Re: The future of television
 

Didn't have you down as a Telegraph reader, Mr K. ;)

Re: The future of television
 

Keep your friends close and your enemies closer. ;)

Re: The future of television
 

I have full free access for some reason. It's some sort of cruel torture, although the sport is good ;)

Re: The future of television
 

I'm not sure this news will go down too well with one of our self-styled older members. ;)

Re: The future of television
 

Just remember one view does not represent the majority view on a subject.;)

Re: The future of television
 

Just change the date your 5 year ( or is it 10 or 15 years??) timescale starts. Problem solved!

Re: The future of television
 

The first line quoted hints at the direction of the article : "Britain is stuck with the license..."

Re: The future of television
 

That's more to do with which paper it's in .Anything with the words, BBC or EU or Megan or woke causes its readers to spontaneously combust! The readers comments sections are hilarious :)

Re: The future of television
 

l will give you a clue what papers continue with their daily tirades against the BBC.;)

DE-TS-DM

Re: The future of television
 

I'll be happy to still be around in 2038 to even care what happens then.

Re: The future of television
 

We’ll be all trying to fix the UNIX equivalent of Y2K then...

I read so many dont bother paying the fee.... How do they make sure ppl do??

Re: The future of television
 

Eventually they get taken to court and get a criminal conviction. There were 114,000 convictions in 2019.

Wow quite alot.......

Re: The future of television
 

There are about 28 million households in the UK and each one of them requires a TV licence (unless they’re one of the very few that never receive broadcast tv, or BBC catch-up service). TV licence avoidance runs at around 6%, so there are around 1.68 million households without a licence.

Do they have any ads on TV there Chris??

If they make people pay $$$$$,there shouldnt really be any ads!

Re: The future of television
 

BBC does not have programming interrupted by Ads.

Re: The future of television
 

It’s a bit more complicated than it first seems.

Most of the UK’s 7 public service broadcasters are funded by their commercial operations, which includes showing adverts on their channels. The BBC is funded mostly by the proceeds of the TV licence but it supplements this with commercial operations. It isn’t allowed to mix the two though, and its UK TV channels are not allowed to show adverts or get sponsorship.

However, the TV licence is not a BBC subscription. In law, it is a licence to operate television reception equipment. Legally, you need a licence to operate a TV set much as you need a licence to drive a car on a public road. That’s why not having a TV licence is a criminal offence that lands you in court where you can get a large fine and a criminal record.

In practice, as almost all the TV licence fee goes to the BBC (a small amount part-funds a small commercial public service channel that operates in the Welsh language) it is now widely seen as a compulsory subscription. It is most loudly complained about by those who claim they never consume any of the BBC services it pays for. As these services include 8 TV channels, 6 national radio stations, 41 local and regional radio stations and a massive news website I’m usually pretty sceptical about anyone who makes that claim.

Re: The future of television
 

TBH I believe that the Welsh, Irish and Scottish language channel's should be a pay channel, as the amount of people that watches them surely cannot justify the cost of making them.


IIRC less than 2% of the UK can speak them.

Re: The future of television
 

I can make that claim and have been visited twice in the past 10yrs by their enforcers who agree I don't need a licence. I do not watch any live broadcast UKTV. They've even stopped sending me their begging letters.

Re: The future of television
 

In the interests of balance, some may be interested in this article.

https://www.digitaltveurope.com/2021...-vod-channels/

Sounds a bit pie in the sky to me, but I’m sure jfman will want to watch it! :D

[EXTRACT]

Video technology company Unified Streaming has launched Unified Remix VOD2Live, a new product that it says enables OTT providers to present VOD programming in new curatable linear channels.

The approach to presenting VOD content in the form of linear channels is designed to replicate the lean-back TV experience and enable easier discovery.

Re: The future of television
 

Not sure why you insist on personalising it.

However as I’ve said all along it costs buttons to create a linear channel from content you own the rights to. Whether that’s broadcast, or an automated playlist, is neither here nor there.

Re: The future of television
 

Now, that’s funny!

As I have said before, the TV companies will only continue to provide linear TV while it makes them money. Once it is no longer worth their while to run all those channels, with all the time and expense of scheduling and filling the gaps in the schedule with dross (which still has to be paid for), they will honour their commitment to their shareholders to maximise their profits. Uploading content to a streamer is far more straight forward than the alternative.

When you add up

- The number of staff required all in all for scheduling;
- The building space they require;
- The cost of the rights to show cheaper programmes to fill the gaps (there are no gaps on VOD);
- The satellite transponder space required or the costs of broadcasting space from transmitters, etc;

I think you will find it costs rather more than buttons to run TV channels.

The only considerations really are whether the government can ensure the rollout of broadband within their existing timetable, which now seems to be in doubt, and for how long most viewers will continue to give conventional broadcast channels the support they have now. Those are the real considerations, not some romantic view that some people have about watching TV the old fashioned way.

Re: The future of television
 

Eh? How many people do you think that takes?

Cant they use zoom?

Introducing a new and unnecessary cost, nice.
Cheap, given the thousands of channels being beamed down across Europe on shoestring budgets.

Round and round we go.

Heaven forbid.

Nobody romanticises it.

I suggest next Sunday night you go onto this new fangled social media platform called Twitter about 10pm and see how popular BBC 1 was the previous hour.

Re: The future of television
 

Where did I say BBC1 wasn’t popular? Twisting it again...

Re: The future of television
 

You’re saying there’s no demand to watch television as broadcast (hence it’s not viable for even a state funded or subscription funded broadcaster to persist with that model). If people are watching BBC 1 between 9 and 10 that’s exactly what they are doing.

Re: The future of television
 

As BBC1 content will be streamed in future, your comment makes no sense. While the individual channels BBC1, 2, 3 and 4 may disappear, the content will not.

Re: The future of television
 

Re: The future of television
 

But people who can choose to record it, or stream it, watch it as broadcast to a schedule as dictated by the BBC.

Or is that not linear television again?

---------- Post added at 12:07 ---------- Previous post was at 10:14 ----------

Just for reference Line of Duty had 10 million on the overnights and it's now pushing past 15 million.

While it's not possible to say all 10 million watched between 9 and 10, it's not credible to pretend they all waited and watched it between 10 and whatever the cut off is for the overnights.

Re: The future of television
 

Yes, but streaming services are more flexible. It doesn’t matter what people choose today because people are changing their viewing habits. What they choose to do now and what they will choose to do tomorrow are two different things.

Anyway, we will never agree on that, so no point in pursuing the discussion further.

Ooh, look...

https://advanced-television.com/2021...start-to-year/

[EXTRACT]

The first quarter of 2021 saw a number of records broken on iPlayer:

As well as being the biggest quarter on record, January is now iPlayer’s most successful month, with 652 million streams.

The first full week of that month (4th – 10th) was the biggest week ever, with 163 million streams.

The 10th of January is iPlayer’s best single day with programmes streamed 26 million times – driven partly by four very popular third round FA Cup matches streaming live on iPlayer, including Marine v Tottenham Hotspur.

The first episode of crime thriller The Serpent is iPlayer’s biggest episode of the year so far, having been streamed 6 million times. The box set of the series was streamed a total of 33 million times between January and March on iPlayer.

The returning series of Line of Duty has also been a hit with viewers, as the first episode of AC-12’s latest case saw over 3.6 million streams in just 11 days up to the end of March. The previous series have also performed strongly on iPlayer, with the Line of Duty box set streamed 35 million times in the first three months of the year.

Re: The future of television
 

You do realise these records were all being broken while a lot of people were stuck at home with nothing else to do, yes?

Re: The future of television
 

And he's also not grasped that despite shifts in viewing habits people still, in their millions, watch linear, broadcast television.

He can write persistently about the success of streaming but he's the only person who sees the world in such a binary manner.

People are streaming old Line of Duty because the new one is coming on, not the other way around. Broadcast television serves as a prompt for people to revisit, to nudge their friends to watch it for the first time, etc.

Re: The future of television
 

True, Chris, and as a result, the public is getting more and more used to accessing their programmes via VOD.

There have been a number of articles about this recently, demonstrating that an increasing number of people are now viewing VOD rather than the normal channels. As they do so, the old ways of viewing will appear increasingly inflexible and time-wasting. It’s very drip-drip, but once that message gets through and people get used to viewing in this way, it will takeoff. People in their 40s and 50s are currently getting the nudge from their children, too.

---------- Post added at 16:59 ---------- Previous post was at 16:55 ----------

I think you will find that I have acknowledged that, jfman, on many occasions, too. That’s why my projection is for 2035, not 2025, and certainly not now. I’m looking at the trend. You are just looking at the present.

Re: The future of television
 

Rubbish Old Boy. You've still never, at any point, illustrated how the trend reaches zero.

The fact you're into the depths of a scheduler requiring accomodation is the desperation you've turned to. Literally a laptop and a desk. Not going to break the bank for a multi billion pound organisation.

Trend iPhone sales 2007-11 and tell me how many iPhones there should be in the world by now and explain why it didn't happen.

Re: The future of television
 

Re: The future of television
 

I have never claimed that the trend will reduce to zero. What I have claimed is that there will be a point reached when the broadcast channels will consider that it is no longer worth the effort to continue to broadcast by this method.

As for the scheduler issue, what you say about scheduling may be true of tinpot channels such as ‘Talking Pictures’, for example, which I hear is run from a garden shed! But the bigger, popular channels are a different proposition.

I-Phones? I’m not sure what they have to do with the price of eggs.

Re: The future of television
 

Trends...

In the first 5 years of iPhone sales, the sales multiplied by 60x after the first year, then sales growth stabilised, and since 2015, has remained constant (in fact, dropped a bit after 2015).

I believe the point is that constant growth in any line of business is not guaranteed.

https://www.statista.com/statistics/...cal-year-2007/

Re: The future of television
 

Which is so close to zero it may be zero.

Can you explain to me how the act of scheduling is proportionately more expensive for larger channels than smaller channels? A huge media conglomerate could do it for buttons across swathes of channels across numerous countries.

As Hugh says I’m questioning your ability to read trends and make accurate assumptions off the back of them.

Re: The future of television
 

Reflecting Chris's point the other day about the pandemic-led streaming boom, Netflix is now reporting growth below target. Interesting to see it blaming last year's growth too.
https://www.theguardian.com/media/20...boom-wears-off

Re: The future of television
 

Not surprising - they really just ate their own lunch last year, gaining a good chunk of the subs they might otherwise have had to work longer and harder to attract. The double whammy is unfortunate, with the forthcoming new content slowdown caused by the same pandemic that also caused the rapid increase in subs. Institutional investors will be worried that insufficient new content over the coming months will test the commitment of some of their newer subscribers, who may only have signed up because they were stuck at home.

Re: The future of television
 

Just found this, which is interesting.

https://advanced-television.com/2021...egy-for-youth/

The reason for me that it’s interesting is that it is acknowledged that scheduled TV means extra work for the schedulers. That extra work means extra cost. Something that some of us on this forum seem to believe is unimportant from a broadcaster’s point of view.

When you combine the extra cost with the viewing trends, this gives a pretty good indication of which way we are going.

I accept completely that the neanderthals will not agree. However, I would point out that neanderthals were subject to a best before date! :D[COLOR="Silver"]


But more generally, once you are freed of the constraints of scheduling and programming a linear channel, it becomes really exciting in terms of the possibilities of the different genres we might venture into – such as factual programmes. On ITV2, we have been very successful in becoming the No1 destination for young adults and we did that by really targeting them and focussing on funny, often irreverent, entertainment programming with a tone that ran through all the content. We prided ourselves that as a viewer you come in, lean back, have fun, and “But more generally, once you are freed of the constraints of scheduling and programming a linear channel, it becomes really exciting in terms of the possibilities of the different genres we might venture intoq all the content.

We prided ourselves that as a viewer you come in, lean back, have fun, and we programmed it so every programme led neatly into the next, it’s all about inheritance, it’s about 9pm junctions and watersheds. But guess what, on demand it’s not…and when you’re free of those linear channel constraints there’s other things you can do in programming terms…”

Re: The future of television
 

Where does it say scheduled programmes mean extra work?

It mentions constraints involved in linear programming, but not extra work - or is that an assumption?

Re: The future of television
 

I agree, but that point does not negate mine, that in terms of on-demand viewing, there will come a point where conventional viewing will no longer be seen as important to broadcasters.

You can only take your analogies so far, Hugh. Advertisers are key to Freeview, but if they are left selling their wares to people who cannot afford their products ... well, I’ll leave it to you to complete that sentence.

---------- Post added at 19:08 ---------- Previous post was at 19:06 ----------

Are we nitpicking again here, Hugh? You seem to be getting desperate to prove the impossible argument.

Just saying’....

Re: The future of television
 

Well, you’d know what that looks like.

Re: The future of television
 

Desperate to get some acknowledgement of the inevitable, yes!

Although I have to say I’m getting a bit past caring. I might just let events prove my argument.

Re: The future of television
 

You said Didn’t answer my question, though, did you?

Please highlight where, in that article, it states that scheduled TV means extra work?

Re: The future of television
 

“Neanderthals”????

Re: The future of television
 

Breaking News .... scheduled TV means TV schedulers have to work ... :dozey:

Re: The future of television
 

Its alright as one has been called far worse as its water off a ducks back as they say..;)

Re: The future of television
 

Someone here getting bullied out of existence by Homo Sapiens then ??

Re: The future of television
 

Yup - and streaming programmes mean there has to be encoding and uploading, collection data to enable personalisation/recommendations, utilisation monitoring and managing, etc...

Swings/roundabouts

Re: The future of television
 

11 million watched Line of Duty last night. Most watched drama on UK television in 13 years.

Re: The future of television
 

Yes, it is a popular programme. The BBC I-Player experienced record viewing figures as well.

Re: The future of television
 

It’s almost as if people enjoy a combination without of both.

The schedule aced that in the 9-10 slot.

Re: The future of television
 

Who was it that said "its dying on its feet"

My memory is not as good as yours.;)

Re: The future of television
 

As at 2021, that is certainly the case. Who could deny it?

Re: The future of television
 

11 million out of say, 15 million, sounds like a lot of Neanderthals to me.

Re: The future of television
 

In 1934, more people travelled by horse, tram, bus, train or on foot than travelled by car. That didn’t mean that the car would not ultimately become the most popular way to travel.

The rapidly increasing interest in the car was the key to what would happen in the future, just as the rapidly increasing use of streaming is today.

However, I understand that such thoughts are outside of your comfort zone, so happy to leave it there.

The one certainty we have is that change happens.

Re: The future of television
 

Neanderthals l would have you know are far more intelligent then once thought.;)

Re: The future of television
 

And yet, 87 years later, people are still travelling by bus, tram, train, or on foot - it's almost as if there is room for all the options, and not just one... ;)

(point of information - rail passenger journeys have doubled in the last 40 years)

Re: The future of television
 

I was massively overthinking my response. :D

Re: The future of television
 

That is true, but the car is more popular by a country mile.

I was not the one who said that conventional viewing would have to get to near zero before existing channels were scrapped. Advertising revenue just has to fall to a level that doesn't make it worthwhile.

Re: The future of television
 

Rather like broadcast TV. Invented in the early 20th century, and yet still the most popular. If you want a hoverboard, you can go out and buy one, but most people continue to use their car because it meets their requirements.

Re: The future of television
 

And where does that threshold lie OB?

The car, despite huge popularity, convenience and relative affordability does not have 100% share of journey made. Streamers, despite huge popularity, convenience and affordability have similar issues reaching 100% market share.

Consider the railways - despite a loss being made on almost every single journey it still gets state subsidy to provide a service in the public interest to those who shun the popularity, convenience and affordability of the car.

You've made an amazing comparison here OB. For once.

The bad news is it reaches the opposite conclusion from the one you were pushing for.

Re: The future of television
 

Unless, of course, you are a PSB...

Re: The future of television
 

PSBs can be redefined...or even abolished!

---------- Post added at 19:44 ---------- Previous post was at 19:42 ----------

When it ceases to draw in sufficient advertising revenue. You’re the economist......

Re: The future of television
 

And you’re the one making claims in absolute terms that it will cease to be viable financially. Surely, in order to make such a claim, you should know where that threshold lies?

Re: The future of television
 

Probably not for the next 17 years, at least...

https://committees.parliament.uk/com...-broadcasting/ https://www.express.co.uk/life-style...and-Speed-DCMS

Re: The future of television
 

We have already seen this happen with some of the +1 channels.

---------- Post added at 22:39 ---------- Previous post was at 22:38 ----------

PSB's can and have ceased trading and gone off air.

Re: The future of television
 

See this is a straw man.

Nobody here is claiming TV isn’t in a process of evolution. All we are saying is - as with the private car in Old Boy’s analogy - trends and growth in competitive markets rarely hit 100% and where they do rarely in such a narrow timeframe.

OB incorrectly charts an accelerated growth of streaming and ignores that on demand cable services that existed long before. BBC iPlayer launched in 2007. Yet still, 11 million people sat down and watched BBC One last night. Maybe another 4 or so will catch up on demand.

Rational consumers in the marketplace. Many with streaming services. The vast majority with internet. Sat down and went to the top of their EPGs in prime time.

11 million people aren’t Neanderthals. Or if they are there’s a lot of dying out to go.

Re: The future of television
 

Which ones?

Re: The future of television
 

I must admit I'm curious to know which ones Richard is thinking of. I can't think of any. The nearest I can get is some of the ITV regional franchise holders, who didn't cease trading and go off air, but in some cases went off air because they lost the franchise, and where they were unable to diversify they then had to cease trading. I suspect that's not what he's alluding to though, and in any case the mechanics of the ITV regional franchise system really has nothing to do with the commercial viability of TV channels today, whether they're operated by PSBs or not.

Re: The future of television
 

Was S2 (the early days Scottish ITV2) under a PSB remit? Genuinely don't know.

Re: The future of television
 

No, it wasn't. No additional channels provided by STV plc, ITV plc, Channel 4 or Viacom (which owns Channel 5) are PSB. Only the channels in EPG slots 1-5, plus all additional BBC branded channels, are public service. None of these have ever failed as businesses and been forced to go off air.

Re: The future of television
 

If Richard has a narrow definition of "off air" as being no longer available via DTT or DTH, then maybe he's thinking of BBC 3?

Re: The future of television
 

It looks to me like he meant gone out of business as in gone bust because their business was no longer viable, which wasn’t the case with BBC3. Hard to say until he comes back in here and clarifies though.

Re: The future of television
 

Oh dear, another streaming company not playing by the rulebook..sorry ruleblog. ;) When will these thriving multinational companies learn that linear TV is on its way out? ;)
https://www.broadbandtvnews.com/2021...ean-expansion/

---------- Post added at 21:18 ---------- Previous post was at 21:03 ----------

Maybe he's referring to failed local TV channels allocated space on Freeview 8/VM 159. I don't think they're strictly PSBs though.

Re: The future of television
 

Can't remember it's name, I think it was one of the Welsh ITV companies that went bust. It didn't get much advertising because it's fanchise area had a sparse population. The solution was to tag it's area onto a neighbouring franchise area.

In fact, a lot of the new ITV companies came perilously close to financial collapse. Once established, however, they were referred to by one owner as being the nearest thing to being given a licence to print money!

Found it:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wale...rth_Television

Re: The future of television
 

ITV's Head of Digital Channels & Acquisitions says youth programming will go onto VOD first as "the linear channels are going nowhere":

https://rxtvinfo.com/2021/on-demand-...youth-channels

Re: The future of television
 

Right. Well that’s an interesting story but it was an extremely specific set of circumstances that doesn’t demonstrate the very broad point you were trying to make. WWN suffered from a small service area, delays building one of its key transmitters and ludicrous rules about the amount of Welsh language content it was supposed to produce itself. Its failure was ultimately a failure of the design of its franchise. Public service broadcasting on channel 3 is managed very differently these days.

Re: The future of television
 

https://twitter.com/benrileysmith/st...641315330?s=21

He’ll be joining the new BBC Chair (Richard Sharp, ex-adviser to Rishi Sunak, donated over £400k to the Conservative Party), and may be joined next year by the proposed Head of OFCOM, Paul Dacre (currently Chairman and editor-in-chief of that paragon of unbiased reportage, the Daily Mail).

"Impartiality" is doing a lot of heavy lifting there… ;)

Re: The future of television
 

I wouldn’t worry… It’s more than balanced out by the fact that the BBC rarely advertises for journalists anywhere other than in the Guardian. ;)

Re: The future of television
 

ITV wants a radical review of the public service broadcasting requirements.

https://www.digitaltveurope.com/2021...rgent-reforms/

Re: The future of television
 

Like most jobs, they’re online now… ;)

https://careerssearch.bbc.co.uk/

There are 7 BBC jobs on the Guardian website,, & 173 on the BBC Careers website.

Re: The future of television
 

13 million Neanderthals last night.

Given LoD started on BBC 2 on a Wednesday night I’m guessing most caught up streaming but watched linear last night. It’s almost as if viewers aren’t dogmatic.

Re: The future of television
 

Put me down as a Neanderthal.;)

Re: The future of television
 

and me as a disappointed one

Re: The future of television
 

Ummmm :confused:

Re: The future of television
 

This proves nothing except that you seem incapable of distinguishing the present from the future. Not one of your better observations, I would say.

Re: The future of television
 

I can’t observe the future OB any more than you can.

All I see in the present is setback after setback to your 2035 vision. Broadband won’t be up to it, there’s nobody with “deep pockets” waiting to buy the Premier League rights and millions of viewers continue to watch linear television when it suits them.

Re: The future of television
 

The point you seem to be missing is that I have never claimed that anything would change yet, apart from a decline in the number of TV channels launching. This will be followed over the next few years by an overall decline in TV channels - slow at first, but then it will speed up.

The fact that occasionally, linear channels will clock up a decent audience is not surprising, given that the streamers are forcing the terrestrials and Sky to up their game.

And while an exceptional 13 million people watching this one series is a good result, it still doesn't compare to the audiences of 16 million that Coronation Street used to achieve on a regular basis.

Re: The future of television
 

I’m not missing your point OB.

What changes between now and whichever predetermined date you’ve arbitrarily pulled out the air this week?

People who clearly have internet access and enabled devices still watch linear television. Despite having the option people watch as broadcast on linear as a preference to streaming. To the average viewer who views them as complementary, and not competing, technologies. That begs the question where, when and why do they arbitrarily change their viewing habits to the point linear ceases to be viable? When broadcasters stop? When does that happen? When there’s no viewers?

It’s the chicken and egg scenario with no chicken.

And no egg.

Re: The future of television
 

Not everyone has dropped linear.

Re: The future of television
 

May l remind you that Coranation Street were getting those audiences when we just had the 4 terrestrial channels and as such Line of Duty linear TV audiences of 12 to 13 million in the age of where there are many streaming outlets for TV viewers to frequent is pretty impressive.

Re: The future of television
 

Indeed, but if a programme like LoD is scoring 13 million on the overnights and perhaps a further 3-4m on catching up that’s not because everyone without access to iPlayer in some form decided to watch the same program.

Fundamentally those kinds of figures are pushed by generating hype, getting people talking about it on social media and having the cast on a series of magazine programming/puff pieces on BBC News/Norton/This Morning.

Dumping seven episodes on an arbitrary Monday morning wouldn’t generate this level of interest. Even if universally available and “free”.

Re: The future of television
 

You are denying the inevitable by pointing to what is happening now, even though I have never claimed that there would be any major change in 2021. Furthermore, you continue to ignore what media commentators and those in the business are saying, rubbishing everything that contradicts your alternative vision.

I am, actually, keeping an open mind on this, but I have not read anything that points to a different scenario to the one I have painted. Your reference to ‘Line of Duty’ is utter desperation if that is meant to prove me wrong, which it doesn’t.

I am quite prepared to see the 2035 date slip without wanting to jump over a cliff if the unexpected happens. One crucial factor in that date is the government’s broadband rollout, which has already slipped. Clearly, if that keeps being put back, that will affect my thinking. However, a nice audience figure recorded on linear TV for a popular BBC1 programme cuts no ice with me. That big swing in audience habits for streaming services simply hasn’t happened to the extent that it will change anything yet, but I never said it would.

For someone who dislikes straw man arguments, you certainly like clutching at straws!

Anyway, let’s just sit back and see what happens. Neither of us are in a position to prove anything at this stage.

Re: The future of television
 

That’s quite a journey to

I don’t see how the Line of Duty comparison is either desperate or a straw man.

I’m simply indicating to you that you haven’t fully understood the size or scale of the “problem” that you perceive.

The first being that most of the population are happy to watch linear, catch up/streaming, time shifted broadcasts as and when it suits them. The choice offers far greater flexibility and viewing experiences (e.g. can you safely go onto social media?). You perceive them to be “Neanderthals”.

Well, it’s not the first time I suppose.

Re: The future of television
 

Amazon Prime currently advertising for a "Prime Video Linear TV Senior Product Manager, Technical".

https://www.amazon.jobs/en/jobs/1508...ager-technical

On a related note, from earlier this year

https://www.mediaplaynews.com/netfli...vice-globally/

---------- Post added at 12:49 ---------- Previous post was at 12:13 ----------

Interesting article from a couple of days ago.

https://www.fastcompany.com/90630158...mething-button

…

Re: The future of television
 

Funny that you didn’t include the very next paragraph...

’These options have downsides, though: They’re all supported by ads, and in many cases they don’t let you pause, rewind, or fast-forward whatever’s on.)’.

However, I concede that some apps may contain linear TV channels (Pluto and Now already do in the UK) but my point has always been that the TV channels we have now will disappear. What is the point in having ITV, ITV2, ITV 3, etc, when you can have all of your programming under one app, like the ITV Hub?

As for whether the new linear channels on apps will prove popular, that remains to be seen. The Netflix idea of having linear channels within its app without adverts is probably the best bet. I haven’t met a single person who watches Pluto linear TV.

Re: The future of television
 

I don't think anyone, anywhere, has suggested linear television wouldn't include this in the future.

Dare I say it's a straw man?

What is the point in not having it? Costs next to nothing, it's only replicating existing services on DTT, satellite and cable that remain universally popular. Advertising, and a schedule, is used to hook people onto ITV programming.

If they want to watch the next programme, or explore the app, either is a positive outcome for ITV. You are under the mistaken belief that one of them is negative.