Why Does London Have Only Five TV Channels?

[Gregg]

There are only five over-the-air TV channels in London, UK. BBC 1, BBC 2, ITV, Channel 4, Channel 5. They do have subchannels. But every station is commercial (even though the BBC channels are government-owned). There are no channels owned by a university or civic group. All channels broadcast entirely in English. There's no channel similar to PBS in the U.S. (BBC 2 comes close but also programs some sitcoms and other mass-appeal shows.)

New York has 12 full power channels (not counting subchannels) plus a handful of low-power stations and a few suburban stations. Toronto has 8 channels plus a couple of suburban stations (but so far no subchannels) and many residents can pick up the Buffalo NY stations too.

Is there a reason the U.K. won't license any non-commercial, university or ethnic TV stations available over-the-air?


Gregg
[email protected]

 

[kenglish]

As I understand it, in most countries the transmission of "Digital Muxes" is provided by one or two transmission provider companies, not by the programmers themselves. So, there is just a group of programming channels on each mux, with no special regard as to what is commercial, non-commercial or government-supported.

 

[Ultimajock]

There are only five over-the-air TV channels in London, UK. BBC 1, BBC 2, ITV, Channel 4, Channel 5. They do have subchannels. But every station is commercial (even though the BBC channels are government-owned).

...when did the BBC start adding commercials? Side question: Has CBC-TV/SRC-TV in Canada always been commercial, or were they non-commercial (like their radio networks) at first?...

 

[azumanga]

...when did the BBC start adding commercials? Side question: Has CBC-TV/SRC-TV in Canada always been commercial, or were they non-commercial (like their radio networks) at first?...

As far as I know, the BBC never did -- it's against the law, especially since they are still funded by license fees. As for community television in Britain, there are some existing, either broadcasting on low-powered transmitters or broadcasting only on cable. Don't know if such exists for London, but if there is one, it's likely available only on cable.

As for CBC and Radio-Canada television -- they always carried commercials since starting broadcast in 1952. Their radio side did carry commercials at first, but they began phasing them out in the early-1970s before going commercial-free (for the English service, that was around 1974).

 

[hubcity]

As I understand it, in most countries the transmission of "Digital Muxes" is provided by one or two transmission provider companies, not by the programmers themselves. So, there is just a group of programming channels on each mux, with no special regard as to what is commercial, non-commercial or government-supported.

Actually, is it really true there's only five channels when considering digital broadcasting (Freeview, specifically?)

Historically, it's true that the UK has had fewer channels, but one should also consider each of the Big Five (BBC1/BBC2/ITV/Channel4/Five) as networks, rather than as "channels". In a somewhat more recent development, there are also independent TV stations, though I think they have an alarming tendency to go bankrupt.

 

[BMR]

Two points to deal with here

There are only five over-the-air TV channels in London, UK. BBC 1, BBC 2, ITV, Channel 4, Channel 5. They do have subchannels.

The UK has been very conservative when it came to launching new channels.

Basically there were only 3 TV channels until 1982, and only 4 until 1997. What the UK *did* have was (near) universal coverage so not only were there 4 channels in London, there were also 4 channels in the most remote corners of the land.

You rightly point out there are 12 channels in New York, but only 60 miles away in Poughkeepsie there are just two. In the UK it is the same number of channels everywhere, and that has reduced the space for new stations.


However since digital TV launched there has been a plethora of new channels- there are 30 to 40 over the air channels these days.

London still has the old analogue system running in parallel for another year

There are no channels owned by a university or civic group. All channels broadcast entirely in English. There's no channel similar to PBS in the U.S. (BBC 2 comes close but also programs some sitcoms and other mass-appeal shows.)


Is there a reason the U.K. won't license any non-commercial, university or ethnic TV stations available over-the-air?

This is an interesting question. I'm not aware of any universities applying to launch a channel, so I've no idea if they were turned down.

In theory Channel Four is non-commercial, in the sense that it is owned by a trust and supposed to focus on public service rather making maximum profit, even though it is funded by advertising. In practice it is hard to distinguish from the commercial networks.

As for Ethnic TV, I'm not sure the demand is there. The largest ethnic minorities in the UK are Black and South Asian. The former group speak english, and most of the 2nd generation south asians do too. There are some TV channels for South Asian viewers on cable and satellite. London also has several radio stations, mostly on AM, focused on ethnic minority listeners, and at least one station (Choice FM) aiming at Black people


Recently we've also seen immigration from Poland, and you'll see large dishes used to pick up Polish TV in the UK

 

[e-dawg]

The rest of of Europe has at least 3-7 channels (analogue) area.

Only Germany, Greece, and Italy has move than 7 channels in their TV systems. Here are the rest of Europe with their TV channels.


Ireland: RTE 1, RTE 2, TV3, TG 4.

France: TF1, France 2, France 3, Canal +, France 5/Arte (shared channel), M6

Belgium: French area: RTBF 1, RTBF 2, BeTV, Dutch area: VRT 1, Ketnet/Canvas

The Nederlands: NED 1, NED 2, NED 3.

Portugual: RTP 1, RTP 2, TVI, SIC

Austria: ORF 1, ORF 2, ATV

Switzerland: French Speaking: TSR 1, TSR 2, German speaking: SF1, SF 2, Italian speaking: RSI 1 RSI 2

Sweden: SVT 1, SVT 2, TV 4, Kanal 5

Norway: NRK 1, NRK 2, TV2, TV Norge

Denmark: DR1, TV2, 6e'ren

Czech Republic: CT 1, CT2, Nova TV, Pima TV

Spain: TVE 1, TVE 2, Antena 3, Cuarto, Tele 5, La Sexta, (Madrid: Tele Madrid, La Otra) (Barcelona: TV3, K3/33)

Italy: RAI 1, RAI 2, RAI 3, Rete 4, Canale 5, Italia 1, La 7, MTV, All Music TV

Germany: ARD 1, 2 ZDF, 3 WDR(Local Broadcast), RTL, RTL II, Pro Sieben,

 

[pab]

When television started in the UK in the 1930's there was only BBC Television. Transmitters were built and planned out to cover the entire nation and channels planned out to achieve the most penetration. There was enough room left over so when the Conservatives took back over from Labour in the 1950's they instituted commercial broadcasting with franchises awarded to individual companies on a regional basis.

Until relatively recently, all of the regional ITV stations were essentially completely independent. They all shared programming but operated separately and didn't necessarily clear an entire national feed. As the 1990's plowed onward two companies eventually bought out most of the smaller regional broadcasters and formed a united ITV in 2004. There are still a couple theoretically independent companies (Channel Television for the Channel Islands, UTV for Northern Ireland, and STV in the North of Scotland) but they pretty much clear the "national" ITV feed.

When 625-line UHF PAL broadcasting came along in the 1960's they planned out coverage for four tv networks: BBC 1 and BBC 2 (which came along in 1964), the existing commercial franchises, and an anticipated second commercial channel in each region that eventually morphed into the non-profit-but-commercial Channel 4. Eventually they found room for a fifth channel over about 75% of the country by short-spacing transmitters and building some low-power transmitters that were co-channel located with French stations but were weak enough to not interfere with them. That's how Five was born.

Today you do have to take Freeview into account. With digital television the "five channels" branch out into four BBC's, four ITV's, three "Channel 4's," time-delayed feeds of some channels, plus news, variety, shopping, a whole plethora of channels all free over-the-air.

 

[WPPCProductions]

It would of been interesting if all of the nations agreed on a international tv system ages ago .that will work in any country.the only thing you need to travel is a power converter.

 

[Mediafrog+]

It would of been interesting if all of the nations agreed on a international tv system ages ago .that will work in any country.the only thing you need to travel is a power converter.

The problem was that spectrum was already allocated for other services, and was not easy to reclaim for TV. Unlike longwave/mediumwave/shortwave which can cover great distances, VHF/UHF frequencies have a limited range, so different countries came up with different allocation schemes, not having to deal with being compatible with other systems.

Another issue with TV standards are the different AC power line frequencies used in the world. The 50 and 60 Hz standards resulted in different field/frame rates and scan line resolutions.

Even in the digital era the standards are different, with ATSC, DVB-T, ISDB, DMB-T, SBTVD, etc.

 

[azumanga]

Italy: RAI 1, RAI 2, RAI 3, Rete 4, Canale 5, Italia 1, La 7, MTV, All Music TV

Germany: ARD 1, 2 ZDF, 3 WDR(Local Broadcast), RTL, RTL II, Pro Sieben,

Italy is notorious for having local television stations, some of them being pirates.

As for Germany, WDR is one of nine regional public broadcasters that produce programming for ARD, the main public channel -- they actually don't have their own channels.

More on German television here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Television_in_Germany

 

[Gregg]

Thanks for the info. I got confused that CBC/SRC in Canada has commercials, forgetting that BBC 1 and BBC 2 are non-commercial. I wasn't aware that Channel 4 was supposed to be non-profit but supported by commercials (similar to Tele-Quebec in Canada). (Is the ABC in Australia supported by commercials?)

I also wasn't aware that most European cities were limited like London to only three, four or five over-the-air channels, till digital broadcasting began.

As for ethnic channels in the U.K. I was amazed when visiting for the first time a few years ago, as soon as I got out of the Heathrow Airport and was on the Picadilly Tube line (which is outdoors for most of the ride from the airport) that everyone in my car who was on a cell phone spoke a foreign language... Russian, Arabic, Hindi, etc. NYC has three over-the-air TV stations in Spanish. Toronto has two over-the-air stations in foreign languages (Mandarin and Cantonese mostly but with some Italian and Greek programming). It seems odd that no over-the-air channels in London broadcast in languages other than English, especially with so many AM stations and FM pirates broadcasting in foreign languages.


Gregg
[email protected]

 

[ixnay]

As I understand it, in most countries the transmission of "Digital Muxes" is provided by one or two transmission provider companies, not by the programmers themselves. So, there is just a group of programming channels on each mux, with no special regard as to what is commercial, non-commercial or government-supported.

"Mux" - a perfectly crumulent word. What's a mux? I don't have time to Wiki right now.

ixnay

 

[ansky212]

Sometimes I wish the US only had 5 channels. It would mean less crap on TV.More does not mean better. The CW and MY Network could go away and I don't think anyone would even notice.

 

[BMR]

As I understand it, in most countries the transmission of "Digital Muxes" is provided by one or two transmission provider companies, not by the programmers themselves. So, there is just a group of programming channels on each mux, with no special regard as to what is commercial, non-commercial or government-supported.

"Mux" - a perfectly crumulent word. What's a mux? I don't have time to Wiki right now.

ixnay

I'll tell you what 'mux' means if you tell me what 'crumulent' means. Deal?


Mux is short for MUltipleX, and means several digital TV or digital radio stations on one frequency. For example the BBC national radio multiplex is on 225.648 MHz, and features several digital radio stations on that same frequency. The decoder in your TV or radio sorts out the channels for you, so as a listener or viewer you don't need to worry about what Mux a station is on.

I think the closest thing you have is the idea of TV subchannels. The only difference is with a mux no one channel is the primary one- all channels are equal. It is the EPG that decides what order the channels appear on you TV

 

[BMR]

Sometimes I wish the US only had 5 channels. It would mean less crap on TV.More does not mean better. The CW and MY Network could go away and I don't think anyone would even notice.

Sometimes I wish the UK still had 5 channels!!

 

[azumanga]

Is the ABC in Australia supported by commercials?

Never seen or heard them, but according to what I read, the ABC doesn't broadcast commercials on TV or radio.

As how they are funded -- I imagine its through tax dollars from Australian residents, as the ABC has no ads or pledge drives, and Australia has no TV licensing.

 

[e-dawg]

Two points to deal with here

There are only five over-the-air TV channels in London, UK. BBC 1, BBC 2, ITV, Channel 4, Channel 5. They do have subchannels.

The UK has been very conservative when it came to launching new channels.

Basically there were only 3 TV channels until 1982, and only 4 until 1997. What the UK *did* have was (near) universal coverage so not only were there 4 channels in London, there were also 4 channels in the most remote corners of the land.

You rightly point out there are 12 channels in New York, but only 60 miles away in Poughkeepsie there are just two. In the UK it is the same number of channels everywhere, and that has reduced the space for new stations.


However since digital TV launched there has been a plethora of new channels- there are 30 to 40 over the air channels these days.

London still has the old analogue system running in parallel for another year

There are no channels owned by a university or civic group. All channels broadcast entirely in English. There's no channel similar to PBS in the U.S. (BBC 2 comes close but also programs some sitcoms and other mass-appeal shows.)


Is there a reason the U.K. won't license any non-commercial, university or ethnic TV stations available over-the-air?

This is an interesting question. I'm not aware of any universities applying to launch a channel, so I've no idea if they were turned down.

In theory Channel Four is non-commercial, in the sense that it is owned by a trust and supposed to focus on public service rather making maximum profit, even though it is funded by advertising. In practice it is hard to distinguish from the commercial networks.

As for Ethnic TV, I'm not sure the demand is there. The largest ethnic minorities in the UK are Black and South Asian. The former group speak english, and most of the 2nd generation south asians do too. There are some TV channels for South Asian viewers on cable and satellite. London also has several radio stations, mostly on AM, focused on ethnic minority listeners, and at least one station (Choice FM) aiming at Black people


Recently we've also seen immigration from Poland, and you'll see large dishes used to pick up Polish TV in the UK

Speaking of UK TV.....I notice that Manchester has a local tv station, also Oxford, South Hamption, and Reading has a local community channel a while back.

 

[w9wi]

I think the closest thing you have is the idea of TV subchannels. The only difference is with a mux no one channel is the primary one- all channels are equal. It is the EPG that decides what order the channels appear on you TV

Digital "subchannels" in the U.S. are also equal. ("subchannel" is a poor choice of words, but nothing has really come along to take its place)

Multichannel providers (cable/satellite/etc.) are only required to carry one of the channels in any given station's mux; almost always, it's the first channel in the mux that's chosen. I suppose to that extent, the first channel is "more equal" than the others.

Likewise for our "IBOC" digital radio system: the various programs are essentially co-equal from a technical standpoint. Stations are required by law to simulcast their analog on one of the digital programs, and universally the first digital program is selected. (among other reasons, because receivers tuned to the first digital program will automatically switch to analog if the digital signal is lost. Actually, *when* the digital signal is lost as our digital radio isn't very robust!

 

[desertv]

AFAIK, "Five" is a commercial channel equivalent to our 4 networks.