Slashdot Mirror
End of an Era As Pioneering BBC3 Becomes an Online-Only Station (betanews.com)
Mark Wilson writes: 13 years ago, BBC3 launched in the UK. Last night, the TV station broadcast over the airwaves for the last time. In a bid to slash expenditure, the youth-oriented channel that launched countless comedy careers is now only available online. The likes of Being Human, The Mighty Boosh, Gavin and Stacey, and the like will live on, but only on the web — which the BBC is spinning as an opportunity to be freed from the constraints of regular scheduling. The change has been known about for some time now, and there have been a number of campaigns and petitions to try to get the BBC to change its mind.
It is so sad that they have moved down to a medium which nobody knows or cares about.
I mean, this makes the television antennas in all of our phones practically useless now....
My eyes reflect the stars and a smile lights up my face.
I really hope Netflix doesn't copy this model - it could be fatal for their business!
>> 13 years ago, BBC3 launched...that launched countless comedy careers...
In the words of John Oliver, settle down people. It's only been around 13 years. Surely, the number of people who are still working in comedy after working on that channel is finite. Here's a list of the most famous, I guess: http://www.theguardian.com/med...
... and even I hardly watch any "over the air" television anymore. Most of the shows I watch are available on Hulu or Netflix (including at least a few of these particular BBC3 shows, which aren't otherwise available to me as a non-Brit). Surely a "youth-oriented" channel can somehow manage to survive the move to an Internet-only presence.
I'm sure the BBC's primary motivation here is indeed to save money - but I don't see how this move has to be construed as a negative one.
#DeleteChrome
People will point to the odd thing that surfaced on BBC3 that was good. They forget that the occasional good thing was buried in an avalache of absolute shit.
I do not want your cheap brainburning drugs. They are useless for work. And I am a working man today.
As it is in so many other contexts, Fox is even worse!
"[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz
Everything is ultimately headed over IP. BBC3 is a good brand with which to pioneer this with it's relatively young and tech-savy demographic. Once "smart" TVs start living up to their name you'll be able to watch it just as you do now over DVB.
Transponders and multiplex slots don't cost a fortune to rent. You only have to look at all the garbage channels to know that it's cheap. In any case, it shares a transponder with a kids channel, so should only pay half. The programme costs will be the same whatever the distribution method. Furthermore there is a cost to streaming to the internet, which I wouldn't mind betting is similar to the transponder costs.
I personally have no interest in the channel, but since it it being paid for by licence fee (tax), I want to know that my money is being spent wisely, and accounted for properly.
The channel was meant to cover "young people" as the BBC, in its wisdom had decided that they weren't watching enough TV (as if that was a bad thing). However, the BBC's idea of "young people" was a rather arbitrary age range of 16 - 34 year olds. That is a group defined by the advertising industry, but since the BBC is advert free, it's not really relevant to them and can hardly be said to be a "demographic".
Given that most 16 year olds are spotty children, living with their parents who still snigger when someone says "fart" and 34 year-olds are generally on their second baby, with a partner, mortgage, job and a car or two - it's a pretty wide range to please, So it's no surprise that the target audience (who weren't watching enough TV) stayed away. Sure, in the eyes of those people who made a living from BBC3, it was "pioneering" or "innovative". However those people were generally, themselves, not exactly target-audience material, either.
When the TV "digital revolution" (i.e. replacing the small number of wide-band analog stations with a large number of digital ones) started, there was a plethora of new stations. Most of them had very little content that was either new or worth watching. Most of these, especially the new ones that the BBC started, can be considered failures. BBC3 is just the most high-profile failure and probably won't be missed, except by those middle-aged 34 year-olds who still wish they were spotty children - or who are still living with their parents.
politicians are like babies' nappies: they should both be changed regularly and for the same reasons
Given the number of repeats shown on BBC1 and BBC2 there was always plenty of space in the schedule for new, innovative and interesting material.
There still is.
Forget putting BBC3 online, shut it down entirely. Anything that's good enough can be shown on BBC2 - it's got to be better than endless repeats of Coast, daily doses of Flog It and whatever the fuck they call that atrocity that's on at 7pm.
So, in England...they only had 3 channels...and are now down to 2 on TV?
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
No, you're just an ignorant dumbass.
I was referencing the fact that Fox cancels bunches of good shows. In other words, with Fox, "If you like your shows, you can keep your shows" is less true than it is for the BBC.
"[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz
Not really - BBC produces amazing Nature documentaries with David Attenborough.
I also miss seeing Ground Force.
And soon we'll have the Orangutan back with Captain Slow, and Pearly white. Never thought I'd get Amazon Prime - but to see the trio in Action again is worth it.
_ _ _ Go for the eyes Boo! GO FOR THE EYES!
Not sure if serious, so I'll answer anyway.
No - the BBC is not the only game in town when it comes to television and radio in the UK. The BBC is uniquely-funded through a "television license" which anyone who watches live broadcast television must pay, regardless whether they watch the BBC's channels or not. There is no commercial advertising on the BBC when watched in the UK (though I understand this is not necessarily the case with the versions of the BBC that are shown internationally).
But there's also the commercial broadcasters:
ITV (a regionalized network of broadcast companies) operates a number of channels
Channel 4 (also broadcasts E4, more4, Film4 (which makes original film content as well as screening Hollywood and independent films)
Channel 5 (again, they operate a few channels).
Sky (satellite TV provider, which has its own channels, but also broadcasts channels from overseas, typically US channels - their set-top boxes also have access to a streaming catch-up service with access to download TV show box sets for you to watch. Sky is hideously expensive, though)
There's the usual assortment of TV shopping channels and adult entertainment
The BBC also has its 24-hour news channel.
Telephone giant BT also has its own service, but it's a streaming service that is (as far as I know) only open to BT Broadband (DSL) and BT Infinity (FTTC) customers.
And we can watch Netflix and Amazon Prime here too. Just not with as much content as the US gets (this is true of Netflix everywhere though).
He's Jesus, for Christ's sake.
Since I didn't know it even existed, nothing of value was lost. :)
The simpsons? X-files? 24?
Fox news! You're talking about fictional entertainment, right?
SJW n. One who posts facts.
Think more along the lines of "if you like your Firefly, you can keep your Firefly."
"[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz
So, like every other channel then. Well, I'd say the hit/miss ratio on BBC3 was a bit above average.
Since I don't have a smart TV and won't watch on my phone/tablet/laptop that's basically the end of BBC 3 for me. You don't need a licence to watch iPlayer (except the live stream) so maybe I won't bother renewing now, as that was basically the only thing other than news I ever watched live (in bed) anyway.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
I was expecting at least BBC12 by 2001...
Who ordered that?
Nevermind that the BBC actually recycles a lot of US content, which in many cases ends up being more popular than the domestic content.
Example please? The Beeb aren't renowned for licensing shows. Quite the reverse in fact; what's far more common is that BBC shows are exported to the US, where they are remade for American tastes and so end up being absolutely awful (e.g. Red Dwarf, The Office).
So, in England...they only had 3 channels...and are now down to 2 on TV?
Pre-digital, there weren't many. We only hit 4 in 1982 and were up to 5 by the nouglties: 2 BBC (public), 1 ITV (commercial), Channel 4 (public-owned-commercial) and the unimaginatively named Channel 5.
Now, on terrestrial digital, The BBC (public, no ads) had 8 channels (BBC1,2,3,4, BBC News, BBC Parliament & 2 kids channels) although 3, 4 only run from 7pm, before that the kid's channels use the same bandwidth. Then there's a shedload of non-BBC channels: ITV, Channel 4, Channel 5 now each have 3-4 digital channels, not counting '+1's and HD versions, plus numerous others (I've lost track of who owns what). Of course, the advent of digital also created a 5-fold increase in the available license fee and advertising revenue, to fill this plethora of new channels with premium content :->
Sadly, we also have shopping channels. Prize for the biggest waste of bandwidth (savour this blow by blow):
QVC (a shopping channel, if you need a stretchy fat-dissolving bra with integrated pressure washer )
QVC HD (See the stretchy fat-dissolving bra with integrated pressure washer in glorious 1080i)
QVC HD +1 (time shifted by an hour in case you'd missed out on that stretchy fat-dissolving bra with integrated pressure washer on regular QVC).
I don't want to live on this planet any more.
In a survey of 100 programmers, 111111 thought that duck-typing was a good idea.
Fox =/= Fox News
Yes. Even with death panels pruning out the no-hopers socialised medicine is so expensive that even 2 is stretching the budget.
And of course all TV channels are government run, which is what happens if everybody doesn't have a gun.
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
The only things I personally can think of are Gavin & Stacy, 2 Pints and The Mighty Boosh
Cross Two Pints off your list!
Add:
Little Britain
Being Human
Torchwood
The Fades (shamefully axed after 1 series)
In the Flesh (managed 2 series before the chop)
Our War
I didn't watch 'Nighty Night', but a lot of people rated it.
The BBC licence fee has been frozen (Govt interference!) for a number of years now due to intense lobbying by the likes of Sky and the newspapers. Its not just the Conservatives, Labour under Tony Blair were happy to be in the Murdochs pocket too.
In real terms this means that the amount of money they get is not enough to cover running the channels they had 13 years ago, is not enough to make/commission more than a few new programme ideas and is not enough to compete with Sky for high profile sports programming. Added to this, the BBC has been saddled with funding a government benefit, the provision of "free" tv licences for the over 75s, and with the number of 75 year olds growing, that means a continuous drop in licence fee income.
The BBC used to produce ALL their own programmes. Under successive licence fee settlements, they have been required to commission from outside production companies. The number of BBC production studios has shrunk dramatically. Ther BBC only has the right to rebroadcast shows or obtain extra income from overseas sales when they make the programmes themselves. Otherwise future income goes into the pockets of the production companies or other rightsholders.
Other income streams like BBC Publishing have also been stolen and sold off in the name of the great god "competition" and the BBC is in danger of losing much of their web content because of johnny-come-lately newspapers who have seen their own print readership evaporate and want to appropriate the online digital content pioneered by the BBC.
BBC 3 wasn't a failure. Over its lifetime it aired ground-breaking comedies and dramas. Having it shunted into the on-line abyss is yet another nail in the coffin of strong, independent programming from the BBC.
I think the comment means that the BBC buys in some overseas programming, rather than "recycles". Personally I like to see some foreign TV, the Walter Presents collection is quite interesting.
OTA is growing in the US. And for me, the picture quality beats Netflix almost every time.
Don't forget about Virgin Media
Build a Man a Fire, and He'll Be Warm for a Day. Set a Man on Fire, and He'll Be Warm for the Rest of His Life.
There's also a few +1 channels which show programmes an hour later than on the other channel.
I'm just waiting for them to come up with -1 channels!
Build a Man a Fire, and He'll Be Warm for a Day. Set a Man on Fire, and He'll Be Warm for the Rest of His Life.
It's just gone 8 o'clock and time for the penguin on top of your television set to explode.
Welcome to the Panopticon. Used to be a prison, now it's your home.
So when will I be able to stream "My Word" and "My Music", auntie Beeb?
Tiller's Rule: Never use a word in written form that you've only heard and never read. You will end up looking foolish.
I don't know everything BBC broadcasts, however I do know that they presently air Family Guy and American Dad, both of which are from Fox.
Aren't they showing the O J Simpson one? And the Walter Presents was a less specific comment to the effect of that there's plenty of interesting TV throughout the world and restricting a channel to just the output of its home country seems a waste.