love 24 and Friends, both of which are on at 9pm. We have a TiVo, so we normally record 24 at 9pm, the same-day repeat of Friends at 11.40pm, and if there was anything I wanted from BBC-4 I can usually get it from the early-hours repeat - so the quick-repeat strategies of E4 and BBC-4 work completely to our advantage. We are far from alone in benefiting from this. Viewing patterns are changing, and it's inevitable that broadcasters will alter their approach to scheduling to take account of this.
|
|
|
Post by dubs on May 8, 2004 23:40:27 GMT
Oh yes give me ITV "Nightscreen" with all the never ending rotation of a piss-poor Powerpoint presentation endlessly looping telling me nothing much about all the great new dramas/comedies/soap plot updates, Oh no - I wouldn't trade that for a 4am re-run of Department S, Mysteries Of Edgar Wallace, Zoo Gang etc...which they could get for peanuts...Oh no!
|
|
|
Post by Laurence Piper on May 9, 2004 8:48:07 GMT
Not superior by chance, Laurence old chap (you don;t mind me calling you by your first name do you? I usually call the servants by their surname!). Anyhow, as I was informing you, he's just better educated and informed. Moves in the correct circles and supper clubs. That sort of thing. Nothing for you to worry your mind over. Take plenty exercise and a worming tablet every week and you'll be fine. Just use your real name when you spout garbage next time. I'm sure Lord G. doesn't need lackeys to spew it out for him (tugs forelock in deference at mention of very name).
|
|