SkyscraperCity banner
1 - 20 of 47 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
16,286 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I was on another site earlier, and one user posed the question of what people expect from their local TV service. One user from Blackpool inferred that there was too much emphasis on Liverpool and Manchester on NWT. I found this interesting as it's similar to the way we frequently comment that Liverpool plays second fiddle to Manchester, yet here is someone who feels that their town plays second fiddle to both Liverpool and Manchester.

Anway I got to thinking, and I wondered. Would the North West (not necessarily just Liverpool) be better served if the NWT/Granada Reports broadcast area was carved up into two smaller regions?

As it stands, there is simply too much for one programme to cover. The North West/Granada region is huge, covering four counties, plus some overspill into North Derbyshire and South Cumbria, and the Isle of Man. Within that you have six cities (Liverpool, Manchester, Salford, Lancaster, Preston and Chester for those keeping score), and countless other towns and villages. It's no wonder some people feel their town is always over-looked in favour of stories from other places.

Perhaps South Cumbria should be included in the Look North programme, and North Derbyshire contained within the East Midlands programme, with Lancashire partnered with Greater Manchester, and Merseyside with Cheshire. This would allow for more thorough coverage in each region, and by separating coverage for Manchester and Liverpool would perhaps allow greater scope for other places to see some coverage without Liverpool and Manchester stories together swallowing the lion's share of the programme?

This is all hypothetical of course, but given the rather frequent comments regarding NWT and Granada Reports on here, it would be interesting to see how people would set about resolving the current issues.
 

·
I caught a falling star
Joined
·
2,325 Posts
I was on another site earlier, and one user posed the question of what people expect from their local TV service. One user from Blackpool inferred that there was too much emphasis on Liverpool and Manchester on NWT. I found this interesting as it's similar to the way we frequently comment that Liverpool plays second fiddle to Manchester, yet here is someone who feels that their town plays second fiddle to both Liverpool and Manchester.

Anway I got to thinking, and I wondered. Would the North West (not necessarily just Liverpool) be better served if the NWT/Granada Reports broadcast area was carved up into two smaller regions?

As it stands, there is simply too much for one programme to cover. The North West/Granada region is huge, covering four counties, plus some overspill into North Derbyshire and South Cumbria, and the Isle of Man. Within that you have six cities (Liverpool, Manchester, Salford, Lancaster, Preston and Chester for those keeping score), and countless other towns and villages. It's no wonder some people feel their town is always over-looked in favour of stories from other places.

Perhaps South Cumbria should be included in the Look North programme, and North Derbyshire contained within the East Midlands programme, with Lancashire partnered with Greater Manchester, and Merseyside with Cheshire. This would allow for more thorough coverage in each region, and by separating coverage for Manchester and Liverpool would perhaps allow greater scope for other places to see some coverage without Liverpool and Manchester stories together swallowing the lion's share of the programme?

This is all hypothetical of course, but given the rather frequent comments regarding NWT and Granada Reports on here, it would be interesting to see how people would set about resolving the current issues.

Dear Lord spare us that which will surely follow.


Past-form doesn't bode well for this thread Chris.

Not your fault son. You weren't to know- you've only made 2,000....oh
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
13,909 Posts
I was on another site earlier, and one user posed the question of what people expect from their local TV service. One user from Blackpool inferred that there was too much emphasis on Liverpool and Manchester on NWT. I found this interesting as it's similar to the way we frequently comment that Liverpool plays second fiddle to Manchester, yet here is someone who feels that their town plays second fiddle to both Liverpool and Manchester.
I have brought this up every time a scouse forumer starts wallowing in self-pity.
 

·
Fugly
Joined
·
11,296 Posts
That comment is a bit Wiggleyesque, even by your retarded standards Accy.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
16,286 Posts
Discussion Starter · #7 ·
Dear Lord spare us that which will surely follow.

Past-form doesn't bode well for this thread Chris.

Not your fault son. You weren't to know- you've only made 2,000....oh
We'll see VT. I wasn't intending to start a discussion on which city gets more coverage and whether that is justified. The intention of the discussion was more that given opinions of being over-looked exist (and as highlighted not just by residents of Liverpool and Manchester), whether it would be better to split the region to provide better coverage for everyone.

Cheshire with Merseyside? 'Av a word.

Don't think the people of Wilmslow and Knutsford will be too pleased being lumped in with Scouseland rather than Manchester.
That was merely a suggestion of how the region could be carved up into smaller regions to provide better coverage. Lancashire could be put with Merseyside, and Cheshire with Greater Manchester (which may work better actually with each regions having three cities). It doesn't really matter how the split occured, just whether people feel that in view of the grumblings of discontent about places being routinely over-looked, do people think a split would serve the region better than the current set-up?
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
18,269 Posts
Cheshire with Merseyside? 'Av a word.

Don't think the people of Wilmslow and Knutsford will be too pleased being lumped in with Scouseland rather than Manchester.

I've got a better idea - why don't the BBC regions just follow the official regional structure as set out by the government. So NW Tonight should include Cumbria, Lancashire, Greater Manchester, Cheshire, Merseyside and possibly Isle of Man - but not Derbyshire, North Wales or Stoke.

There, all done and dusted.
yeah, based in Liverpool and dedicating itself to the promotion of the city above all else.... but never managing to shove the mantra further than Crewe and barrow!!!

But accy, Preston never does anything to get overlokkd in the first place. Liverpool is a significant city. Your argument fals down when the lets have all news from a northern perspective, broadcast from Leeds option is raised...I think our manc friends would have a little issue with that, even the monkeys who live their would see this as 'unfair'.

How can you even begin to compare Liverpool to Preston.. you must have one hell of a vivid imagination!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,105 Posts
Physical rather than economic geography plays a large part in this.

North Derbyshire comes into the north west and not east midlands TV regions because there's bloody big hills in the way between, say, Glossop, and the midlands TV transmitters. South Cumbria and North Wales is in Granadaland because that's where the TV signals spill their seed (that's also why north Norfolk is served by Yorkshire TV, not Anglia).

Liverpool and Manchester share a TV region because physically they are not very far away, however far away culturally you like to think they are.
 

·
Liverpool, England.
Joined
·
12,587 Posts
Physical rather than economic geography plays a large part in this.

North Derbyshire comes into the north west and not east midlands TV regions because there's bloody big hills in the way between, say, Glossop, and the midlands TV transmitters. South Cumbria and North Wales is in Granadaland because that's where the TV signals spill their seed (that's also why north Norfolk is served by Yorkshire TV, not Anglia).

Liverpool and Manchester share a TV region because physically they are not very far away, however far away culturally you like to think they are.
How long will that be true Bingethink? My wife is very attached to London and, now that we have a DAB radio, we are subjected to reports about traffic congestion in the Blackwall Tunnel etc. There should be no need nowadays for transmissions to be confined to a certain geographical area.

A Liverpool based TV channel should have a market that extends along Liverpool Bay from the Ribble to the Conway and as far inland as Warrington. That may not be a convenient area for old fashioned analogue transmissions but should come into its own in the digital age.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,251 Posts
Physical rather than economic geography plays a large part in this.

North Derbyshire comes into the north west and not east midlands TV regions because there's bloody big hills in the way between, say, Glossop, and the midlands TV transmitters. South Cumbria and North Wales is in Granadaland because that's where the TV signals spill their seed (that's also why north Norfolk is served by Yorkshire TV, not Anglia).

Liverpool and Manchester share a TV region because physically they are not very far away, however far away culturally you like to think they are.
Surely you mean that North Norfolk would be served by Leicester or Nottingham (ie the East Midlands) rather than transmissions from Leeds or Sheffield. The Yorkshire cities must be well over 100 miles away from the the Wash coastline.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
16,286 Posts
Discussion Starter · #13 ·
Physical rather than economic geography plays a large part in this.
OK I take your point about North Derbyshire and South Cumbria, perhaps they may have to be combined into one of the two new smaller north west regions. With regard to Liverpool and Manchester I don't see why they couldn't be separated, and receive different services. Satellite and cable services can deliver specific services to specific areas, so there's no problem there. With regard to digital terrestrial what if hypothetically Winter Hill was used to service Greater Manchester and Lancashire (as it currently the case), but the Storeton relay transmitter on the Wirral was upgraded to provide a new regional service for Merseyside and Cheshire?

Remember this isn't a case of what coverage Liverpool and Manchester receive. It's about the fact that with such a large broadcast area and so many cities contained therein, the services currently being provided are arguably not serving their target audience as well as two smaller regions could.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,251 Posts
OK I take your point about North Derbyshire and South Cumbria, perhaps they may have to be combined into one of the two new smaller north west regions. With regard to Liverpool and Manchester I don't see why they couldn't be separated, and receive different services. Satellite and cable services can deliver specific services to specific areas, so there's no problem there. With regard to digital terrestrial what if hypothetically Winter Hill was used to service Greater Manchester and Lancashire (as it currently the case), but the Storeton relay transmitter on the Wirral was upgraded to provide a new regional service for Merseyside and Cheshire?

Remember this is a case of what coverage Liverpool and Manchester receive. It's about the fact that with such a large broadcast area and so many cities contained therin, the services currently being provided are arguably not serving their target audience as well as two smaller regions could.
spot on Chris. its a bit like how Liverpool gets its water from North Wales and Manchester gets hers from the Lake District.
 

·
Keltlandia
Joined
·
8,877 Posts
Surely you mean that North Norfolk would be served by Leicester or Nottingham (ie the East Midlands) rather than transmissions from Leeds or Sheffield. The Yorkshire cities must be well over 100 miles away from the the Wash coastline.
No. Many people in northern Norfolk rely on the Belmont transmitter in Lincolnshire. This carries Yorkshire TV and BBC East Yorks & Lincs (based in Hull). They should really get their signals from Tacolneston, which is a few miles south of Norwich. I'm really not sure why they have reception difficulty, as the land is mostly flat. It could be as simply as them facing their aerials north instead of south.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,105 Posts
Surely you mean that North Norfolk would be served by Leicester or Nottingham (ie the East Midlands) rather than transmissions from Leeds or Sheffield. The Yorkshire cities must be well over 100 miles away from the the Wash coastline.
No, the North Norfolk coast is served by Yorkshire TV! Crazy, but true!



Broadcasters could split up TV regions using postcode analysis over Digital Satellite and cable, but not on Freeview, which is the most common digital TV platform.

(And anyway, don't expect ITV to do it, though - they are in the process of amalgamating regions (like East and West Midlands) not setting up new ones. You are more likely to get a "Northern News" covering East and West of the Pennines, than a Liverpool News from them).
 

·
Keltlandia
Joined
·
8,877 Posts
Cheshire with Merseyside? 'Av a word.

Don't think the people of Wilmslow and Knutsford will be too pleased being lumped in with Scouseland rather than Manchester.

I've got a better idea - why don't the BBC regions just follow the official regional structure as set out by the government. So NW Tonight should include Cumbria, Lancashire, Greater Manchester, Cheshire, Merseyside and possibly Isle of Man - but not Derbyshire, North Wales or Stoke.

There, all done and dusted.
Perhaps that would be a bad idea because these regions are artificial and stupid. Ever considered that, MM?

Under your idea, places like Glossop & Buxton, nearest large city being Manchester, will get news from Nottingham, who's news team would also have to cover areas as far off as Kettering. Many North Wallians, who actually prefer the Granada region to the old HTV Wales on, will find themselves completely ignored. Chester will find that anywhere west of it, including some of its own suburbs, will non longer exist as far as 'local' TV is concerned, but that places many miles north will be. Much of Cumbria, including far & distant Carlisle, will be added, which most of them would not be happy with. They are absoloutely miles away.

Add to this that you would need to rejig a lot of the transmitters, probably adding relays on the fringes, where these small places are unlucky enough to be put in a region who's main body is miles away, like poor old Glossop, for example. A lot of cost for an inferior system.

I've told you before, the government regions are stupid, idiosyncratic & totally artificial in relation to regional loyalities, economy and anything else that exists outside of the civil service.
 

·
Keltlandia
Joined
·
8,877 Posts
As for the question, I would say that a three way split would be better.

- Liverpool-focus region which includes a ring around Liverpool from Southport, around to Warrington, down to Chester & North Wales

- Manchester-focus region which includes Greater Manchester, Warrington, eastern Cheshire, North Derbyshire.

- Lancashire-focus region which includes to existing county of Lancashire, overlaps including the Southport area, Wigan, as well as southern Cumbria and places in western North Yorkshire, such as Settle.

This is essentially the BBC local radio pattern, which is very logical.

Reasons it won't happen...

- the government doesn't really care
- more regions = more cost, which doesn't make commercial sense for the now united ITVplc and the BBC, without government inteference.
- ITV are currently merging existing regions. It will not be making any new ones. Eventually, ITV will have no regions at all.
- it would require a new main transmitter for the Liverpool area. The cost for what, these days, is to merely provide a different half hour news program, five nights a week,
- regional TV is effectively dead, thanks it ITV consolidation and lack of regulation.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,251 Posts
No. Many people in northern Norfolk rely on the Belmont transmitter in Lincolnshire. This carries Yorkshire TV and BBC East Yorks & Lincs (based in Hull). They should really get their signals from Tacolneston, which is a few miles south of Norwich. I'm really not sure why they have reception difficulty, as the land is mostly flat. It could be as simply as them facing their aerials north instead of south.
i see what you mean Gareth. a bit like the 80's here in Bootle. we could get S4C (Welsh Channel 4) a hell of a lot clearer than we could Channel 4. which meant you had to wait till 8.30 before you could watch Brookey!
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
18,269 Posts
Physical rather than economic geography plays a large part in this.

North Derbyshire comes into the north west and not east midlands TV regions because there's bloody big hills in the way between, say, Glossop, and the midlands TV transmitters. South Cumbria and North Wales is in Granadaland because that's where the TV signals spill their seed (that's also why north Norfolk is served by Yorkshire TV, not Anglia).

Liverpool and Manchester share a TV region because physically they are not very far away, however far away culturally you like to think they are.
and Leeds is how far from central Manc? Let us have all of our localised services come from Leeds, it would be as relevant for us as the current situation, but Manchester may be enriched, watching as it would, ongoing promos telling us all just how great Leeds is, how it is better and more dynamic than any other northern city, how the Leeds music scene is internationally influential.. how its amateur league teams are doing. You never know, they may even make reference to what is going on in Manchester once in a while.. you know the sort of things, the occasional murder or henoius crime..... some poverty report that highlights just how shit the place is etc?
 
1 - 20 of 47 Posts
Top