Culture Secretary Jeremy Hunt has invited companies to run local TV stations and make the proposed new services a reality.

Addressing broadcasting executives at the Oxford Media Convention, he said the initial schemes would be focused on "10 to 12" major cities.

He asked firms to register an interest by 1 March.

Licences for local - rather than regional - television services are to be handed out before the end of 2012.

Mr Hunt has long championed the concept of US-style local television, where many cities, rather than wider regions, have their own news and entertainment coverage.

'Patronising'
In a speech to the convention, he said: "To make this vision a reality I am today inviting existing and new media providers to come forward with suggestions as to how this network channel - or local TV 'spine' - could work.

Continue reading the main story
“
Start Quote

People in Chelmsford aren't interested in what's happening in Watford”

Jeremy Hunt
Culture Secretary
Send us your comments
"For consumers what this will mean is a new channel dedicated to the provision of local news and content.

"One that will sit alongside other public service broadcasters, offering a new voice for local communities, with local perspectives that are directly relevant to them.

"We will not be prescriptive. We will wait for the necessary technical assessment to be completed and we will listen to the commercially viable proposals that come forward.

"Our goal is to be able to award the relevant licences by the end of 2012, and for local TV to be up and running soon after."

Mr Hunt continued: "It is easy to be patronising about hyper-local services, but take a look at the evidence of what consumers truly value.

"Eight out of 10 consider local news important. Nearly seven out of 10 adults feel localness of stories is more important than them being professionally produced."

He added: "People in Barnham don't want to watch what is going on in Southampton. People in Chelmsford aren't interested in what's happening in Watford. That is the system we currently have at the moment, so that is what we are trying to rethink."

However, Mr Hunt conceded that 24-hour-a-day local news and programming was "not viable".

A panel set up by the government said local television channels might start by broadcasting in only 10 to 12 areas, adding it would take "significant effort" to make the plan a success.

In an interview at last year's Edinburgh International Television Festival, Mr Hunt described the UK media as "chronically over-centralised".

He said: "It is crazy that a city like Sheffield, for example, does not have its own television station like it would have in most other developed countries."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-12220187

Well, I have mixed thoughts about this one, gotta be said. Although I like the idea of having our own television channel, to show off to other cities and my friends from other cities coming over here to stay, it's happened before. Channel M. What happened to that? It became a failure; shut down.

So what're other people's opinions on all this? Is it just Channel M but on a grander, country-wide scale? Or will it be a success?

Will the new stations be run by the BBC? Will it be like "BBC Manchester Television", or will they be whole new corporations in each city?

Discuss!

I believe this is a case of a Minister thinking somethings a great idea without stopping to look at the economics. They seem to be proposing it as a kind of ITV network however, a network of local stations US style.

ISTR similar grand ideas when cable took off in the mid-1990s.

I definitely remember Liverpool had its own television channel (Channel One Liverpool?), because I went to their studios/offices. We had a different operator in Manchester (NYNEX), I can't remember us having one for definite.

Channel M was a victim of the recession. Had the Brown/Blair boom years continued, we'd have had plenty more years of constant property drivvel and awful public sector GMP/GMPTE/GMCFRS adverts to put up with.

As long as we don't get http://www.tameside.gov.uk/ttv , I'll be happy. Big waste of taxpayers' money!

Channel M failed because of the lack of advertisers. The success of Local TV advertising hasn't been proven except for on the ITV sub-regions, which have popular (national) programming backing them. Audience figures couldn't be published city-by-city as they can for regular TV, radio, web and print. If advertisers see that local advertising can bear fruit, like it does on Radio and in Newspapers or overseas, it'll be a hit. Plus, Manchester was/is/will be over-represented on TV, so in media deserts like Liverpool, Sheffield, Nottingham, Hull and Plymouth, I can see these services being more popular.

Channel M would be a good place to start as a model for local TV. When it was in its heydayI was a regular viewer 4-5 times a week. The News programmes were brilliant, reporting in the morning and evening, from across GM. The studio (albeit simple) was in a great central location, with a (locally) well known anchor - Andy Crane. The programmes weren't as technically advanced of those of the BBC, but the shoestring budget gave the channel was its charm.
A lot can be done with a little.

The lifestyle programmes such as I Love Manchester and The Homes Mine were top! The 'Commercial Features' were an example of how quality programmes can be produced through the support of sponsors. For example when Sian Astley would visit an area of Manchester on The Homes Mine, she'd then be shown round a nearby development, 'interviewing' the PR person from the developer (infuriatingly with no negative questions or points, haha!) and the programme would be sponsored by the developers who could then use clips for their own presentations/open days. On 'I Love Manchester', Steph Elmore, would visit a part of the City-Centre or a suburb, give some background history and then visit an important museum/shop/restaurant/bar and get an insiders view, giving the place some extra coverage and getting the crew a free brew.

Losing Channel M Music was a real shame, it was an excellent showcase of artists that have since gone huge (Ting Tings, Passion Pit, Friendly Fires, Delphic etc) and had a national audience on Sky. There was nothing like it around, I would love to see it brought back!

If a network is established, the costs of producing networked programmes, titles, graphics and audio could be shared between local stations, as could the organisation of sales. The stations will need multi-platform coverage, IMO to an area bigger than Channel M's Freeview reach. So, if Channel M could do it well, a national network with a proven advertising reach will have no problem succeeding, especially as all other media such as ITV and Local Radio consolidate into bigger national/global units.

As I imagine the economics if they followed US Cable model they would have several national headline programs (probably some cheap us comedy or something) to grab viewers then handing over to local news programs, there would also be slots for local lifestyle/public interest programs and probably a slot for original programming.

Even if they had a central graphics department, central sales team and anything else that could be centralised im still not sure they could make it cheap enough to work. I know a channel on Sky that failed where it simply had voiceovers and cheap imported programming, still attracted 200k daily viewers, only had 16 staff and still folded (after a period of going down to a skeleton 4 man team).

Just to chip in that Channel M is actually still on air, just not producing any new content.

Is it? I know it shows Euronews most of the day, but I can never seem to find it on Digital Satelitte (used to be my Channel 6).

According to Wikipedia it's now on digital terrestrial if nothing else.

Am I cynical, but is this the Tories faustian pact with Murdoch.

A new semi local, but centrally run media network run by News Corp.

You tell me. I can't see where the desire for this is.

According to Wikipedia it's now on digital terrestrial if nothing else.

But only for half the county.

London doesn't have it's own channel.

Enough said, ecomonically not viable.

But only for half the county.

Yup... well it's meant to be local to Manchester, no? Was it national when Sky carried it?

Yeah was national, now only half of Manchester, Trafford and Stockport (probably a few bits of Bolton and Salford too) can recieve it as its on a narrow beam through the city centre from Winter Hill but doesnt reach as far as Altrincham.

The main channels are transmitted at 100,000 watts, Channel M at 1,000 watts.

London doesn't have it's own channel.

Enough said, ecomonically not viable.

Some might argue that London doesn't have its own channel because London doesn't have the well established local community that other cities have because people in the capital move around more often are less likely to be from London (or the UK), so will be less likely to be interested in Local News.

Most UK' media is based in London and their coverage focusses disproportionately on London. A London channel would only cover stories already covered in the national/regional media. I remember seeing a BBC LDN promotion down there a few years ago that had the strapline "London. Where the Local News is the National News". Haha.

London is a 'region' of the UK as well as a local area, so already has huge coverage and competition in local news in a way that no other part of the UK has. So there wouldn't be any point in establishing a station there yet when you have competition from BBC London News (TV), ITV London, LBC, Capital, BBC LDN Radio, The Evening Standard, Time Out London, City AM etc etc etc.

Outside London, City TV stations would have bespoke coverage for local areas on which coverage isn't already focussed (eg Nottingham, Leicester, Sheffield, Hull, Plymouth....)

The Scots government has just decided they want another TV channel, they want the BBC or UK government to cough up £72m a year to fund it. BBC has told them to take a walk.

London is a 'region' of the UK as well as a local area, so already has huge coverage and competition in local news in a way that no other part of the UK has. So there wouldn't be any point in establishing a station there yet when you have competition from BBC London News (TV), ITV London, LBC, Capital, BBC LDN Radio, The Evening Standard, Time Out London, City AM etc etc etc.

I agree, when there's so much competition in the proposed London 'local' television market, there really would be no point in establishing another outlet. Although when local television stations are set up, and if they network it would make economic sense for a station to be set up in London, so companies could take out national advertising and reach all parts of the UK.

When people say a local station for London wouldn't be commercially viable, I think they're wrong. Any 'local' station for London would be able to survive as it would have the same 'local' advertisements as ITV London do, because as you say London is a 'region' of the UK.

Outside London, City TV stations would have bespoke coverage for local areas on which coverage isn't already focussed (eg Nottingham, Leicester, Sheffield, Hull, Plymouth....)

City TV stations would be great for as you say the provincial British cities away from London. Unlike any London station though, these stations would need to network in some form with other stations to be commercially viable. Standalone stations probably couldn't work for cities such as Liverpool, Nottingham etc, as the local advertising market simply isn't there.

As for Channel M, that didn't work for various reasons. The most obvious being that local advertising wasn't there; and another being that it's position on the EPG was far too low. The vast majority of people do not look at the channels in the 200s of the Sky guide to choose a channel to watch. If Channel M was in the 'channel 8' position which the government are looking at for these new stations then I think it would of had a much better chance of survival.

The Scots government has just decided they want another TV channel, they want the BBC or UK government to cough up £72m a year to fund it. BBC has told them to take a walk.

If they want a new channel exclusively for Scotland, then the taxpayers of Scotland should pay for it, out of their license fee or tax. The taxpayers of England, Wales and Northern Ireland should not be expected to pay for something which they don't need or will ever have the chance of actually watching, unless the channel is put on Sky or something for the entire UK (like S4C is).

I heard not that long ago that the Scottish Government are now looking at using the local television stations plan as an opportunity to create their 'Scottish Digital Network' or 'SBC' public broadcaster. They want any local stations in Scotland to not be in a UK-wide network but be in a Scotland-wide network instead; but if that doesn't work they've said that they'd like a lot of opt-outs from the UK network to show local and national Scottish programming.

Given that local radio is shite I would expect local TV to be similar.

Total waste of money and probably not viable rather like Jeremy C*n* who thought this crap idea up.

If they want a new channel exclusively for Scotland, then the taxpayers of Scotland should pay for it, out of their license fee or tax. The taxpayers of England, Wales and Northern Ireland should not be expected to pay for something which they don't need or will ever have the chance of actually watching, unless the channel is put on Sky or something for the entire UK (like S4C is).

I heard not that long ago that the Scottish Government are now looking at using the local television stations plan as an opportunity to create their 'Scottish Digital Network' or 'SBC' public broadcaster. They want any local stations in Scotland to not be in a UK-wide network but be in a Scotland-wide network instead; but if that doesn't work they've said that they'd like a lot of opt-outs from the UK network to show local and national Scottish programming.

English license-fee payers already subsidise the national and local radio services for Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland as well as frequent regional opt-outs on BBC1 and BBC2 (on which the English regions are lumped with one station for the whole country). Not only that, BBC Alba and S4C get huge handouts from the UK taxpayer, the News Services in the non-English UK regions are so much better resourced than in the English Regions, it's a joke!

At the end of the day does 'River City' really reflect Scottish life any more than 'Hollyoaks' or 'Eastenders' (or even 'Neighbours' for that matter!?).

I agree, when there's so much competition in the proposed London 'local' television market, there really would be no point in establishing another outlet. Although when local television stations are set up, and if they network it would make economic sense for a station to be set up in London, so companies could take out national advertising and reach all parts of the UK.

When people say a local station for London wouldn't be commercially viable, I think they're wrong. Any 'local' station for London would be able to survive as it would have the same 'local' advertisements as ITV London do, because as you say London is a 'region' of the UK.

You're actually right. Most major population centres would need coverage for this to work, if national advertising is going to fund the station. Plus, like you say, adverts on ITV London could be shown on London's 'local TV' station without being modified and would apply to the same audience, but cheaper.

Imagine LBC TV!

You're actually right. Most major population centres would need coverage for this to work, if national advertising is going to fund the station. Plus, like you say, adverts on ITV London could be shown on London's 'local TV' station without being modified and would apply to the same audience, but cheaper.

Imagine LBC TV!

I think LBC could work, as long as it had light entertainment/movies in prime time. There was a station in London a while ago called 'Channel One', copied off NY1 in New York, but it had limited coverage because of its position on the EPG, and because it was only available on cable, which at the time wasn't very widespread.

If local television was a success though, I think that new laws should be introduced to make sure that another ITV1 didn't happen. A law which stopped one company owning all of the stations in their 'network'. There are laws like this in the United States so that the national networks such as NBC, CBS, ABC and Fox can't take control of all the stations, and reduce local programming and merge stations, like what has been seen on Global Radio's Heart Network; and to a lesser extent in Global's Capital FM Network.