• Get involved.
    We want your input!
    Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.

    After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
    If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.

    After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
    https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/

    Thanks in advance and have fun!
    RadioDiscussions Administrators

BBC World in the US: Any news

N

Nertz!

Guest
Earlier this year I heard rumors that BBC World would be avaliable in the US. Any progress?
 
I take it that BBC World and BBC America are two different channels, but I know they do show BBC World News on BBC America...

Side topic: We recently just got BBC America, I can't stop watching that channel...I love the programming on it...also maybe because I have this thing about British culture and such...
 
We get the BBC World News on PBS Channel 20 WYIN in Chicago. I love it. It's interesting to see how different the viewpoint of news is in the other nations of the world.

Even more interesting is how really our network and cable news is so darn similar with their viewpoints, compared to the other nations of the world
 
I know it is on PBS stations, but there is a complete 24 hour news network.
 
Having a 24 hour news channel would be a good thing. It is a shame that there aren't any.
 
Let's not confuse BBC World with the 30-minute BBC newscasts that are shown on many PBS affiliates on a tape delay. BBC World has live news, as well as documentaries and such programs as HARDtalk - which is an excellent interview program. It is a completely different experience than BBC America.

Most (if not almost all) cable systems in Canada have BBC Canada (much like BBC Am), a BBC Kids channel AND BBC World - usually on the digital tier. It sure would be nice if we had such options down here. For example, with the N. Korean nuke test last night, it sure would have been nice to tune to BBC World for a different perspective on the event. I may not always agree with the BBC's version of certain issues, but they do a thorough job in covering a story and present the issues in a thought provoking way.

In many places, this is the only 24 hour news channel offered in English and I've watched it from Guatemala to Ecuador to Uganda to Japan. I have no idea why the US is about the only big market in the world that cannot get this channel and would love for someone to explain it to me.
 
Adding a foreign news channel is not a high priority for cable systems in the US. Newsworld International had a hard enough time getting on cable systems. I can't imagine BBC World faring much better.
 
tested said:
Adding a foreign news channel is not a high priority for cable systems in the US. Newsworld International had a hard enough time getting on cable systems. I can't imagine BBC World faring much better.
Click to expand...

There's no comparison between Newsworld Int'l and the BBC. For one thing, the BBC has good name recognition and is well respected. Secondly, they already have another (entertainment) channel on most cable systems. Thirdly, in all my travels the only place I had EVER seen CBC Newsworld was in Canada. BBC World is basically everywhere except here.

On the same vein, I also wish Time Warner would offer us CNN International on digital cable. That too would be a good channel to have.

If you're talking about potential viewers, both options would garner many more viewers than some of the fringe crap that is now on cable.
 
Good News: BBC World is available online.
Bad News: They charge $5.95 a month for it.

I did watch BBC World online before the Beeb got greedy. First half of each hour was news. Second half was an interview, documentary or some such that seemed like Sunday morning. I do get BBC America. I have programmed my TiVo to record all occurrences of BBC News and keep one. So, I have the latest newscast whenever I want it.

I do miss Newsworld International, even though it had very little actual content from CBC Newsworld. But I enjoyed seeing CBC's National, Britain's ITV News (now no longer on public television) and some of the others. Dumping Newsworld for slacker news; another dumb move by Al Gore.
 
I'm sure a U.S. cable operator would say that BBC America carries several half hour newscasts each day which come from BBC World.

And as mentioned above, I'm lucky to have WLIW 21, Long Island's PBS station which is distributed on nearly all New York area cable systems, even some in NJ and CT, which carries BBC World News at 6am, 7pm and 11pm.


Gregg
[email protected]
 
Why do we not get BBC World? Because the culture is different over here - WE want our news from screaming pundits who yell about topics that matter pretty much not at all and partisan screeds from "fair and balanced" reporters. Oh, and no one here cares about the rest of the world. When you have CNN, MSNBC, and Fox News (bastions of journalism all!) why would you need another option?

Or, so the cable companies and BBC would claim. But you know, when all you've been served is crap, you start to think of crap as the cream of the crop. If we got BBC World, CNN and MSNBC would start having to show REAL news and Fox would have to GO OFF THE AIR ENTIRELY because Roger That-Ailes-Me would have a heart attack if he learned he couldn't do partisan screeds and get away with big ratings any more.
 
Morgan Wick said:
Why do we not get BBC World? Because the culture is different over here - WE want our news from screaming pundits who yell about topics that matter pretty much not at all and partisan screeds from "fair and balanced" reporters. Oh, and no one here cares about the rest of the world. When you have CNN, MSNBC, and Fox News (bastions of journalism all!) why would you need another option?

Or, so the cable companies and BBC would claim. But you know, when all you've been served is crap, you start to think of crap as the cream of the crop. If we got BBC World, CNN and MSNBC would start having to show REAL news and Fox would have to GO OFF THE AIR ENTIRELY because Roger That-Ailes-Me would have a heart attack if he learned he couldn't do partisan screeds and get away with big ratings any more.
Click to expand...

I don't think that has anything to do with it. Whether BBC World were offered or not, the existing players would not be affected. What they do is different from what the BBC does, and they have different audiences. And, it has nothing to do with the "culture" as the channel is offered all over the world to viewers of different cultures. And, it's not like Canada has such an exotic and different culture - yet they are offered BBC World. Even in Alberta, which would be a red state if in the US.

It would just be nice to have the option - and a 30 minute taped newscast on a PBS station just isn't the same thing. Oddly enough, cable companies couldn't care less how many local broadcast channels carry home shopping or infomercials - the still plug the satellite ones anyway. Too bad that ethic doesn't apply to other types of programming.

About Fox News, by the way, your comment simply lacks merit. It's the most popular cable "news" channel in the country. They do just fine and will continue to do so. If anyone would lose a few viewers from the addition of BBC World, it would probably be CNN. But, I doubt any of them would be damaged.
 
Cable/satellite TV is like a supermarket.
Shelf-space is limited.
There is not room for everybody.
There are some popular brands/products/channels that shoppers/viewers demand and expect.
In cable/satellite, these can charge for carriage.
Or the owners of those channels can require systems to carry other channels they own.
In the beginning, Fox got their news channel carried by threatening to withhold Fox TV.
Preachers and shopping channels pay to get carried.
The Beeb is on its own...
- No strong and widespread demand.
- No co-owned channels with strong and widespread demand.
- Can't afford to pay.
 
BRNout said:
Morgan Wick said:
Why do we not get BBC World? Because the culture is different over here - WE want our news from screaming pundits who yell about topics that matter pretty much not at all and partisan screeds from "fair and balanced" reporters. Oh, and no one here cares about the rest of the world. When you have CNN, MSNBC, and Fox News (bastions of journalism all!) why would you need another option?

Or, so the cable companies and BBC would claim. But you know, when all you've been served is crap, you start to think of crap as the cream of the crop. If we got BBC World, CNN and MSNBC would start having to show REAL news and Fox would have to GO OFF THE AIR ENTIRELY because Roger That-Ailes-Me would have a heart attack if he learned he couldn't do partisan screeds and get away with big ratings any more.
Click to expand...

I don't think that has anything to do with it. Whether BBC World were offered or not, the existing players would not be affected. What they do is different from what the BBC does, and they have different audiences. And, it has nothing to do with the "culture" as the channel is offered all over the world to viewers of different cultures. And, it's not like Canada has such an exotic and different culture - yet they are offered BBC World. Even in Alberta, which would be a red state if in the US.

It would just be nice to have the option - and a 30 minute taped newscast on a PBS station just isn't the same thing. Oddly enough, cable companies couldn't care less how many local broadcast channels carry home shopping or infomercials - the still plug the satellite ones anyway. Too bad that ethic doesn't apply to other types of programming.

About Fox News, by the way, your comment simply lacks merit. It's the most popular cable "news" channel in the country. They do just fine and will continue to do so. If anyone would lose a few viewers from the addition of BBC World, it would probably be CNN. But, I doubt any of them would be damaged.
Click to expand...
In case you didn't notice, a lot of my post was sarcastic. But I still wonder if a large part of the "audience" that watches the crap that passes for cable news these days watch only because there's nothing better when the broadcast news isn't on.

Perhaps we should band together and start an online petition to the cable and satellite companies if we want BBC World so much. The truest point in my post was "But you know, when all you've been served is crap, you start to think of crap as the cream of the crop."
 
You guys are all missing a big point: Discovery Communications has signed on to distribute BBC World, just as they distribute BBC America. And Discovery has quite a bit of heft. Doesn't look like they've had much luck so far in distribbing BBC World, but maybe that will change. In the meantime, News Corp.'s pending sale of its controlling interest in DirecTV to John Malone could help BBC World's cause. Because Rupert would never in a million years allow BBC World on the bird -- hell, he didn't even let Sky News go on, and he owns that channel! But he had no interest in adding anything that would compete with Fox News. Now, hopefully, the new owners will take a different approach.
 
Well, I can confirm BBC World (24/7) is still "coming soon" - I was watching BBC World News on BBC America (the 6 AM - 9 AM ET block) and saw an ad (kind of a strange ad, really) that used a soft sell approach to get consumers to contact cable/satellite operators and request the channel.
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom