Are television companies getting lazy?

[Howardh]

I don't even watch live TV anymore. It's an absolute joke, full of some unbelievably terrible content. All the good stuff is either hanging from a string or gone forever from being shown live.

Me too. Can't remember the last time I sat down to watch "linear" TV, when I last did they crammed the whole programme into the first three minutes of introduction - so what's the point of watching the rest?

My instant option is Youtube, I'm prepared to sub to avoid the ads. I don't bother with Amazonflix etc; no different than normal TV. Really annoys that we have to pay a licence to a company I rarely use now - even the 24 hr news is largely world-dominated like World Service now.

 

[Carnforth_24]

Has anyone heard of the “off” button?

 

[dangie]

The only show that annoys me as a repeat is Have I Got News for You. It is a topical show. I am no longer interested in Rishi Sunak's activities as PM.

Yes, I wonder how long it will be before they show repeats of News at Ten...?

 

[Gloster]

Yes, I wonder how long it will be before they show repeats of News at Ten...?

We seem to be getting repeats of the news anyway: Bay of Pigs 2, more nuclear sabre rattling, all hell breaking out in the Middle East, etc.

One problem is that serious drama is a massive financial disaster: Mr Bates vs the Post Office was a ratings and critical success, but lost a million pounds. Meanwhile, that old banker, costume drama, has been undercut by Netflix and other that make them cheaper and shoddier, but more profitably.

 

[Mcr Warrior]

Yes, I wonder how long it will be before they show repeats of News at Ten...?

They already do. On the ITV+1 channel!

 

[Ashley Hill]

On C4 the same shows have been on continuous rotation in the mornings for nearly a decade. I liked Frasier but have now got bored with it. Yet other than Paramount no terrestrial channel has yet shown the two new series.

 

[Bevan Price]

The entire afternoon output Monday to Friday (14:00-18:00) on ITV1 this week consists of Quiz repeats.

I know everybody has their personal view as to what is good and what is bad, and personally I feel tha most soaps are little better than endless repeats -- different characters but the same boring old stories, Audience ssems to be losing interest ? Must be time for another disaster - fire, crash, kill a character, etc. And is there ever a happy stable marriage / family in soaps?

In principle, I don't mind a few repeats, but preferably from a long time ago, rather than recent programmes, but not too often (e.g. Dads Army)

 

[Peter Mugridge]

For years now U & Gold has repeated the same shows to the point of insanity.

At least in the case of Gold, that channel was set up specifically re re-run old shows wasn't it? There's another channel, I forget for the moment which one, that was specifically set up to show 1980s music non stop - my wife certainly doesn't have any issue with that!!

I do think overall the number of repeats in general is too high, but that's more that we have too many channels these days - not just the lack of money and imagination, but also they have to repeat things regularly to ensure that everyone who wants to watch them can do so; there's a limit to how many things we can watch and record at once...

Some of these channels do show quite interesting documentaries and do repeat them fairly regularly, which I don't have a problem with. The Really and Yesterday channels are a good example of this; DMAX also usually has things of greater interest than average.

One thing I strongly dislike is some channels using a 65 minute slot for a 60 minute broadcast; I am convinced they do this on purpose to prevent us from recording too much on their rival channels.

The lack of a plus 1 channel for the BBC also gives the BBC a bit of an unfair advantage as it means anything involving a BBC channel and another channel, whether watching directly or recording something, has to be planned around the BBC channel, and that isn't always the most convenient way of planning viewing.

 

[johntea]

Linear TV is out of fashion to an extent, although still has a place for live news / sport and such

Even the broadcasters now seem to just shove an entire series on their online platform at once, so instead of tuning in for 6 weeks at 9pm on ITV or whatever I can have watched the entire series...before Episode 1 has even aired on TV!

Pointless 'celebrated' episode 2000 last night which perhaps shows just how many broadcasts of that are repeats, considering it started in 2009 it would be more like celebrating 4,000 episodes by now if it was a new episode each time!

I don't think 'lazy' is the right term particularly, just changing trends - the rise of smartphones and fast Internet connections!

 

[Gloster]

The entire afternoon output Monday to Friday (14:00-18:00) on ITV1 this week consists of Quiz repeats.

I know everybody has their personal view as to what is good and what is bad, and personally I feel tha most soaps are little better than endless repeats -- different characters but the same boring old stories, Audience ssems to be losing interest ? Must be time for another disaster - fire, crash, kill a character, etc. And is there ever a happy stable marriage / family in soaps?

In principle, I don't mind a few repeats, but preferably from a long time ago, rather than recent programmes, but not too often (e.g. Dads Army)

It is summer: people are away or outside turning themselves a livid shade of red, so they are not watching TV so much in the daytime: you can’t ask as much from the advertisers as at other times of the day or year. Why waste something that you can get a reasonable amount of advertising income at other times of the year by using it when you can’t charge much?

 

[RT4038]

Pointless 'celebrated' episode 2000 last night which perhaps shows just how many broadcasts of that are repeats, considering it started in 2009 it would be more like celebrating 4,000 episodes by now if it was a new episode each time!

Wasn't this a repeat?

 

[Bevan Price]

At least in the case of Gold, that channel was set up specifically re re-run old shows wasn't it? There's another channel, I forget for the moment which one, that was specifically set up to show 1980s music non stop - my wife certainly doesn't have any issue with that!!

I do think overall the number of repeats in general is too high, but that's more that we have too many channels these days - not just the lack of money and imagination, but also they have to repeat things regularly to ensure that everyone who wants to watch them can do so; there's a limit to how many things we can watch and record at once...

Some of these channels do show quite interesting documentaries and do repeat them fairly regularly, which I don't have a problem with. The Really and Yesterday channels are a good example of this; DMAX also usually has things of greater interest than average.

One thing I strongly dislike is some channels using a 65 minute slot for a 60 minute broadcast; I am convinced they do this on purpose to prevent us from recording too much on their rival channels.

The lack of a plus 1 channel for the BBC also gives the BBC a bit of an unfair advantage as it means anything involving a BBC channel and another channel, whether watching directly or recording something, has to be planned around the BBC channel, and that isn't always the most convenient way of planning viewing.

Personally, I think that +24 hour channels would be more use than +1 channels. If you go out for a day, you re just as likely to miss the +1 showing as the original broadcast. (In fact it is oten easier to use a Tv/Video recorder. )

 

[Harpo]

The mode of consumption is shifting. One thing that is hugely obvious amongst the under-20s in our wider family is that none of them watch transmissions, nor our old-fartydom PVR world of recorded transmissions. Does BBC TV do anything for under 50s these days??

 

[johntea]

Wasn't this a repeat?

No, but it has been sat on the shelf since 2023 looking at the end credits! (and a bit of an awkward Gregg Wallace reference!)

 

[Ashley Hill]

I think that +24 hour channels would be more use

C5 used to have a 5+24 channel and BBC1+1 used to exist.

At least in the case of Gold, that channel was set up specifically re re-run old shows wasn't it?

Yes but does it have to show the same 6 or 7 shows ad infinitum? There must be more in the BBC archive than Only Fools or Vicar of Dibley. And when you’ve got bored of Last of the Summer Wine you can turn over to Drama and watch more of it.

 

[styles]

C5 used to have a 5+24 channel and BBC1+1 used to exist.

Yes but does it have to show the same 6 or 7 shows ad infinitum? There must be more in the BBC archive than Only Fools or Vicar of Dibley. And when you’ve got bored of Last of the Summer Wine you can turn over to Drama and watch more of it.

It's one of those things though - yes there was good quality programming other than OFAH, but OFAH is also by far one of the most-loved shows, if not the most-loved show, which fits the Gold bill.

Sure there's Keeping Up Appearances, Last of the Summer Wine, Vicar of Dibley, etc; but when BBC polled users a few years ago, the only two programmes which had more than 50% of the number of votes as Only Fools and Horses were Blackadder and Vicar of Dibley. OFAH was double any of the others. It's universally popular for the Gold audience, which means more viewers, which means more ad revenue.

Personally I've just bought the OFAH series' on YouTube and don't watch TV while it's being broadcast unless it's something special like the Olympics or election night coverage, at which point I'm usually in the pub or something.

 

[Dai Corner]

How many people still plan their viewing around the listings in the newspaper? My mother and stepfather who are in their 80s and 90s do. I'd like to introduce them to on demand TV but I don't think they'd be able to learn how to use the interface.

I only watch news, snooker and rugby live. My default is YouTube.

 

[styles]

How many people still plan their viewing around the listings in the newspaper? My mother and stepfather who are in their 80s and 90s do. I'd like to introduce them to on demand TV but I don't think they'd be able to learn how to use the interface.

I only watch news, snooker and rugby live. My default is YouTube.

My mum buys the Radio Times every Christmas for this purpose.

 

[jon81uk]

Many companies such as UKTV, That’s,E4 and also the lesser ITV and BBC channels are continuously repeating the same programmes over and over again. For years now U & Gold has repeated the same shows to the point of insanity. Take weekends, not one goes by where Only Fools & Horses is repeated to death for two days. Other channels are just as guilty. Has British television run out of ideas for new original shows?

The UKTV channels like Gold were designed to show repeats of older BBC content. They were originally a joint venture between BBC Worldwide (commerical part of BBC) and Thames Television. Since 2019 they have been wholly owned by BBC Studios (new name for commercial BBC). UKTV channels have never prioritised new original content, Dave had a little more than the others with things like Taskmaster but it was designed to repeat older things.
Bookish on U&Alibi is original and quite good though. But in general if you don't want to watch repeats of old shows, don't watch the channels designed to show repeats of old shows.

BBC & ITV have got some new original stuff but the summer is never prime TV viewing time, generally most new shows come in September and January. TV companies have never invested heavility in programmes for July & August as it is assumed people are on holiday or out doing things.

But in general now with Netflix and Disney+, fewer people are watching the traditional broadcast channels, so with fewer viewers the commercial channels like Channel 4 have less money to spend. For the BBC they had the license fee frozen for years so also have less to spend as costs have gone up.

I've found plenty to watch in the last six months though but we do have the streaming services, however I still watch a lot of BBC content.

 

[Oxfordblues]

The "compulsory" £174.50 television licence fee, enforced by threats of £1000 fines and possible imprisonment, has surely had its day. What is the moral case for throwing elderly, vulnerable women into prison for not being able to afford the fine for evading the television licence fee? I read recently that over 30% of the UK female prison population have been locked-up over this offence. Meanwhile potentially-dangerous criminals are being released early because of overcrowding. Even Culture Secretary Lisa Nandy has admitted that the current threat-based funding model is, in her words, "unenforceable".

Along with 300,000 UK households in the last year I no longer have a television licence as I only watch Youtube and get my news from the internet. If I get a knock on the door from an enforcement officer I just ignore them and they go away.

 

[styles]

The "compulsory" £174.50 television licence fee, enforced by threats of £1000 fines and possible imprisonment, has surely had its day.

Almost certainly.

What is the moral case for throwing elderly, vulnerable women into prison for not being able to afford the fine for evading the television licence fee? I read recently that over 30% of the UK female prison population have been locked-up over this offence.

You think a third of the female prison population are in there because they didn't pay their TV Licence? Come on.

You can't actually be imprisoned for the offence of not having a licence - if you get imprisoned it's for not paying the fine you received for not having a licence, and this is exceptionally rare.

According to the MoJ, In 2019, a grand total of 2 people were jailed for not paying the fine associated with not having a licence, both of whom were men. In 2020 and 2021 precisely 0 people were jailed for this.

Around 50,000 prosecutions are made for TV Licensing each year. There is no way any government would be daft enough to try locking people up for this. We don't have the space for sex offenders and persistent thieves, let alone people watching iPlayer without a licence.

The majority of prosecutions are for women however. This is most likely because they're more often the ones home during the day when TV Licensing come to visit. I suspect also, though there is some sex based generalisation in this, that on average women would be more intimidated by TV Licensing officers than men. This is part of the reason I would ditch the licence.

Meanwhile potentially-dangerous criminals are being released early because of overcrowding. Even Culture Secretary Lisa Nandy has admitted that the current threat-based funding model is, in her words, "unenforceable".

Regardless of what I feel about early release due to overcrowding, the same would be applied to the 2 people jailed in 2019 for not paying their TV Licence fine.

Along with 300,000 UK households in the last year I no longer have a television licence as I only watch Youtube and get my news from the internet. If I get a knock on the door from an enforcement officer I just ignore them and they go away.

Ditto.

 

[dangie]

….. If I get a knock on the door from an enforcement officer I just ignore them and they go away.

How do you know the knock at the door is from the enforcement officer? Do they have a big badge saying ‘Television Licence Enforcement Officer’….?

 

[Ashley Hill]

in general if you don't want to watch repeats of old shows, don't watch the channels designed to show repeats of old shows

I don’t mind watching repeats, it’s showing the same repeats over and over and over again for years that bothers me.

 

[The exile]

Yes, I wonder how long it will be before they show repeats of News at Ten...?

Ironically, I would actually be quite interested in a channel that was (say) bbc1 + 40 years. Obviously not all the material has survived - but actually re-run the whole schedule as it was then… A bit like when you keep newspaper cuttings, the thing on the back ends up being more interesting than what you kept it for.

 

[simonw]

At least in the case of Gold, that channel was set up specifically re re-run old shows wasn't it? There's another channel, I forget for the moment which one, that was specifically set up to show 1980s music non stop - my wife certainly doesn't have any issue with that!!

I do think overall the number of repeats in general is too high, but that's more that we have too many channels these days - not just the lack of money and imagination, but also they have to repeat things regularly to ensure that everyone who wants to watch them can do so; there's a limit to how many things we can watch and record at once...

Some of these channels do show quite interesting documentaries and do repeat them fairly regularly, which I don't have a problem with. The Really and Yesterday channels are a good example of this; DMAX also usually has things of greater interest than average.

One thing I strongly dislike is some channels using a 65 minute slot for a 60 minute broadcast; I am convinced they do this on purpose to prevent us from recording too much on their rival channels.

The lack of a plus 1 channel for the BBC also gives the BBC a bit of an unfair advantage as it means anything involving a BBC channel and another channel, whether watching directly or recording something, has to be planned around the BBC channel, and that isn't always the most convenient way of planning viewing.

Why record stuff when you can use iPlayer and similar?

 

[JamesT]

Why record stuff when you can use iPlayer and similar?

Not everything gets uploaded to the streaming sites and often they're time-limited on how long they're up there. PVRs will usually let you skip or fast-forward the adverts, whereas the stream usually forces you to sit through them or demands extra money for ad-free. (Not sure a problem with iPlayer, but the commercial broadcasters)

 

[Ashley Hill]

Ironically, I would actually be quite interested in a channel that was (say) bbc1 + 40 years. Obviously not all the material has survived - but actually re-run the whole schedule as it was then… A bit like when you keep newspaper cuttings, the thing on the back ends up being more interesting than what you kept it for.

We could watch Pebble Mill or Ask the Family!
Actually a it’s not a bad idea, trouble the BBC won’t show programmes containing errant former staff, so no Grandstand with Frank Bough for example.

 

[Harpo]

the BBC won’t show programmes containing errant former staff, so no Grandstand with Frank Bough for example.

Yes. The prospect of TV without Mr Shouty, ‘GREG WALLACE!’. Blessed relief.

 

[Peter Mugridge]

Why record stuff when you can use iPlayer and similar?

It's often more convenient and it's certainly more comfortable watching something on the TV than while sitting on the sofa than it is on the computer in the study...

...and:

Not everything gets uploaded to the streaming sites and often they're time-limited on how long they're up there. PVRs will usually let you skip or fast-forward the adverts, whereas the stream usually forces you to sit through them or demands extra money for ad-free. (Not sure a problem with iPlayer, but the commercial broadcasters)

Exactly that; also the subtitles are much more readable on the directly broadcast versions than on the iPlayer versions ( that applies to all iPlayers, not just the BBC example ). Some are also awkward about which browsers they work on; BBC will happily play on Chrome but if I want to watch something online with Channel 4 I need to open the rather clunky Firefox instead.

 

[Harpo]

Why record stuff when you can use iPlayer and similar?

45 minutes to watch a ‘one hour’ programme, no logging in or account creation needed, all recordings in a single place and it’s available to watch until you delete it.

Not just adverts, but endless amounts of re-cap padding is avoided too and you are in complete control. The only thing that happens when you press ‘pause’ is that it pauses.