The decision not to merge the BBC News channel and BBC World News after all is , well… a classic BBC dither. One not made any better by inflicting more cuts on both, so that we get two more enfeebled channels rather than a single strong one. And the dithering gets worse when you look at what’s really involved.
Corporation strategists have long — and sometimes publicly — maintained that TV 24-hour news is a brief and now dying invention. Who needs it when the news is actually available day in and night out on a smartphone in your back pocket? At the very least the BBC could stop cluttering both channels with 15-minute mini-features and concentrate on putting out simple, repetitive bulletins in Sky style. There’s no need for padding without purpose at extra cost.
These channels are a public service (with ads in the worldwide case). They aren’t entertainment to watch around the clock, unless you’re a very sad person. And when something big happens, of course, mere formula filling can be swept right away. That doesn’t need a designated channel, watching and waiting and marking time. It’s what Wimbledon does to BBC2 anyway.
No, the real point of merging – apart from strengthening the entire offering – lay in deciding who a unified news channel was actually for, choosing and nurturing an audience that mattered. And the benefits would have been more evident abroad than at home because, as yet, there isn’t something called “world news” that attracts a “world audience”. Regional and national add-ons are part of the deal; what, too often, gets squeezed out is news about home for Brits abroad.
Global missions are one thing, basic information rather another. Knocking 10% off won’t solve the problem.
