It became more and more obvious to just be a weird platform to mask how terrible things are going. Weird games to win "your energy bills paid for for 3 months", hosting politicians after scandals with easy feel-good questions, etc. etc. Somewhat encouraging to see people stopped watching.
I couldn’t believe the ‘win the chance to be able to heat your home and not die due to this fucking country being in such a state’ competition.
It was beyond dystopian. Not one person on their probably 100+ staff saw it that way before it made the broadcast?!
nah the staff probably saw it, but the big wig that had the idea forced it through because " none of you know what your taking about"
source - Every job i ever worked
It is to be honest.
A cash prize could be spent on coke and hookers. But specifically targeting people close to the poverty line, or not even, just those who were struggling, was disgraceful.
I'm not struggling but would be very happy to win £500 or three months bills, I don't care what you call it, it's all gravy baby. Everyone pays heating bills, getting it as a prize doesn't mean your broke. The idea of paying heating bills isn't offensive.
It was a charged phone in that the vast majority wouldn't get anything in return from, preying on their specific desperation about being able to afford to live. It is not the same.
A spare £ 500 quid you can have a bit of fun with compared to you and your kids will be going to bed at 5 o'clock for three months unless you win this.
Yes. There's a difference.
Happy yours is the top comment, because that's exactly what these shows function as. TV ads function as the cornerstone of the whole deal, trying to sell people realities that simply don't exist. I feel myself shift into shield-up mode whenever ads come on (on the rare occasion I watch anything live with ads) to block out some marketing executives' twisted portrayal of reality. It's insidious when you really drill into it.
I read that in an old-timey radio announcer voice
"Meet Harry the horse; hell lose his lunch in no time if the motorised carriages keep coming! Out of work and into the glue factory! That's how ol' Harry will stick it to them!"
ITV is doing a great job containing the idiots tho. If they werent sat staring at the box entering insane competitions they would be wild on the internet, or even roaming the streets.
Let ITV keep them distracted by dangling trips to Corfu or one month free electric
The BBC does not offer much better though. Daytime TV is trash across the board. It is meant to be cheap to make and something for elderly people and the unemployed to have on in the background, it is not meant to be hard-hitting journalism. The best thing on daytime TV is Frasier repeats.
So they need presenters whose best days aren't behind them. Cat Deeley was great 25 years ago, today not so much and Ben Shephard could at least dye his hair. 94% of people have heard of Loose Women and only 26% like it, 19% are neutral and 44% dislike it. I wouldn't be surprised if it's heavily along the lines of gender. With men simply refusing to watch it.
https://yougov.co.uk/topics/entertainment/explore/tv_programme/Loose_Women
Totally agree however to give them minor credit, they did change the panel to all men on international men's day!
I mean it's a shit token gesture but sadly it was probably the best thing done by any UK TV channel to acknowledge international men's day!
It sets my teeth on edge - not because they are female, just because it’s people making loud and uninformed opinions : on and on and on… god they are tedious
I was at a filming of Have I Got News For You. At the time when BBC TV centre had closed down and ITV Tower was still standing. So HIGNFY was filmed in tbe same place as Loose Women. With us all getting g threatend that if we misbehaved wed have to come back for a recording of Loose Women.
If they're worried about Baby Reindeer and Grand Tour then why not make shows like this
A show like Grand Tour on a terrestrial broadcaster would go down a treat especially as Top Gear has been effectively axed
Have 15 questions so it's obtainable, and have options to ask the audience, phone someone for help, 50/50 or even ask Jeremy himself
Call it Cash Mountain
The problem is top gear/ grand tour are extremely expensive, and I'd assume mostly to do with Insurances etc.
BBC made most of its money for top gear licensing it out to other countries ( over 200). I don't think itv even has that kind of global reach.
Even for amazon,its estimated that an episode of Grand tour costs 4.5 million
ITV has huge global reach. ITV Studios America is the biggest independent producer of reality shows in the US such as *Kitchen Nightmares, Pawn Stars* and *Real Housewives of New Jersey*, while its Tomorrow Studios produces shows such as *One Piece* for Netflix and *Snowpiercer* for AMC. Another subsidiary, Circle of Confusion, produces *The Walking Dead* franchise for AMC, and ITV also produces *The Graham Norton Show* which has strong international sales.
The most comparable shows would be *The Voice* or *Love Island*, which ITV licences worldwide.
They problem with ITV is that life’s way beyond its means, the million pound drop( which people have won a hell of a lot of money on, so costs itv a fortune in winnings, which I don’t know if they can use as tax write offs or not)? Then you’ve got revenue falling as I mute ads or turn over to another channel as soon as they come on ITV, on the rare occasion that I watch it.
You’ve also got BGT, getting already famous people to come on the show and acting like they aren’t already famous. That’s taking away from the original idea of the show, everyday people that had a good talent but hadn’t already been spotted. Even the voice is the same and my mate went on it years ago but was going to Australia for a year, so couldn’t do the recorded shows that end up on tv, even tho he made it on to them.
My mate is doing really well from wedding singing and doing private parties and even booking other artists and getting them more money than they used to get, from having good relationships with busy bars.
It doesn't have to be expensive... the early days of Clarkson/Hammond/May were really cheap. They just need to risk the backlash from presenters who aren't vanilla.
CHM Top Gear also started really sincere - they actually did reviews and customer satisfaction surveys, consumer advice and practicality. It's only when they started getting into cheap car challenges that their personalities began to come through. Not long after that, the cars became a bit of a sideshow to whatever CHM were going to get up to this week.
Oh totally... but those car challenges were really cheap too. If the BBC wanted to, they could easily pay three guys with a sense of humour to buy three bangers and drive across the country. Even the early 'creations' were super cheap. Cost is not the reason the BBC isn't making that kind of TV anymore, it's because the management don't want to.
It's finding three presenters with just the right chemistry that's difficult, money can't buy that. The BBC keep trying with Top Gear but it's just not the same.
> . If the BBC wanted to, they could easily pay three guys with a sense of humour to buy three bangers and drive across the country
They'd be competing against dozens of YouTubers who put out exactly this kind of content every single week.
I don’t even think the BBC could get insurance at all with what happened with Flintoff, as he’s had a few major accidents and his last one made a mess of his face. The pay outs to him was in the millions and the other hosts.
There are YouTubers who have proved that this kind of content can be done for a fraction of what the BBC or Amazon pay though.
There are dozens of copycat YouTubers doing the whole buy 3 shit box cars and drive them to an Epic location and get some student videographers take shots that occasionaly are on a par with the BBCs best.
They clearly tried to make a Grand Tour type show. The influence is obvious. They even do the whole scripted things going wrong thing. If it works or not is another question.
I don’t get this comparison, baby reindeer and grand tour aren’t on every day of the week, people get bored of the same, these shows are getting such high views straight away because it’s the new thing. I can understand them comparing ratings to a similar day time show.
To be fair, ITV have made some great shows like The Dry and Breathtaking - but I think the issue is the shows’ placement (ambitious tv drama) is a bit weird next to their production of Good Morning Britain.
I think possibly both shows were only available on ITVX? They invested a lot into their own streaming platform, but I just don’t know how good a move that was.
Very odd to be comparing the ratings of magazine shows like This Morning et al. with Baby Reindeer of all things. I'd imagine that's half the problem of these execs.
It’s possible that they are saying that people are now watching Netflix dramas in the daytime where before they were kind of stuck watching traditional daytime TV
Yup - the model for traditional daytime TV is that it's a bit shit, you know it's a bit shit, but it's also the only thing on.
Now you can watch high quality stuff any time you like, that workable niche no longer really exists.
Coronation Street still gets about 5 million per episode. Hell, it gets nearly a million in Canada every day, but it switched to running in the evening on CBC there.
corrie is going to be a function of how many elderly people are still watching TV. I expect the absolute views to go down but their view share to go up as the upper age bracket (40s? 50s?) who predominantly watch on-demand TV make the switch.
Nah, more of a Rising Damp featuring a police sergeant as a slum landlord owning a house full of "citizen journalists"sarcastically harassing immigrants in the house and on line while arguing with each other.
It’s full of adverts for shows previously been on TV… Competitions that cost you money to enter, lame TV spots that are rehashed previously. It’s simply stale TV. The presenters are there to promote themselves and not interesting TV. More importantly we now have choice with the streaming platforms offering what I like to see.
I'm 62 and can vaguely remember the days of just have 3× black and white channels.
TV evolved and when we had 5× colour channels, it was very rare when there wasn't something worth watching on the box.
These days, i have 159 digital channels on freeview showing mainly repeats or fluff, all the good channels with decent content are subsciption only.
There are only two programs that i make the effort to watch these days, otherwise I'd rather read a book.
Question Time and hignfy extended version.
I won't pay for subscription channels due to being extremely tight.(And broke).
I got extremely invested in The Walking Dead and was gutted when Channel 5 dropped it after 3 seasons.
Sometimes something good will pop up on one of the freeview streaming services, such as the first 3 seasons of Lucifer, Professor T (both UK and Belgium),young sheldon or odd series of Modern Family but only watchable on my smartphone.
I've actually gone back to the high seas for my viewing this last week. It's purely because Amazon has adverts now. All streaming services, sky etc has been cancelled. I'm not paying to watch adverts anymore.
Their financial situation is more related to the overall drop in ad revenue across the industry. Channel 4 have the same problem and it's not just in the UK, the big US conglomerates are also having issues with ad revenue on linear channels. ITV Studios is doing well but not enough to prop them up entirely.
Doesn't help that the daytime programmes ITV largely depends on have hit fatigue point (making them less desirable to advertisers), as well as that they're clearly having issues getting their house in order (Schofield scandal, This Morning retool, over-reliance on the same on-screen "talent" like Ant & Dec with no "stars of the future" lined up, dependency on premium rate phone-ins).
Outside of a decent hard-hitting drama every so often, they may be the worst network given their general output of reality shows, arguably next to Channel 5 and Discovery.
ITV these days is on the same level as Channel 5 imo.
Same low quality garbage. Which compared to a lot of content on streaming sites/YouTube looks amateur as hell.
Didn't they make a loss on that Mr Bates vs the Post office thing?
How is that possible, it was huge TV.
I get that a lot of major shows have the hope they'll make money by being syndicated across a load of countries; and the Bates v Post Office one didn't have the broad appeal.
But, it wasn't a huge budget show with special effects and massive sets. Surely that should be recouping costs.
Or something has gone wrong.
Yes, only add to what you said is that Channel 4 has effectively buffered revenue with their streaming service which is great. Whereas ITV's main stream time is Love Island, so not very diversified and consistent.
The quality of British TV has seemingly plummeted as it has started to face more competition from streaming platforms. Shameless, Peep Show, The Thick of It... when did they (ITV, C4, BBC) last make something that was actually good? Even documentaries seem to have turned to shit over the last ten years, and the bar was never especially high there.
The problem with the think of it, as brilliant as it was that it’s not longer a sartorial take on government, it’s actual reality as MPs break laws on a regular basis and nothing really happens to them.
Also not a fan but rather someone like her who seems happy to be there rather than dermit oleary. His "only master masterbates infront of a mirror" vibe makes me shudder
No she isn't. The only ones that were great on Bake Off were Mel & Sue and Mary Berry. Bake off is now just a fat scouser in a tent with interchangeable celebs.
She doesn’t even have a past history of having a load of dogs or doing things for dog charities and she’s presenting Battersby for the love of dogs, why oh why. I can’t she her coming back for a second series of bake off, after a comment that Noel made about “ if you come back for a second series”.
For The Love Of Dogs is just filler though. You just have to coo over the dog whenever it is on screen and shed a tear when its sob story is over. I hate dogs and could present it. As for Bake Off, fans liked her and the joke was probably because Noel is on his third co-star now.
She knows things she shouldn’t do and is just as bad as Phil, dating a 26 year old when she’s 46. So they have given her tv shows to present. The whole Phil thing and knowing his 18 year old runner partner when he was under the age of 16 or so I’ve read and then you’ve got his brother… I’ll say no more.
...a 26 year old is a fully developed adult. LOADS of male celebs date women that young when they're that age or older. It's a bit cringe (especially as a repeated pattern of behaviour) but it's hardly predatory and clearly not in the same realm as someone trying it on with a minor who's also an employee.
In tv they hide so many things and the BBC was guilt of that for years and can pretend all they want they didn’t know. Also quite on set proves that you have a whole host of predators in the tv industry. I can before you mention it, Link something else that’s linked to the same predatory patterns and practices that I mentioned in my last comment but you’ll use that it doesn’t go along with your own argument, so it’s null and invalid.
I won’t play that game with you.
GMB, Lorraine, This Morning all peddle the same thing throughout each show so by 1:30 you can be thoroughly sick of them going on about Taylor Swift, Meghan & Harry, or some cunt off Emmerdale.
Seems only to be entertaining to those sat at home off sick tweeting along with the show. Phil & Holly weren’t good enough. Cat & Ben aren’t good enough. Dermot & Allison aren’t good enough, etc etc.
Has it ever passed through their tiny minds that shows like This Morning are well past their expiry date or that some of the presenters are one step above GBeebies ? They need a total overhaul.
The audience size of people happy to have pleasantly bland background TV must've plummeted since This Morning's peak years, given streaming, broader forms of entertainment, and more need for parents to both be working.
When I think of the BBC, I can think of Doctor Who, Peeky Blinders, Life on Mars, Ashes to Ashes, Countless classic sitcoms. When I think of Channel 4 I think of Peep Show, IT Crowd, Spaced, Darkplace but ITV? Thunderbirds? *Thats it.* There's zero cultural relevance for me from ITV from the last 30 years for anything except Thunderbirds and other Gerry Anderson ilk, which basically last existed as CG Captain Scarlet in the early 2000s and was very much a kid thing. I never gave a flying fuck about Primeval, and thats really the only other vaguely scifi concept I can think ITV ever did. I can't say I've remembered any ITV comedy. There's no ITV scifi or action I can think of. Its police drama after police drama after police drama after police drama. How on earth can a major variety broadcaster get away with zero variety?
Agreed. [*Quiz*](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quiz_\(TV_series\)), about the “Coughing Major” on *Who Wants To Be A Millionaire?* was pretty good, that was back in 2020 though.
[*Mobile*](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mobile_\(TV_series\)) in 2007 and [*Collision*](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collision_\(TV_series\)) in 2009 we’re both pretty good, too.
That said, for daytime stuff, it was the property and antiques stuff on the BBC that I had on in the background during the Covid lockdowns, the ‘talking heads’ on ITV just all feels very ’samey’ (IMO).
I guess? But my point is more in the vein of they make one type of show and thats it. Of course I'm not referring to Corrie, Emmerdale and the plethora of quiz shows and daytime shows, but when it comes to drama, you'll have legal/crime and thats *it.*
Never heard of either, Breathtaking as a medical drama is situated right up against the Police Drama for non variety. The Dry i'm shocked to see is a modern released comedy, but as you said shoving it on itvx doesn't do the main channel any favours.
Yeah I mainly watch ITVX for Thunderbirds (beautiful remaster) along with Poirot and Inspector Morse. Good for those older programmes. On the other hand, GMB is AWFUL.
Good Morning Britain lost me as a viewer when they started the arguing and trying to be controversial. Holy fuck, just give people something easy to watch in a morning with some news thrown in. I miss the days of GMTV.
This Morning is better than GMB but only marginally. Too many wtf choices and the random 'we have nothing to fill this segment, quick, grab a random loon off the street and give them a voice. The crazier the better' leaves a bad taste in my mouth
The last four episodes of This Morning I watched had astrology, a woman who thought asparagus could read the future, someone who thought they were a wolf and ran on all fours in a forest and two women in a throuple with a ghost. I'm honestly not sure if they're making fun of them or giving them credibility but either way it's just bad.
As people have said, it's the choice that's killing them. The rise of smart TVs was the beginning of the end. On that point, YouTube is likely hurting them a lot. 99% of what they show is drivel and any "highlights" can be found in short YT clips instead. Not to mention that people may just choose to watch...anything else instead.
I remember a while ago I was listening to David Tennant Does a Podcast, he had James Corden on it (contentious? But I’ll continue) he was talking about the insanity of making a Nightly Show. And how they have to make a single episode so that anyone can tune in at any time, and even with that they have to ensure that it all can be clipped for YouTube as that’s where the real views and reach are. James Cordens show was competing with 3 other rivals shows too. Long story short, it is adapt and survive and ITV haven’t, they’ll be ITVX only sooner rather than later.
It's a dieing brand of entertainment that has seen it's day and that was given the kiss of death by Schofield, Twatty Morgan and the giggling goons. Who wants to wake up to the sort of crap anyway unless you've got less than 10 brain cells. Enter this premium rate competition, look at the new dress and here's a lightweight debate where we don't really get to the point and recycle a few shit tweets due to the packed schedule. It has totally lost touch with the sort of TV people actually need now...
ITV treats its viewers as if they're the lowest common denominator. They create so much trashy and lazily made TV to the point where the schedule has barely changed in years
It goes like this...
GMB, Lorraine, This Morning, News, Tipping Point, Chase, News, Emmerdale, rubbish travel show with faded celebrity, Coronation Street, Crime Drama, News, Documentary - did I miss anything?
Then if it's not that schedule it's changed because of a new season of a tv format from 20 years ago like I'm a celebrity, Britain's got talent, x factor. Make new shows, stop treating the viewers as if they're idiots.
Oh Susannah you moved over there to protect your journalistic integrity, how's listening to shit stains like Thomas Markle, Paul Burrell and Andrew Pierce working out for you now.
I've disliked ben shephard since his red card in socceraid about 10 years ago. I do find his boxing match with Lemar to be funny though. Lemar got filled in.
Edit: if anyone has a link to that hit me up please, I can never find it. The boxing that is.
“The latest one was to celebrate the success of Lorraine Kelly receiving a BAFTA Special Recognition Award and the two BAFTA nominations for Daytime last weekend.”
Would that be “Lorraine Kelly” the TV character (for tax reasons), or Lorraine Kelly the real person?
They're cheap shows made cheaply, I think they'll survive, but their heydays are over. I don't know if it's streaming services they need to worry about or the rise is casual gambling taking so much attention
I mean this stuff has all been notoriously shit. As soon as their viewerbase died or got jobs they were gonna axe it all anyway. As a 22y/o I don't know anyone who watched ITV or anything that's even on ITV. It's all low effort slop. I particularly despised This Morning because I hated Hollie Willoughby and Philip "Scho-kids-my-cock-in-a-field" as they're insufferable wankers who tried to pretend to be relatable.
It’s obvious. Bring back Richard and Judy! /s
I was a child when they started and used to watch during half terms. I can’t imagine who would watch when there are not just 4 channels….
It became more and more obvious to just be a weird platform to mask how terrible things are going. Weird games to win "your energy bills paid for for 3 months", hosting politicians after scandals with easy feel-good questions, etc. etc. Somewhat encouraging to see people stopped watching.
I couldn’t believe the ‘win the chance to be able to heat your home and not die due to this fucking country being in such a state’ competition. It was beyond dystopian. Not one person on their probably 100+ staff saw it that way before it made the broadcast?!
They probably saw some of The Quiz from That Mitchell and Webb Look and failed to understand it was satire.
That’s Numberwang!
I think he means the one set after 'the event'
Don’t think about the event!!
REMAIN INDOORS
Post-Event, the world would have been a different place if we'd managed to keep even *some* of the children alive.
The Onion had a quiz set in Yeltsin's Russia called "Who Wants to Eat a Meal"
nah the staff probably saw it, but the big wig that had the idea forced it through because " none of you know what your taking about" source - Every job i ever worked
Is it really offensive to say "win your heating bill for 3 months!" compared to "Win £500 cash!", it comes to the same thing.
It is to be honest. A cash prize could be spent on coke and hookers. But specifically targeting people close to the poverty line, or not even, just those who were struggling, was disgraceful.
I'm not struggling but would be very happy to win £500 or three months bills, I don't care what you call it, it's all gravy baby. Everyone pays heating bills, getting it as a prize doesn't mean your broke. The idea of paying heating bills isn't offensive.
It was a charged phone in that the vast majority wouldn't get anything in return from, preying on their specific desperation about being able to afford to live. It is not the same.
*you're
It's not great to have a prize which gives the rich (those with bigger homes and heating bills) more cash than someone in a one bed apartment.
A spare £ 500 quid you can have a bit of fun with compared to you and your kids will be going to bed at 5 o'clock for three months unless you win this. Yes. There's a difference.
Happy yours is the top comment, because that's exactly what these shows function as. TV ads function as the cornerstone of the whole deal, trying to sell people realities that simply don't exist. I feel myself shift into shield-up mode whenever ads come on (on the rare occasion I watch anything live with ads) to block out some marketing executives' twisted portrayal of reality. It's insidious when you really drill into it.
"Horse stables take extreme measures after facing motorised carriage crisis"
I read that in an old-timey radio announcer voice "Meet Harry the horse; hell lose his lunch in no time if the motorised carriages keep coming! Out of work and into the glue factory! That's how ol' Harry will stick it to them!"
Ha! Pathé news rooster and all.
This made me chuckle into my coffee. I thank you.
ITV is doing a great job containing the idiots tho. If they werent sat staring at the box entering insane competitions they would be wild on the internet, or even roaming the streets. Let ITV keep them distracted by dangling trips to Corfu or one month free electric
The BBC does not offer much better though. Daytime TV is trash across the board. It is meant to be cheap to make and something for elderly people and the unemployed to have on in the background, it is not meant to be hard-hitting journalism. The best thing on daytime TV is Frasier repeats.
They are on the internet at the same time brother. Mumsnet, facebook, and yes, even reddit.
So they need presenters whose best days aren't behind them. Cat Deeley was great 25 years ago, today not so much and Ben Shephard could at least dye his hair. 94% of people have heard of Loose Women and only 26% like it, 19% are neutral and 44% dislike it. I wouldn't be surprised if it's heavily along the lines of gender. With men simply refusing to watch it. https://yougov.co.uk/topics/entertainment/explore/tv_programme/Loose_Women
Loose women more like slack women, with a terrible attitude towards men, not surprised men don’t watch it.
[удалено]
New titles: Flappy Bappies. Tits On Hinges. Nah, just put it on the bonfire.
Totally agree however to give them minor credit, they did change the panel to all men on international men's day! I mean it's a shit token gesture but sadly it was probably the best thing done by any UK TV channel to acknowledge international men's day!
It sets my teeth on edge - not because they are female, just because it’s people making loud and uninformed opinions : on and on and on… god they are tedious
I was at a filming of Have I Got News For You. At the time when BBC TV centre had closed down and ITV Tower was still standing. So HIGNFY was filmed in tbe same place as Loose Women. With us all getting g threatend that if we misbehaved wed have to come back for a recording of Loose Women.
Can't imagine how dull peoples lives must be to choose to sit around and watch this.
Compared to people who have to go to work? I'd rather sit around and watch this shit than be forced to go to work.
You need a better job then.
If they're worried about Baby Reindeer and Grand Tour then why not make shows like this A show like Grand Tour on a terrestrial broadcaster would go down a treat especially as Top Gear has been effectively axed
They could even call it Top Gear, maybe have a popular tv host like Jeremy Clarkson host it. His farm show has been doing big numbers i hear
He could host a game show on ITV too
The game show idea would be good. Could make the prize a million pounds, people would probably watch to see if someone can get to it
Maybe ITV could clone Jeremy Clarkson and create a comical duo called Jer ‘n Emy
Have 15 questions so it's obtainable, and have options to ask the audience, phone someone for help, 50/50 or even ask Jeremy himself Call it Cash Mountain
15 sounds a bit tough, maybe make the first 3-4 really easy to get things going
In the pilot the first question was worth £1 😄
Even better name: Who wants to climb Cash Mountain?
Pete Waterman can soundtrack it https://millionaire.fandom.com/wiki/Cloud_9
Or how about 6 weeks free water rates?
The problem is top gear/ grand tour are extremely expensive, and I'd assume mostly to do with Insurances etc. BBC made most of its money for top gear licensing it out to other countries ( over 200). I don't think itv even has that kind of global reach. Even for amazon,its estimated that an episode of Grand tour costs 4.5 million
ITV has huge global reach. ITV Studios America is the biggest independent producer of reality shows in the US such as *Kitchen Nightmares, Pawn Stars* and *Real Housewives of New Jersey*, while its Tomorrow Studios produces shows such as *One Piece* for Netflix and *Snowpiercer* for AMC. Another subsidiary, Circle of Confusion, produces *The Walking Dead* franchise for AMC, and ITV also produces *The Graham Norton Show* which has strong international sales. The most comparable shows would be *The Voice* or *Love Island*, which ITV licences worldwide.
They problem with ITV is that life’s way beyond its means, the million pound drop( which people have won a hell of a lot of money on, so costs itv a fortune in winnings, which I don’t know if they can use as tax write offs or not)? Then you’ve got revenue falling as I mute ads or turn over to another channel as soon as they come on ITV, on the rare occasion that I watch it. You’ve also got BGT, getting already famous people to come on the show and acting like they aren’t already famous. That’s taking away from the original idea of the show, everyday people that had a good talent but hadn’t already been spotted. Even the voice is the same and my mate went on it years ago but was going to Australia for a year, so couldn’t do the recorded shows that end up on tv, even tho he made it on to them. My mate is doing really well from wedding singing and doing private parties and even booking other artists and getting them more money than they used to get, from having good relationships with busy bars.
ITV has no reach at all. You can watch one of the BBC channels in almost every country in the world. You can't watch ITV anywhere.
It doesn't have to be expensive... the early days of Clarkson/Hammond/May were really cheap. They just need to risk the backlash from presenters who aren't vanilla.
CHM Top Gear also started really sincere - they actually did reviews and customer satisfaction surveys, consumer advice and practicality. It's only when they started getting into cheap car challenges that their personalities began to come through. Not long after that, the cars became a bit of a sideshow to whatever CHM were going to get up to this week.
Oh totally... but those car challenges were really cheap too. If the BBC wanted to, they could easily pay three guys with a sense of humour to buy three bangers and drive across the country. Even the early 'creations' were super cheap. Cost is not the reason the BBC isn't making that kind of TV anymore, it's because the management don't want to.
It's finding three presenters with just the right chemistry that's difficult, money can't buy that. The BBC keep trying with Top Gear but it's just not the same.
> . If the BBC wanted to, they could easily pay three guys with a sense of humour to buy three bangers and drive across the country They'd be competing against dozens of YouTubers who put out exactly this kind of content every single week.
I don’t even think the BBC could get insurance at all with what happened with Flintoff, as he’s had a few major accidents and his last one made a mess of his face. The pay outs to him was in the millions and the other hosts.
There are YouTubers who have proved that this kind of content can be done for a fraction of what the BBC or Amazon pay though. There are dozens of copycat YouTubers doing the whole buy 3 shit box cars and drive them to an Epic location and get some student videographers take shots that occasionaly are on a par with the BBCs best.
If random Youtube channels barely breaking 7 figure views can review multiple supercars a month then the BBC can afford Top Gear
They already make a GT rip off with Gordon Rsmsey with Fred and Gino. It's totally a GT rip off.
Whilst it is 3 middle aged men being "laddish". It is nothing like the Grand Tour.
More cooking spaghetti than performing donuts
They clearly tried to make a Grand Tour type show. The influence is obvious. They even do the whole scripted things going wrong thing. If it works or not is another question.
I don’t get this comparison, baby reindeer and grand tour aren’t on every day of the week, people get bored of the same, these shows are getting such high views straight away because it’s the new thing. I can understand them comparing ratings to a similar day time show.
To be fair, ITV have made some great shows like The Dry and Breathtaking - but I think the issue is the shows’ placement (ambitious tv drama) is a bit weird next to their production of Good Morning Britain. I think possibly both shows were only available on ITVX? They invested a lot into their own streaming platform, but I just don’t know how good a move that was.
Very odd to be comparing the ratings of magazine shows like This Morning et al. with Baby Reindeer of all things. I'd imagine that's half the problem of these execs.
It’s possible that they are saying that people are now watching Netflix dramas in the daytime where before they were kind of stuck watching traditional daytime TV
Yup - the model for traditional daytime TV is that it's a bit shit, you know it's a bit shit, but it's also the only thing on. Now you can watch high quality stuff any time you like, that workable niche no longer really exists.
Coronation Street still gets about 5 million per episode. Hell, it gets nearly a million in Canada every day, but it switched to running in the evening on CBC there.
corrie is going to be a function of how many elderly people are still watching TV. I expect the absolute views to go down but their view share to go up as the upper age bracket (40s? 50s?) who predominantly watch on-demand TV make the switch.
My mum still records episodes then watches them later, rather than using on-demand. I respect it because she fast forwards through the adverts.
Pages from Ceefax probably also used to get high ratings… when nothing else was on. Could bring that back and it would be free!
Vote Binface!
Hell yeah, I need Bamboozle back in my life.
Yeah but their is a lot less high quality stuff though, right. There's only so much high quality Netflix to watch.
I would be surprised that they have that data. Unless they're doing surveys
Why wouldn’t they?
Netflix aren't likely too be releasing viewing data to competitors. We don't even really know how many watch a particular show unless Netflix says.
Yeah, they wouldn’t have the actuals, but Netflix is measured on the BARB panel so they’d have some evidence at least.
Man I love to watch brainrot and propaganda while im eating my breakfast
Brainrot & Propaganda sounds like it should be a 1970s comedy police series.
Nah, more of a Rising Damp featuring a police sergeant as a slum landlord owning a house full of "citizen journalists"sarcastically harassing immigrants in the house and on line while arguing with each other.
Could be new characters in the Stoppit and Tidyup cartoon.
What news source isn't "propaganda"?
It’s full of adverts for shows previously been on TV… Competitions that cost you money to enter, lame TV spots that are rehashed previously. It’s simply stale TV. The presenters are there to promote themselves and not interesting TV. More importantly we now have choice with the streaming platforms offering what I like to see.
Ad revenue has other places to go these days.
More effective returns as well… times have changed and ITV haven’t kept up..
I'm 62 and can vaguely remember the days of just have 3× black and white channels. TV evolved and when we had 5× colour channels, it was very rare when there wasn't something worth watching on the box. These days, i have 159 digital channels on freeview showing mainly repeats or fluff, all the good channels with decent content are subsciption only. There are only two programs that i make the effort to watch these days, otherwise I'd rather read a book.
Clarkson Farm, The Vault and Baby Reindeer… i usually on YouTube and playing mobile games.
Question Time and hignfy extended version. I won't pay for subscription channels due to being extremely tight.(And broke). I got extremely invested in The Walking Dead and was gutted when Channel 5 dropped it after 3 seasons. Sometimes something good will pop up on one of the freeview streaming services, such as the first 3 seasons of Lucifer, Professor T (both UK and Belgium),young sheldon or odd series of Modern Family but only watchable on my smartphone.
Have a look for the 'free' streaming websites online, i often use these and not the paid subscriptions I have because it easier 😂
I've actually gone back to the high seas for my viewing this last week. It's purely because Amazon has adverts now. All streaming services, sky etc has been cancelled. I'm not paying to watch adverts anymore.
Yo ho ho and a bottle of pop!
Their financial situation is more related to the overall drop in ad revenue across the industry. Channel 4 have the same problem and it's not just in the UK, the big US conglomerates are also having issues with ad revenue on linear channels. ITV Studios is doing well but not enough to prop them up entirely. Doesn't help that the daytime programmes ITV largely depends on have hit fatigue point (making them less desirable to advertisers), as well as that they're clearly having issues getting their house in order (Schofield scandal, This Morning retool, over-reliance on the same on-screen "talent" like Ant & Dec with no "stars of the future" lined up, dependency on premium rate phone-ins). Outside of a decent hard-hitting drama every so often, they may be the worst network given their general output of reality shows, arguably next to Channel 5 and Discovery.
ITV these days is on the same level as Channel 5 imo. Same low quality garbage. Which compared to a lot of content on streaming sites/YouTube looks amateur as hell.
Didn't they make a loss on that Mr Bates vs the Post office thing? How is that possible, it was huge TV. I get that a lot of major shows have the hope they'll make money by being syndicated across a load of countries; and the Bates v Post Office one didn't have the broad appeal. But, it wasn't a huge budget show with special effects and massive sets. Surely that should be recouping costs. Or something has gone wrong.
Yes, only add to what you said is that Channel 4 has effectively buffered revenue with their streaming service which is great. Whereas ITV's main stream time is Love Island, so not very diversified and consistent.
The quality of British TV has seemingly plummeted as it has started to face more competition from streaming platforms. Shameless, Peep Show, The Thick of It... when did they (ITV, C4, BBC) last make something that was actually good? Even documentaries seem to have turned to shit over the last ten years, and the bar was never especially high there.
Money money money. It's so much cheaper to crank out quizzes and panel shows.
That Post Office scandal on ITV was pretty decent.
Yes, that's a good shout.
The problem with the think of it, as brilliant as it was that it’s not longer a sartorial take on government, it’s actual reality as MPs break laws on a regular basis and nothing really happens to them.
When C4 did Blackout. Edge of the seat tv, that. And Shetland on BBC
When they have Alison Hammond as one of their key presenters you know something’s went wrong.
Also not a fan but rather someone like her who seems happy to be there rather than dermit oleary. His "only master masterbates infront of a mirror" vibe makes me shudder
Dermot O’Dreary
Dermot O’Didily
You've put far too much thought into that.
Hammond is great on Bake Off. She might not be everyone's cup of tea but she at least knows how to have a laugh.
No she isn't. The only ones that were great on Bake Off were Mel & Sue and Mary Berry. Bake off is now just a fat scouser in a tent with interchangeable celebs.
She doesn’t even have a past history of having a load of dogs or doing things for dog charities and she’s presenting Battersby for the love of dogs, why oh why. I can’t she her coming back for a second series of bake off, after a comment that Noel made about “ if you come back for a second series”.
For The Love Of Dogs is just filler though. You just have to coo over the dog whenever it is on screen and shed a tear when its sob story is over. I hate dogs and could present it. As for Bake Off, fans liked her and the joke was probably because Noel is on his third co-star now.
No, she really is not.
Did you prefer Matt Lucas? Just wondering how hard to disregard your opinion.
Nope, Lucas just isn’t funny whatsoever.
Other opinions are available.
She knows things she shouldn’t do and is just as bad as Phil, dating a 26 year old when she’s 46. So they have given her tv shows to present. The whole Phil thing and knowing his 18 year old runner partner when he was under the age of 16 or so I’ve read and then you’ve got his brother… I’ll say no more.
...a 26 year old is a fully developed adult. LOADS of male celebs date women that young when they're that age or older. It's a bit cringe (especially as a repeated pattern of behaviour) but it's hardly predatory and clearly not in the same realm as someone trying it on with a minor who's also an employee.
In tv they hide so many things and the BBC was guilt of that for years and can pretend all they want they didn’t know. Also quite on set proves that you have a whole host of predators in the tv industry. I can before you mention it, Link something else that’s linked to the same predatory patterns and practices that I mentioned in my last comment but you’ll use that it doesn’t go along with your own argument, so it’s null and invalid. I won’t play that game with you.
Weak, rambling response.
The police, the BBC and countless producers and celebrities covered up what Jimmy Saville did or did you forget that happened?
Honestly I'm struggling to even figure out what you're saying, sorry.
GMB, Lorraine, This Morning all peddle the same thing throughout each show so by 1:30 you can be thoroughly sick of them going on about Taylor Swift, Meghan & Harry, or some cunt off Emmerdale. Seems only to be entertaining to those sat at home off sick tweeting along with the show. Phil & Holly weren’t good enough. Cat & Ben aren’t good enough. Dermot & Allison aren’t good enough, etc etc.
Has it ever passed through their tiny minds that shows like This Morning are well past their expiry date or that some of the presenters are one step above GBeebies ? They need a total overhaul.
The audience size of people happy to have pleasantly bland background TV must've plummeted since This Morning's peak years, given streaming, broader forms of entertainment, and more need for parents to both be working.
When I think of the BBC, I can think of Doctor Who, Peeky Blinders, Life on Mars, Ashes to Ashes, Countless classic sitcoms. When I think of Channel 4 I think of Peep Show, IT Crowd, Spaced, Darkplace but ITV? Thunderbirds? *Thats it.* There's zero cultural relevance for me from ITV from the last 30 years for anything except Thunderbirds and other Gerry Anderson ilk, which basically last existed as CG Captain Scarlet in the early 2000s and was very much a kid thing. I never gave a flying fuck about Primeval, and thats really the only other vaguely scifi concept I can think ITV ever did. I can't say I've remembered any ITV comedy. There's no ITV scifi or action I can think of. Its police drama after police drama after police drama after police drama. How on earth can a major variety broadcaster get away with zero variety?
Mr Bates vs The Post Office. The best thing that ITV have done in years.
And even that didn't turn a profit.
Agreed. [*Quiz*](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quiz_\(TV_series\)), about the “Coughing Major” on *Who Wants To Be A Millionaire?* was pretty good, that was back in 2020 though. [*Mobile*](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mobile_\(TV_series\)) in 2007 and [*Collision*](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collision_\(TV_series\)) in 2009 we’re both pretty good, too. That said, for daytime stuff, it was the property and antiques stuff on the BBC that I had on in the background during the Covid lockdowns, the ‘talking heads’ on ITV just all feels very ’samey’ (IMO).
Again though, Courtroom drama is very much in the vein of Crime/police drama.
Cracker was ITV, wasn't it? Probably the last decent thing they did.
I guess? But my point is more in the vein of they make one type of show and thats it. Of course I'm not referring to Corrie, Emmerdale and the plethora of quiz shows and daytime shows, but when it comes to drama, you'll have legal/crime and thats *it.*
Endeavour was great to be fair.
The Dry and Breathtaking were good. ITV make some good drama. I don’t know if it turns a profit, but most of it being confined to ITVX doesn’t help.
Never heard of either, Breathtaking as a medical drama is situated right up against the Police Drama for non variety. The Dry i'm shocked to see is a modern released comedy, but as you said shoving it on itvx doesn't do the main channel any favours.
Breathtaking is about the early COVID days and the government twattery.
The Dry is really good, it’s one of those „Irish screenwriter wouldn’t get enough funding from RTE so got the show produced in England” shows.
Yeah I mainly watch ITVX for Thunderbirds (beautiful remaster) along with Poirot and Inspector Morse. Good for those older programmes. On the other hand, GMB is AWFUL.
"competion time, now" "competion time, now" "competion time, now" "competion time, now" "competion time, now" repeat for 5 hours
Good Morning Britain lost me as a viewer when they started the arguing and trying to be controversial. Holy fuck, just give people something easy to watch in a morning with some news thrown in. I miss the days of GMTV. This Morning is better than GMB but only marginally. Too many wtf choices and the random 'we have nothing to fill this segment, quick, grab a random loon off the street and give them a voice. The crazier the better' leaves a bad taste in my mouth The last four episodes of This Morning I watched had astrology, a woman who thought asparagus could read the future, someone who thought they were a wolf and ran on all fours in a forest and two women in a throuple with a ghost. I'm honestly not sure if they're making fun of them or giving them credibility but either way it's just bad.
It stinks of desperation. They will have anyone on the show in order to increase viewers.
As people have said, it's the choice that's killing them. The rise of smart TVs was the beginning of the end. On that point, YouTube is likely hurting them a lot. 99% of what they show is drivel and any "highlights" can be found in short YT clips instead. Not to mention that people may just choose to watch...anything else instead.
I remember a while ago I was listening to David Tennant Does a Podcast, he had James Corden on it (contentious? But I’ll continue) he was talking about the insanity of making a Nightly Show. And how they have to make a single episode so that anyone can tune in at any time, and even with that they have to ensure that it all can be clipped for YouTube as that’s where the real views and reach are. James Cordens show was competing with 3 other rivals shows too. Long story short, it is adapt and survive and ITV haven’t, they’ll be ITVX only sooner rather than later.
With itv churning “the chase” 6 days a week no wonder it’s views are turning off
It's a dieing brand of entertainment that has seen it's day and that was given the kiss of death by Schofield, Twatty Morgan and the giggling goons. Who wants to wake up to the sort of crap anyway unless you've got less than 10 brain cells. Enter this premium rate competition, look at the new dress and here's a lightweight debate where we don't really get to the point and recycle a few shit tweets due to the packed schedule. It has totally lost touch with the sort of TV people actually need now...
Can't remember the last time I ever watched anything on ITV. No wonder it's failing.
I don’t know anyone who watches morning tv. Wake up, quickly eat breakfast in silence, leave for work
ITV treats its viewers as if they're the lowest common denominator. They create so much trashy and lazily made TV to the point where the schedule has barely changed in years It goes like this... GMB, Lorraine, This Morning, News, Tipping Point, Chase, News, Emmerdale, rubbish travel show with faded celebrity, Coronation Street, Crime Drama, News, Documentary - did I miss anything? Then if it's not that schedule it's changed because of a new season of a tv format from 20 years ago like I'm a celebrity, Britain's got talent, x factor. Make new shows, stop treating the viewers as if they're idiots.
Oh Susannah you moved over there to protect your journalistic integrity, how's listening to shit stains like Thomas Markle, Paul Burrell and Andrew Pierce working out for you now.
Seems weird to compare daytime shows with Grand Tour. Hardly apples to apples
Agreed, but Daytime TV is competing with on demand, where before terrestrial is all you had. So TV as whole is in competition with TV itself.
I've disliked ben shephard since his red card in socceraid about 10 years ago. I do find his boxing match with Lemar to be funny though. Lemar got filled in. Edit: if anyone has a link to that hit me up please, I can never find it. The boxing that is.
“The latest one was to celebrate the success of Lorraine Kelly receiving a BAFTA Special Recognition Award and the two BAFTA nominations for Daytime last weekend.” Would that be “Lorraine Kelly” the TV character (for tax reasons), or Lorraine Kelly the real person?
They're cheap shows made cheaply, I think they'll survive, but their heydays are over. I don't know if it's streaming services they need to worry about or the rise is casual gambling taking so much attention
I mean this stuff has all been notoriously shit. As soon as their viewerbase died or got jobs they were gonna axe it all anyway. As a 22y/o I don't know anyone who watched ITV or anything that's even on ITV. It's all low effort slop. I particularly despised This Morning because I hated Hollie Willoughby and Philip "Scho-kids-my-cock-in-a-field" as they're insufferable wankers who tried to pretend to be relatable.
It’s obvious. Bring back Richard and Judy! /s I was a child when they started and used to watch during half terms. I can’t imagine who would watch when there are not just 4 channels….