Discussion:
SOT: BBC News at One
(too old to reply)
Scott
2023-11-29 18:30:23 UTC
Permalink
How does moving a news programme to Salford rather than the news
studio where all other news programmes are produced save any money?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-67564479
Andy Burns
2023-11-29 18:46:41 UTC
Permalink
Post by Scott
How does moving a news programme to Salford rather than the news
studio where all other news programmes are produced save any money?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-67564479
It saves £285,000 for Kirsty Wark's salary?
Scott
2023-11-29 18:51:14 UTC
Permalink
Post by Andy Burns
Post by Scott
How does moving a news programme to Salford rather than the news
studio where all other news programmes are produced save any money?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-67564479
It saves £285,000 for Kirsty Wark's salary?
That's Newsnight. Why don't the merge it with 'The World Tonight' on
Radio 4 and BBC WS?

However, I was wondering about the logic of moving News at One away
from a dedicated news studio.
alan_m
2023-11-29 19:04:12 UTC
Permalink
Post by Scott
Post by Andy Burns
Post by Scott
How does moving a news programme to Salford rather than the news
studio where all other news programmes are produced save any money?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-67564479
It saves £285,000 for Kirsty Wark's salary?
That's Newsnight. Why don't the merge it with 'The World Tonight' on
Radio 4 and BBC WS?
However, I was wondering about the logic of moving News at One away
from a dedicated news studio.
Further away from the Westminster village and so the journalists may
have to work harder to report real news?
--
mailto : news {at} admac {dot} myzen {dot} co {dot} uk
Scott
2023-11-29 19:21:59 UTC
Permalink
Post by alan_m
Post by Scott
Post by Andy Burns
Post by Scott
How does moving a news programme to Salford rather than the news
studio where all other news programmes are produced save any money?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-67564479
It saves £285,000 for Kirsty Wark's salary?
That's Newsnight. Why don't the merge it with 'The World Tonight' on
Radio 4 and BBC WS?
However, I was wondering about the logic of moving News at One away
from a dedicated news studio.
Further away from the Westminster village and so the journalists may
have to work harder to report real news?
Yes, but how does this save money, which is the claimed purpose?
R. Mark Clayton
2023-11-29 21:34:09 UTC
Permalink
Post by Scott
Post by alan_m
Post by Scott
Post by Andy Burns
Post by Scott
How does moving a news programme to Salford rather than the news
studio where all other news programmes are produced save any money?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-67564479
It saves £285,000 for Kirsty Wark's salary?
That's Newsnight. Why don't the merge it with 'The World Tonight' on
Radio 4 and BBC WS?
However, I was wondering about the logic of moving News at One away
from a dedicated news studio.
Further away from the Westminster village and so the journalists may
have to work harder to report real news?
Yes, but how does this save money, which is the claimed purpose?
Er rents and salaries etc. are lower in Manchester than central London.
Scott
2023-11-30 10:51:47 UTC
Permalink
On Wed, 29 Nov 2023 13:34:09 -0800 (PST), "R. Mark Clayton"
Post by R. Mark Clayton
Post by Scott
Post by alan_m
Post by Scott
Post by Andy Burns
Post by Scott
How does moving a news programme to Salford rather than the news
studio where all other news programmes are produced save any money?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-67564479
It saves £285,000 for Kirsty Wark's salary?
That's Newsnight. Why don't the merge it with 'The World Tonight' on
Radio 4 and BBC WS?
However, I was wondering about the logic of moving News at One away
from a dedicated news studio.
Further away from the Westminster village and so the journalists may
have to work harder to report real news?
Yes, but how does this save money, which is the claimed purpose?
Er rents and salaries etc. are lower in Manchester than central London.
But the rent is already paid (fixed cost) and getting existing staff
to produce another hour of output would intuitively seem cheaper than
employing new staff in Salford. Anyway, I thought the news was
semi-automated with the equipment based in 'Europe's largest newsroom'
in London.
charles
2023-11-30 11:15:03 UTC
Permalink
Post by Scott
On Wed, 29 Nov 2023 13:34:09 -0800 (PST), "R. Mark Clayton"
Post by R. Mark Clayton
Post by Scott
Post by alan_m
On Wed, 29 Nov 2023 18:46:41 +0000, Andy Burns
Post by Andy Burns
Post by Scott
How does moving a news programme to Salford rather than the news
studio where all other news programmes are produced save any
money? https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-67564479
It saves £285,000 for Kirsty Wark's salary?
That's Newsnight. Why don't the merge it with 'The World Tonight'
on Radio 4 and BBC WS?
However, I was wondering about the logic of moving News at One away
from a dedicated news studio.
Further away from the Westminster village and so the journalists may
have to work harder to report real news?
Yes, but how does this save money, which is the claimed purpose?
Er rents and salaries etc. are lower in Manchester than central London.
But the rent is already paid (fixed cost) and getting existing staff to
produce another hour of output would intuitively seem cheaper than
employing new staff in Salford. Anyway, I thought the news was
semi-automated with the equipment based in 'Europe's largest newsroom' in
London.
London staff are more expensive than those outside - no "London Weighting"
of salaries
--
from KT24 in Surrey, England - sent from my RISC OS 4té²
"I'd rather die of exhaustion than die of boredom" Thomas Carlyle
Scott
2023-11-30 11:33:41 UTC
Permalink
Post by charles
Post by Scott
On Wed, 29 Nov 2023 13:34:09 -0800 (PST), "R. Mark Clayton"
Post by R. Mark Clayton
Post by Scott
Post by alan_m
On Wed, 29 Nov 2023 18:46:41 +0000, Andy Burns
Post by Andy Burns
Post by Scott
How does moving a news programme to Salford rather than the news
studio where all other news programmes are produced save any
money? https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-67564479
It saves £285,000 for Kirsty Wark's salary?
That's Newsnight. Why don't the merge it with 'The World Tonight'
on Radio 4 and BBC WS?
However, I was wondering about the logic of moving News at One away
from a dedicated news studio.
Further away from the Westminster village and so the journalists may
have to work harder to report real news?
Yes, but how does this save money, which is the claimed purpose?
Er rents and salaries etc. are lower in Manchester than central London.
But the rent is already paid (fixed cost) and getting existing staff to
produce another hour of output would intuitively seem cheaper than
employing new staff in Salford. Anyway, I thought the news was
semi-automated with the equipment based in 'Europe's largest newsroom' in
London.
London staff are more expensive than those outside - no "London Weighting"
of salaries
I know that, but would you employ a whole staff member to read one
hour of news? Surely flexible working at BH would be cheaper than
setting up a new operation at SQ.
Mark Carver
2023-11-30 14:11:08 UTC
Permalink
Post by Scott
Post by charles
Post by Scott
On Wed, 29 Nov 2023 13:34:09 -0800 (PST), "R. Mark Clayton"
Post by R. Mark Clayton
Post by Scott
Post by alan_m
On Wed, 29 Nov 2023 18:46:41 +0000, Andy Burns
Post by Andy Burns
Post by Scott
How does moving a news programme to Salford rather than the news
studio where all other news programmes are produced save any
money? https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-67564479
It saves £285,000 for Kirsty Wark's salary?
That's Newsnight. Why don't the merge it with 'The World Tonight'
on Radio 4 and BBC WS?
However, I was wondering about the logic of moving News at One away
from a dedicated news studio.
Further away from the Westminster village and so the journalists may
have to work harder to report real news?
Yes, but how does this save money, which is the claimed purpose?
Er rents and salaries etc. are lower in Manchester than central London.
But the rent is already paid (fixed cost) and getting existing staff to
produce another hour of output would intuitively seem cheaper than
employing new staff in Salford. Anyway, I thought the news was
semi-automated with the equipment based in 'Europe's largest
newsroom' in
Post by Scott
Post by charles
Post by Scott
London.
London staff are more expensive than those outside - no "London Weighting"
of salaries
I know that, but would you employ a whole staff member to read one
hour of news? Surely flexible working at BH would be cheaper than
setting up a new operation at SQ.
It's not a new operation at Salford. Breakfast has been there for 12
years. They've just built a new studio there for Breakfast (so it no
longer shares with North West Tonight) I'm sure that's the studio to be
used for the Lunchtime News.
Scott
2023-12-03 16:50:50 UTC
Permalink
Post by R. Mark Clayton
Post by Scott
Post by charles
Post by Scott
On Wed, 29 Nov 2023 13:34:09 -0800 (PST), "R. Mark Clayton"
Post by R. Mark Clayton
Post by Scott
Post by alan_m
On Wed, 29 Nov 2023 18:46:41 +0000, Andy Burns
Post by Andy Burns
Post by Scott
How does moving a news programme to Salford rather than the news
studio where all other news programmes are produced save any
money? https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-67564479
It saves £285,000 for Kirsty Wark's salary?
That's Newsnight. Why don't the merge it with 'The World Tonight'
on Radio 4 and BBC WS?
However, I was wondering about the logic of moving News at One away
from a dedicated news studio.
Further away from the Westminster village and so the journalists may
have to work harder to report real news?
Yes, but how does this save money, which is the claimed purpose?
Er rents and salaries etc. are lower in Manchester than central
London.
Post by Scott
Post by charles
Post by Scott
But the rent is already paid (fixed cost) and getting existing staff to
produce another hour of output would intuitively seem cheaper than
employing new staff in Salford. Anyway, I thought the news was
semi-automated with the equipment based in 'Europe's largest
newsroom' in
Post by Scott
Post by charles
Post by Scott
London.
London staff are more expensive than those outside - no "London
Weighting"
Post by Scott
Post by charles
of salaries
I know that, but would you employ a whole staff member to read one
hour of news? Surely flexible working at BH would be cheaper than
setting up a new operation at SQ.
It's not a new operation at Salford. Breakfast has been there for 12
years. They've just built a new studio there for Breakfast (so it no
longer shares with North West Tonight) I'm sure that's the studio to be
used for the Lunchtime News.
Okay, though I still can's see how it can be cheaper to employ someone
in Salford to read the news when I'm sure it could be read by an
existing staff member in London. If it were me, I would be bolder and
go back to the concept of Pebble Mill at One (which contradicts my
argument, I know).
Mark Carver
2023-12-03 16:59:41 UTC
Permalink
Post by Scott
Post by R. Mark Clayton
Post by Scott
Post by charles
Post by Scott
On Wed, 29 Nov 2023 13:34:09 -0800 (PST), "R. Mark Clayton"
Post by R. Mark Clayton
Post by Scott
Post by alan_m
On Wed, 29 Nov 2023 18:46:41 +0000, Andy Burns
Post by Andy Burns
Post by Scott
How does moving a news programme to Salford rather than the news
studio where all other news programmes are produced save any
money? https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-67564479
It saves £285,000 for Kirsty Wark's salary?
That's Newsnight. Why don't the merge it with 'The World Tonight'
on Radio 4 and BBC WS?
However, I was wondering about the logic of moving News at One away
from a dedicated news studio.
Further away from the Westminster village and so the journalists may
have to work harder to report real news?
Yes, but how does this save money, which is the claimed purpose?
Er rents and salaries etc. are lower in Manchester than central
London.
Post by Scott
Post by charles
Post by Scott
But the rent is already paid (fixed cost) and getting existing staff to
produce another hour of output would intuitively seem cheaper than
employing new staff in Salford. Anyway, I thought the news was
semi-automated with the equipment based in 'Europe's largest
newsroom' in
Post by Scott
Post by charles
Post by Scott
London.
London staff are more expensive than those outside - no "London
Weighting"
Post by Scott
Post by charles
of salaries
I know that, but would you employ a whole staff member to read one
hour of news? Surely flexible working at BH would be cheaper than
setting up a new operation at SQ.
It's not a new operation at Salford. Breakfast has been there for 12
years. They've just built a new studio there for Breakfast (so it no
longer shares with North West Tonight) I'm sure that's the studio to be
used for the Lunchtime News.
Okay, though I still can's see how it can be cheaper to employ someone
in Salford to read the news when I'm sure it could be read by an
existing staff member in London. If it were me, I would be bolder and
go back to the concept of Pebble Mill at One (which contradicts my
argument, I know).
It's not just the person reading the news that's in Salford, the entire
production team and studio crew (obvs) will be there
Scott
2023-12-03 17:39:08 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mark Carver
Post by Scott
Post by R. Mark Clayton
Post by Scott
Post by charles
Post by Scott
On Wed, 29 Nov 2023 13:34:09 -0800 (PST), "R. Mark Clayton"
Post by R. Mark Clayton
Post by Scott
Post by alan_m
On Wed, 29 Nov 2023 18:46:41 +0000, Andy Burns
Post by Andy Burns
Post by Scott
How does moving a news programme to Salford rather than the news
studio where all other news programmes are produced save any
money? https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-67564479
It saves £285,000 for Kirsty Wark's salary?
That's Newsnight. Why don't the merge it with 'The World Tonight'
on Radio 4 and BBC WS?
However, I was wondering about the logic of moving News at One away
from a dedicated news studio.
Further away from the Westminster village and so the journalists may
have to work harder to report real news?
Yes, but how does this save money, which is the claimed purpose?
Er rents and salaries etc. are lower in Manchester than central
London.
Post by Scott
Post by charles
Post by Scott
But the rent is already paid (fixed cost) and getting existing staff to
produce another hour of output would intuitively seem cheaper than
employing new staff in Salford. Anyway, I thought the news was
semi-automated with the equipment based in 'Europe's largest
newsroom' in
Post by Scott
Post by charles
Post by Scott
London.
London staff are more expensive than those outside - no "London
Weighting"
Post by Scott
Post by charles
of salaries
I know that, but would you employ a whole staff member to read one
hour of news? Surely flexible working at BH would be cheaper than
setting up a new operation at SQ.
It's not a new operation at Salford. Breakfast has been there for 12
years. They've just built a new studio there for Breakfast (so it no
longer shares with North West Tonight) I'm sure that's the studio to be
used for the Lunchtime News.
Okay, though I still can's see how it can be cheaper to employ someone
in Salford to read the news when I'm sure it could be read by an
existing staff member in London. If it were me, I would be bolder and
go back to the concept of Pebble Mill at One (which contradicts my
argument, I know).
It's not just the person reading the news that's in Salford, the entire
production team and studio crew (obvs) will be there
I would suggest this supports my argument that it is difficult to see
how this saves money.
charles
2023-12-03 18:30:09 UTC
Permalink
Post by Scott
Post by Mark Carver
Post by Scott
Post by R. Mark Clayton
Post by Scott
Post by charles
Post by Scott
On Wed, 29 Nov 2023 13:34:09 -0800 (PST), "R. Mark Clayton"
Post by R. Mark Clayton
On Wed, 29 Nov 2023 19:04:12 +0000, alan_m
Post by alan_m
On Wed, 29 Nov 2023 18:46:41 +0000, Andy Burns
Post by Andy Burns
Post by Scott
How does moving a news programme to Salford rather than the news
studio where all other news programmes are produced save any
money? https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-67564479
It saves £285,000 for Kirsty Wark's salary?
That's Newsnight. Why don't the merge it with 'The World Tonight'
on Radio 4 and BBC WS?
However, I was wondering about the logic of moving News at One away
from a dedicated news studio.
Further away from the Westminster village and so the journalists may
have to work harder to report real news?
Yes, but how does this save money, which is the claimed purpose?
Er rents and salaries etc. are lower in Manchester than central
London.
Post by Scott
Post by charles
Post by Scott
But the rent is already paid (fixed cost) and getting existing staff to
produce another hour of output would intuitively seem cheaper than
employing new staff in Salford. Anyway, I thought the news was
semi-automated with the equipment based in 'Europe's largest
newsroom' in
Post by Scott
Post by charles
Post by Scott
London.
London staff are more expensive than those outside - no "London
Weighting"
Post by Scott
Post by charles
of salaries
I know that, but would you employ a whole staff member to read one
hour of news? Surely flexible working at BH would be cheaper than
setting up a new operation at SQ.
It's not a new operation at Salford. Breakfast has been there for 12
years. They've just built a new studio there for Breakfast (so it no
longer shares with North West Tonight) I'm sure that's the studio to be
used for the Lunchtime News.
Okay, though I still can's see how it can be cheaper to employ someone
in Salford to read the news when I'm sure it could be read by an
existing staff member in London. If it were me, I would be bolder and
go back to the concept of Pebble Mill at One (which contradicts my
argument, I know).
It's not just the person reading the news that's in Salford, the entire
production team and studio crew (obvs) will be there
I would suggest this supports my argument that it is difficult to see
how this saves money.
a load of people not being paid London Weighting
--
from KT24 in Surrey, England - sent from my RISC OS 4té²
"I'd rather die of exhaustion than die of boredom" Thomas Carlyle
Robin
2023-12-03 23:31:07 UTC
Permalink
Post by charles
Post by Scott
Post by Mark Carver
Post by Scott
Post by R. Mark Clayton
Post by Scott
Post by charles
Post by Scott
On Wed, 29 Nov 2023 13:34:09 -0800 (PST), "R. Mark Clayton"
Post by R. Mark Clayton
On Wed, 29 Nov 2023 19:04:12 +0000, alan_m
Post by alan_m
On Wed, 29 Nov 2023 18:46:41 +0000, Andy Burns
Post by Andy Burns
Post by Scott
How does moving a news programme to Salford rather than the news
studio where all other news programmes are produced save any
money? https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-67564479
It saves £285,000 for Kirsty Wark's salary?
That's Newsnight. Why don't the merge it with 'The World Tonight'
on Radio 4 and BBC WS?
However, I was wondering about the logic of moving News at One away
from a dedicated news studio.
Further away from the Westminster village and so the journalists may
have to work harder to report real news?
Yes, but how does this save money, which is the claimed purpose?
Er rents and salaries etc. are lower in Manchester than central
London.
Post by Scott
Post by charles
Post by Scott
But the rent is already paid (fixed cost) and getting existing staff to
produce another hour of output would intuitively seem cheaper than
employing new staff in Salford. Anyway, I thought the news was
semi-automated with the equipment based in 'Europe's largest
newsroom' in
Post by Scott
Post by charles
Post by Scott
London.
London staff are more expensive than those outside - no "London
Weighting"
Post by Scott
Post by charles
of salaries
I know that, but would you employ a whole staff member to read one
hour of news? Surely flexible working at BH would be cheaper than
setting up a new operation at SQ.
It's not a new operation at Salford. Breakfast has been there for 12
years. They've just built a new studio there for Breakfast (so it no
longer shares with North West Tonight) I'm sure that's the studio to be
used for the Lunchtime News.
Okay, though I still can's see how it can be cheaper to employ someone
in Salford to read the news when I'm sure it could be read by an
existing staff member in London. If it were me, I would be bolder and
go back to the concept of Pebble Mill at One (which contradicts my
argument, I know).
It's not just the person reading the news that's in Salford, the entire
production team and studio crew (obvs) will be there
I would suggest this supports my argument that it is difficult to see
how this saves money.
a load of people not being paid London Weighting
Apologies if I missed it in this thread but the BBC committed in 2021 to
move news staff out of London. I suspect driven by savings but also by
the judgment that the "metropolitan elite" label is an existential threat.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-56433109

https://pressgazette.co.uk/news/bbcs-journalistic-centre-to-move-outside-london-in-bid-to-connect-with-audiences/
--
Robin
reply-to address is (intended to be) valid
JMB99
2023-12-04 07:48:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by Robin
Apologies if I missed it in this thread but the BBC committed in 2021 to
move news staff out of London.  I suspect driven by savings but also by
the judgment that the "metropolitan elite" label is an existential threat.
A threat from broadcast and print media that is probably itself based in
London?
charles
2023-12-03 18:30:05 UTC
Permalink
Post by R. Mark Clayton
Post by Scott
Post by charles
Post by Scott
On Wed, 29 Nov 2023 13:34:09 -0800 (PST), "R. Mark Clayton"
Post by R. Mark Clayton
On Wed, 29 Nov 2023 19:04:12 +0000, alan_m
Post by alan_m
On Wed, 29 Nov 2023 18:46:41 +0000, Andy Burns
Post by Andy Burns
Post by Scott
How does moving a news programme to Salford rather than the
news studio where all other news programmes are produced save
any money?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-67564479
It saves £285,000 for Kirsty Wark's salary?
That's Newsnight. Why don't the merge it with 'The World
Tonight' on Radio 4 and BBC WS?
However, I was wondering about the logic of moving News at One
away from a dedicated news studio.
Further away from the Westminster village and so the journalists
may have to work harder to report real news?
Yes, but how does this save money, which is the claimed purpose?
Er rents and salaries etc. are lower in Manchester than central
London.
Post by Scott
Post by charles
Post by Scott
But the rent is already paid (fixed cost) and getting existing
staff to produce another hour of output would intuitively seem
cheaper than employing new staff in Salford. Anyway, I thought the
news was semi-automated with the equipment based in 'Europe's
largest
newsroom' in
Post by Scott
Post by charles
Post by Scott
London.
London staff are more expensive than those outside - no "London
Weighting"
Post by Scott
Post by charles
of salaries
I know that, but would you employ a whole staff member to read one
hour of news? Surely flexible working at BH would be cheaper than
setting up a new operation at SQ.
It's not a new operation at Salford. Breakfast has been there for 12
years. They've just built a new studio there for Breakfast (so it no
longer shares with North West Tonight) I'm sure that's the studio to be
used for the Lunchtime News.
Okay, though I still can's see how it can be cheaper to employ someone in
Salford to read the news when I'm sure it could be read by an existing
staff member in London. If it were me, I would be bolder and go back to
the concept of Pebble Mill at One (which contradicts my argument, I
know).
Trouble is that Pebble Mill is no more
--
from KT24 in Surrey, England - sent from my RISC OS 4té²
"I'd rather die of exhaustion than die of boredom" Thomas Carlyle
JMB99
2023-12-03 21:21:54 UTC
Permalink
Post by Scott
Okay, though I still can's see how it can be cheaper to employ someone
in Salford to read the news when I'm sure it could be read by an
existing staff member in London. If it were me, I would be bolder and
go back to the concept of Pebble Mill at One (which contradicts my
argument, I know).
Not sure of the relevance of Pebble Mill at One, it was a magazine
programme and not a new programme?

There is probably a bigger turnover of staff in Central London so a
lower chance that you will need to keep recruiting new staff in Salford.
Scott
2023-12-04 10:19:14 UTC
Permalink
Post by JMB99
Post by Scott
Okay, though I still can's see how it can be cheaper to employ someone
in Salford to read the news when I'm sure it could be read by an
existing staff member in London. If it were me, I would be bolder and
go back to the concept of Pebble Mill at One (which contradicts my
argument, I know).
Not sure of the relevance of Pebble Mill at One, it was a magazine
programme and not a new programme?
There is probably a bigger turnover of staff in Central London so a
lower chance that you will need to keep recruiting new staff in Salford.
It was just a random thought. I really don't know much about the
economics of broadcasting or BBC strategy but I see there has been an
announcement about the licence fee today that probably deserves a
thread of its own. I am sure there will be plenty of ideas :-)
JMB99
2023-11-30 15:49:15 UTC
Permalink
Post by charles
London staff are more expensive than those outside - no "London Weighting"
of salaries
Probably a higher turnover in staff than in the regions.
JNugent
2023-12-04 14:47:51 UTC
Permalink
Post by charles
Post by Scott
On Wed, 29 Nov 2023 13:34:09 -0800 (PST), "R. Mark Clayton"
Post by R. Mark Clayton
Post by Scott
Post by alan_m
On Wed, 29 Nov 2023 18:46:41 +0000, Andy Burns
Post by Andy Burns
Post by Scott
How does moving a news programme to Salford rather than the news
studio where all other news programmes are produced save any
money? https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-67564479
It saves £285,000 for Kirsty Wark's salary?
That's Newsnight. Why don't the merge it with 'The World Tonight'
on Radio 4 and BBC WS?
However, I was wondering about the logic of moving News at One away
from a dedicated news studio.
Further away from the Westminster village and so the journalists may
have to work harder to report real news?
Yes, but how does this save money, which is the claimed purpose?
Er rents and salaries etc. are lower in Manchester than central London.
But the rent is already paid (fixed cost) and getting existing staff to
produce another hour of output would intuitively seem cheaper than
employing new staff in Salford. Anyway, I thought the news was
semi-automated with the equipment based in 'Europe's largest newsroom' in
London.
London staff are more expensive than those outside - no "London Weighting"
of salaries
As someone born, brought up and educated in Liverpool, let me just say
that I would rather that ALL BBC news and current affairs broadcasting
came from London (which has an unimpeachable claim to it) than that some
of it comes from Manchester (which does not).
JMB99
2023-12-04 16:44:19 UTC
Permalink
Post by JNugent
As someone born, brought up and educated in Liverpool, let me just say
that I would rather that ALL BBC news and current affairs broadcasting
came from London (which has an unimpeachable claim to it) than that some
of it comes from Manchester (which does not).
There are educated people from Liverpool? What a surprise!
JNugent
2023-12-04 20:14:33 UTC
Permalink
Post by JNugent
As someone born, brought up and educated in Liverpool, let me just say
that I would rather that ALL BBC news and current affairs broadcasting
came from London (which has an unimpeachable claim to it) than that
some of it comes from Manchester (which does not).
There are educated people from Liverpool?  What a surprise!
Did ever get that refund from the charm school?
Andy Burns
2023-11-29 19:31:39 UTC
Permalink
Post by Scott
Post by Andy Burns
Post by Scott
How does moving a news programme to Salford rather than the news
studio where all other news programmes are produced save any money?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-67564479
It saves £285,000 for Kirsty Wark's salary?
That's Newsnight.
Which is where your link went to ...
Scott
2023-11-29 19:35:44 UTC
Permalink
Post by Andy Burns
Post by Scott
Post by Andy Burns
Post by Scott
How does moving a news programme to Salford rather than the news
studio where all other news programmes are produced save any money?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-67564479
It saves £285,000 for Kirsty Wark's salary?
That's Newsnight.
Which is where your link went to ...
Fair point. I realised as soon as I sent the post that I should have
quoted the relevant part and made the text independent of the subject.
I just can't see how relocating News at One to Salford saves money. I
suspect it has something to do with BBC internal politics.
Brian Gaff
2023-11-30 12:21:33 UTC
Permalink
Well, a lot of stuff is going to Media City as its trendally called now.
Perhaps the rents are cheaper.
I don't think it will be very long before all news will be created by CGI
and artificial speech in any case.
Brian
--
--:
This newsgroup posting comes to you directly from...
The Sofa of Brian Gaff...
***@blueyonder.co.uk
Blind user, so no pictures please
Note this Signature is meaningless.!
Post by Scott
Post by Andy Burns
Post by Scott
How does moving a news programme to Salford rather than the news
studio where all other news programmes are produced save any money?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-67564479
It saves £285,000 for Kirsty Wark's salary?
That's Newsnight. Why don't the merge it with 'The World Tonight' on
Radio 4 and BBC WS?
However, I was wondering about the logic of moving News at One away
from a dedicated news studio.
Scott
2023-11-30 12:59:59 UTC
Permalink
On Thu, 30 Nov 2023 12:21:33 -0000, "Brian Gaff"
Post by Brian Gaff
Well, a lot of stuff is going to Media City as its trendally called now.
Perhaps the rents are cheaper.
I don't think it will be very long before all news will be created by CGI
and artificial speech in any case.
I can see that but my specific question is how it saves money to split
one department between two sites. If they put on a second edition of
'Breakfast' ('Lunch') I could see the logic - as in the days of
'Pebblemill at One'.
Brian Gaff
2023-12-01 09:31:01 UTC
Permalink
Maybe the eventual idea is do away with demarcation of radio and tv news and
just have two news regions serving both tv and radio, including local radio.

Seems to me that despite the finger pointing at the BBC for being left wing,
we are heading toward throwing away the things the BBC does reasonable well,
local radio, tv news and documentaries and wildlife and giving all the
money to big productions that they can sell to the rest of the world. Its no
good trying to maximise the money coming in, if you let the actual good
parts die of starvation while you are doing it.
Brian
--
--:
This newsgroup posting comes to you directly from...
The Sofa of Brian Gaff...
***@blueyonder.co.uk
Blind user, so no pictures please
Note this Signature is meaningless.!
Post by Scott
On Thu, 30 Nov 2023 12:21:33 -0000, "Brian Gaff"
Post by Brian Gaff
Well, a lot of stuff is going to Media City as its trendally called now.
Perhaps the rents are cheaper.
I don't think it will be very long before all news will be created by CGI
and artificial speech in any case.
I can see that but my specific question is how it saves money to split
one department between two sites. If they put on a second edition of
'Breakfast' ('Lunch') I could see the logic - as in the days of
'Pebblemill at One'.
Davey
2023-12-01 10:05:43 UTC
Permalink
On Fri, 1 Dec 2023 09:31:01 -0000
"Brian Gaff" <***@gmail.com> wrote:

There seems to be a desire to give up all the programs that people
like, such as "A Question of Sport". It worked well under Sue Barker et
alia, so they changed it 'for a younger audience', and now I never
watch it, it's lost all that it had that was good. Similarly with Ken
Bruce on radio, he was sidelined for no reason.
There are others.

A strange way to run a public service corporation.
--
Davey.
Post by Brian Gaff
Maybe the eventual idea is do away with demarcation of radio and
This> tv
Post by Brian Gaff
news and just have two news regions serving both tv and radio,
including local radio.
Seems to me that despite the finger pointing at the BBC for being
left wing, we are heading toward throwing away the things the BBC
does reasonable well, local radio, tv news and documentaries and
wildlife and giving all the money to big productions that they can
sell to the rest of the world. Its no good trying to maximise the
money coming in, if you let the actual good parts die of starvation
while you are doing it. Brian
JMB99
2023-12-01 19:49:42 UTC
Permalink
Post by Davey
Similarly with Ken
Bruce on radio, he was sidelined for no reason.
I thought he 'followed the money', must be being paid considerably more
at wherever he is.
James Heaton
2023-12-01 20:19:30 UTC
Permalink
Post by JMB99
Post by Davey
Similarly with Ken
Bruce on radio, he was sidelined for no reason.
I thought he 'followed the money', must be being paid considerably more
at wherever he is.
He hadn't been offered a new contract at Radio 2, with around 3mths to
go. Apparently he had chased a couple of times and told it was 'in the
works'.

Bearing in mind he has a disabled child who will never earn his own
living, and a limited lifespan at the top of his profession to try and
maximise what he leaves, I don't think it was unreasonable to take the
offer that was on the table.

James
Woody
2023-12-01 20:36:12 UTC
Permalink
Post by James Heaton
Post by JMB99
Post by Davey
Similarly with Ken
Bruce on radio, he was sidelined for no reason.
I thought he 'followed the money', must be being paid considerably
more at wherever he is.
He hadn't been offered a new contract at Radio 2, with around 3mths to
go.  Apparently he had chased a couple of times and told it was 'in the
works'.
Bearing in mind he has a disabled child who will never earn his own
living, and a limited lifespan at the top of his profession to try and
maximise what he leaves, I don't think it was unreasonable to take the
offer that was on the table.
Also don't forget that he registered (patented?) the music quiz (name
escapes me) which he took with him to GHR and is now making him a fortune.
JMB99
2023-12-02 11:56:08 UTC
Permalink
Now Claudia Winkleman leaving her Saturday programme, certainly will not
be listening to Romesh Ranganathan!
Pamela
2023-12-06 20:30:37 UTC
Permalink
Post by Brian Gaff
Maybe the eventual idea is do away with demarcation of radio and tv
news and just have two news regions serving both tv and radio,
including local radio.
Seems to me that despite the finger pointing at the BBC for being left
wing, we are heading toward throwing away the things the BBC does
reasonable well, local radio, tv news and documentaries and wildlife
and giving all the money to big productions that they can sell to the
rest of the world. Its no good trying to maximise the money coming in,
if you let the actual good parts die of starvation while you are doing
it. Brian
The BBC used to be outstanding in many areas but as competition (at home
and abroad) grew it is no longer so special.

Foreign news services have been catching up and I can live without
wildlife documentaries. It's general documentaries can be very lowbrow
with elaborate "experiments" to demonstrate basic scientific facts.

In general I haven't kept up with what's on the BBC but I recall endless
dancing and cooking shows along with property improvement programmes and
auctions. To say nothing of various soap operas.
Davey
2023-12-06 22:44:57 UTC
Permalink
On Wed, 06 Dec 2023 20:30:37 GMT
Pamela <***@gmail.com> wrote:

I despair of the BBC's Saturday morning. Cooking, with a side of
somebody else's cooking, and maybe even a Keith Floyd cooking rerun from
the vaults as variety. Probably interrupted by one of several Matches
of the Day (how many Matches of the Day can you have?).
Even ITV has James Martin cooking.

PS. As I write this, I can hear that darn football signature tune
playing in the background!
--
Davey.
Post by Pamela
In general I haven't kept up with what's on the BBC but I recall
endless dancing and cooking shows along with property improvement
programmes and auctions. To say nothing of various soap operas.
JMB99
2023-11-30 15:46:39 UTC
Permalink
Post by Brian Gaff
I don't think it will be very long before all news will be created by CGI
and artificial speech in any case.
I said years ago that it would be relatively easy to use synthesised
voices on radio. Authors have to travel around the country plugging
their book and be interviewed by local radio people who have not read
the book and probably never hear of them.

They could do one interview and the station could have the interviewer
in any accent they want.

TV is a bit more difficult but can be done.
JMB99
2023-11-29 23:22:12 UTC
Permalink
Post by Scott
How does moving a news programme to Salford rather than the news
studio where all other news programmes are produced save any money?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-67564479
Newsnight is rather superfluous now, there news discussion programmes on
the News channel all day that do a very similar job to Newsnight but I
admit that I have hardly ever watched Newsnight - probably count the
number of times on one hand.

It could be that they have available studio space in Manchester and can
use the space freed up in London for something else.
Scott
2023-11-30 10:52:50 UTC
Permalink
Post by JMB99
Post by Scott
How does moving a news programme to Salford rather than the news
studio where all other news programmes are produced save any money?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-67564479
Newsnight is rather superfluous now, there news discussion programmes on
the News channel all day that do a very similar job to Newsnight but I
admit that I have hardly ever watched Newsnight - probably count the
number of times on one hand.
It could be that they have available studio space in Manchester and can
use the space freed up in London for something else.
Why not merge it with 'The World Tonight' on Radio 4?
charles
2023-11-30 11:15:05 UTC
Permalink
Post by Scott
Post by JMB99
Post by Scott
How does moving a news programme to Salford rather than the news
studio where all other news programmes are produced save any money?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-67564479
Newsnight is rather superfluous now, there news discussion programmes on
the News channel all day that do a very similar job to Newsnight but I
admit that I have hardly ever watched Newsnight - probably count the
number of times on one hand.
It could be that they have available studio space in Manchester and can
use the space freed up in London for something else.
Why not merge it with 'The World Tonight' on Radio 4?
That would mean rather long days to be worked
--
from KT24 in Surrey, England - sent from my RISC OS 4té²
"I'd rather die of exhaustion than die of boredom" Thomas Carlyle
Scott
2023-11-30 11:35:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by charles
Post by Scott
Post by JMB99
Post by Scott
How does moving a news programme to Salford rather than the news
studio where all other news programmes are produced save any money?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-67564479
Newsnight is rather superfluous now, there news discussion programmes on
the News channel all day that do a very similar job to Newsnight but I
admit that I have hardly ever watched Newsnight - probably count the
number of times on one hand.
It could be that they have available studio space in Manchester and can
use the space freed up in London for something else.
Why not merge it with 'The World Tonight' on Radio 4?
That would mean rather long days to be worked
I meant retiming Newsnight to 10 pm and simulcasting (or retiming The
World Tonight to 10.30 pm).
JMB99
2023-11-30 15:48:31 UTC
Permalink
Post by Scott
Why not merge it with 'The World Tonight' on Radio 4?
No news film, no graphics etc on the radio.
Brian Gaff
2023-12-03 11:11:07 UTC
Permalink
Well of course in this brave new online world, they could do a talk radio
thing and just bung the radio on the tv. Many moons ago I'm sure that you
recall all bbc radio had web cams in their studios so every few seconds
yocould view Terry Wogans face or whatever. I am surprised its taken so long
to get the in the same time frame, so to speak. Just think of the
opportunities, the BBC could sell advertising on the radio version while the
videos of people being shot were going out on the TV.
Brian
--
--:
This newsgroup posting comes to you directly from...
The Sofa of Brian Gaff...
***@blueyonder.co.uk
Blind user, so no pictures please
Note this Signature is meaningless.!
Post by JMB99
Post by Scott
Why not merge it with 'The World Tonight' on Radio 4?
No news film, no graphics etc on the radio.
JMB99
2023-12-03 15:04:47 UTC
Permalink
Post by Brian Gaff
Many moons ago I'm sure that you
recall all bbc radio had web cams in their studios so every few seconds
yocould view Terry Wogans face or whatever.
Didn't something happen that made them remove all the webcameras|
Scott
2023-12-03 16:56:14 UTC
Permalink
Post by JMB99
Post by Scott
Why not merge it with 'The World Tonight' on Radio 4?
No news film, no graphics etc on the radio.
My understanding of the proposal was to remove 'reports' and make
Newsnight into a discussion programme. The graphics must be there
already from BBC World News. I would envisage just presenting it from
a TV studio instead of a radio studio. The incremental cost over the
radio show would be minimal.
Mark Carver
2023-12-03 17:38:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by Scott
Post by JMB99
Post by Scott
Why not merge it with 'The World Tonight' on Radio 4?
No news film, no graphics etc on the radio.
My understanding of the proposal was to remove 'reports' and make
Newsnight into a discussion programme. The graphics must be there
already from BBC World News. I would envisage just presenting it from
a TV studio instead of a radio studio. The incremental cost over the
radio show would be minimal.
Combined radio and TV shows are a disaster, name me one that's decent
compelling viewing ?

With respect, you are making all sorts of armchair style assertions and
assumptions about the way in which TV and radio programmes are produced,
and resourced.
Scott
2023-12-03 18:02:05 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mark Carver
Post by Scott
Post by JMB99
Post by Scott
Why not merge it with 'The World Tonight' on Radio 4?
No news film, no graphics etc on the radio.
My understanding of the proposal was to remove 'reports' and make
Newsnight into a discussion programme. The graphics must be there
already from BBC World News. I would envisage just presenting it from
a TV studio instead of a radio studio. The incremental cost over the
radio show would be minimal.
Combined radio and TV shows are a disaster, name me one that's decent
compelling viewing ?
With respect, you are making all sorts of armchair style assertions and
assumptions about the way in which TV and radio programmes are produced,
and resourced.
You are on reflection correct. I just thought it was an interesting
and topical subject, then I got rather carried away in discussion. I
shall vacate this thread.
Brian Gaff
2023-12-05 17:28:52 UTC
Permalink
Oh well, don't worry, we are all different. Its interesting on Samsung TV to
note that they have news from all over the place now, and the different
slants put on the same story by the different broadcasters. Brian
--
--:
This newsgroup posting comes to you directly from...
The Sofa of Brian Gaff...
***@blueyonder.co.uk
Blind user, so no pictures please
Note this Signature is meaningless.!
Post by Scott
Post by Mark Carver
Post by Scott
Post by JMB99
Post by Scott
Why not merge it with 'The World Tonight' on Radio 4?
No news film, no graphics etc on the radio.
My understanding of the proposal was to remove 'reports' and make
Newsnight into a discussion programme. The graphics must be there
already from BBC World News. I would envisage just presenting it from
a TV studio instead of a radio studio. The incremental cost over the
radio show would be minimal.
Combined radio and TV shows are a disaster, name me one that's decent
compelling viewing ?
With respect, you are making all sorts of armchair style assertions and
assumptions about the way in which TV and radio programmes are produced,
and resourced.
You are on reflection correct. I just thought it was an interesting
and topical subject, then I got rather carried away in discussion. I
shall vacate this thread.
Woody
2023-12-05 18:16:20 UTC
Permalink
Post by Brian Gaff
Oh well, don't worry, we are all different. Its interesting on Samsung TV to
note that they have news from all over the place now, and the different
slants put on the same story by the different broadcasters. Brian
We found that out years ago. We were on hols caravanning in France (in
the Astra 2E days with a larger footprint) and use to watch Euronews.
(On my Samsung its on 4003.) There was a train crash in Madrid - can't
remember when but at a guess early noughties - which IMSMC happened on a
Monday morning. It was all over Euronews before teatime that day, but it
didn't appear on the BBC until at least Tuesday evening!!!
JMB99
2023-12-05 19:49:51 UTC
Permalink
Post by Woody
We found that out years ago. We were on hols caravanning in France (in
the Astra 2E days with a larger footprint) and use to watch Euronews.
(On my Samsung its on 4003.) There was a train crash in Madrid - can't
remember when but at a guess early noughties - which IMSMC happened on a
Monday morning. It was all over Euronews before teatime that day, but it
didn't appear on the BBC until at least Tuesday evening!!!
Like most people I do not have much interest in crashes in Madrid though
it is probably a cheap way to fill up the news programme with footage
being made available free.
Brian Gaff
2023-12-07 11:17:21 UTC
Permalink
I think things like train crashes are not political, but it seems that what
is happening in Ukraine or Gaza is and each outlet you look at has different
footage and even different footage. I'm not going to comment directly on the
rights and wrongs of these, but suffice to say, its all bias in some way In
many wars you can often see the reasons, but not the underlying inability to
talk about the answers as one side and the other will not compromise.
Brian
--
--:
This newsgroup posting comes to you directly from...
The Sofa of Brian Gaff...
***@blueyonder.co.uk
Blind user, so no pictures please
Note this Signature is meaningless.!
Post by JMB99
Post by Woody
We found that out years ago. We were on hols caravanning in France (in
the Astra 2E days with a larger footprint) and use to watch Euronews. (On
my Samsung its on 4003.) There was a train crash in Madrid - can't
remember when but at a guess early noughties - which IMSMC happened on a
Monday morning. It was all over Euronews before teatime that day, but it
didn't appear on the BBC until at least Tuesday evening!!!
Like most people I do not have much interest in crashes in Madrid though
it is probably a cheap way to fill up the news programme with footage
being made available free.
R. Mark Clayton
2023-12-01 10:45:05 UTC
Permalink
Post by JMB99
Post by Scott
How does moving a news programme to Salford rather than the news
studio where all other news programmes are produced save any money?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-67564479
Newsnight is rather superfluous now, there news discussion programmes on
the News channel all day that do a very similar job to Newsnight but I
admit that I have hardly ever watched Newsnight - probably count the
number of times on one hand.
It could be that they have available studio space in Manchester and can
use the space freed up in London for something else.
Newsnight was good if you wanted an in depth news program after a long day. Now that there are multiple news channels you can catch up almost anytime and sadly Newsnight has tended to long magazine type sections on obscure [dull] subjects.
Ozempic Family
2023-12-03 23:32:21 UTC
Permalink
Imagining that? Got it pictured in your mind? Okay, but now you’re also lit AF!
These Magic Mushroom Chocolates are downright tasty—and also mind-meltingly potent! Our proprietary blend of mushroom extracts includes a combination of nootropics, adaptogens, and a pre-blend of tryptamines. They may feel like magic in chocolate form, but these soft chews aren’t traditional magic mushrooms.
Where to buy magic chocolate bars
https://psychedelicstree.com/mushroom-chocolate-bar/
buy polcadot magic chocolate bars: https://psychedelicstree.com/product/polkadot-chocolate-bars/
buy trippy magic chocolate bars: https://psychedelicstree.com/product/trippy-flip-mushroom-chocolate-bars/
buy one close up chocolate bars : https://psychedelicstree.com/product/oneup-chocolate-bars-gummies/
buy shroomies dark chocolate crips: https://psychedelicstree.com/product/shroomies-dark-chocolate-cups-1000mg/
https://psychedelicstree.com/mushroom-chocolate-bar/
https://psychedelicstree.com/mushroom-chocolate-bar/

Benefits

Body Buzz
• Euphoria
• Relaxation
• Cerebral Effects
• Mind-Melting Fun
Available Flavors:
• Churro Milk
• Cookies & Cream
• Fruity Cereal
• Chocolate Milk
Directions for Best Results:
If you have experience with edible THC products, these chocolates are kinda similar. Like THC gummies, these bars also take around an hour or more to incite their euphoric effects, so patience is key with our chocolate bars. Don’t fall for the classic rookie mistake of going back for a second chocolate bar serving. Take your desired dose and wait to ride the waves of mushroom magic.
If you’re just beginning your shroom adventures or looking for a chill microdose, one chocolate square is perfect. Need a little more oomph? Four mushroom chocolate squares are ideal for those chocolate cavaliers breaking free from their comfort zone. And seven or more mushroom chocolate squares? Well, we recommend that serving size to space cowboys who have a higher tolerance—and dual citizenship on the moon.
https://psychedelicstree.com/mushroom-chocolate-bar/
https://psychedelicstree.com/mushroom-chocolate-bar/
https://psychedelicstree.com/mushroom-chocolate-bar/
Loading...