VOD : Linear is old tech - on demand is the future

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by Chris

Where in that article does it say anything about Channel 4 ‘going’ anywhere?

4 is a public service broadcast channel, and the company that runs it is state owned.regardless of where they see future *growth* in their overall business, Channel 4 itself will continue to exist, has the same hours to fulfill and the same legal obligations as to what it fills those hours with.

It’s going to have to jump out and bite you in the bum before you actually acknowledge where all this is going.

Firstly, the first paragraph says:

‘Channel 4 has said it no longer sees its future in traditional television channels, in a decision that could spell the end for some documentaries and other programmes that do not attract younger online audiences.’

You say the channel is a public service broadcaster. So what? Not only can they provide free streaming services through Freeview, but the government is looking to sell off the channel. Additionally, they are also reviewing whether ‘public service broadcasting’ is relevant today, and if so, what it should embrace.

I accept completely that the channel is not closing down tomorrow, but the process might not take as long as I originally envisaged.

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

Originally Posted by Legendkiller2k

Considering Channel 4 have a 20 years plan i highly doubt they're going anywhere will check Monday though when we're back in work but nothing about Channel 4 closing has ever been mentioned or even been on our systems.

Are you on about more4? As that has a question mark on it.

I think it is pretty clear that Channel 4 will migrate to streaming. I never said the company would be closing. The content will still be there.

[jfman]

There's nothing to indicate that they will close linear channels or cease broadcasting on digital terrestrial or other platforms.

A streaming future and linear broadcasting aren't mutually exclusive.

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by jfman

There's nothing to indicate that they will close linear channels or cease broadcasting on digital terrestrial or other platforms.

A streaming future and linear broadcasting aren't mutually exclusive.

Except that the message is they see 'no future' in their TV channels. You can interpret that how you like, but the message is clear enough, IMHO.

Ian Katz ... isn’t he the one who tried to send a direct message to a colleague about “boring, snoring Rachel Reeves” when he was editor of Newsnight, but actually tweeted it to the entire Twattersphere?

[jfman]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

Except that the message is they see 'no future' in their TV channels. You can interpret that how you like, but the message is clear enough, IMHO.

“No future” doesn’t feature in the article as you’ve presented it here.

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

I accept completely that the channel is not closing down tomorrow, but the process might not take as long as I originally envisaged.

Just a timely reminder that the Forum's understanding of " as long as you originally envisaged" is 2025.

Elsewhere, I see that Entertainment One is pulling its films off a streaming service, Amazon, in favour of a contract with satellite and streamer Sky. https://www.cityam.com/sky-beefs-up-...one-film-deal/

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by jfman

“No future” doesn’t feature in the article as you’ve presented it here.

The exact words were: ‘ no longer sees its future in traditional television’.

I’m not sure how that slight change of wording makes any difference, frankly.

However, sorry for my inadvertent misquote.

---------- Post added at 17:30 ---------- Previous post was at 17:28 ----------

Originally Posted by 1andrew1

Just a timely reminder that the Forum's understanding of " as long as you originally envisaged" is 2025.

Elsewhere, I see that Entertainment One is pulling its films off a streaming service, Amazon, in favour of a contract with satellite and streamer Sky. https://www.cityam.com/sky-beefs-up-...one-film-deal/

And just to remind you, Andrew, that I have been saying 2035 since 2015. So what is the point you are making?

[jfman]

It’s also important to note it’s not a quote of an individual at C4 it was the journalist who wrote it.

Context is important here because at each iteration what has actually been said is being stretched further.

I don’t think anyone sees their future as primarily in broadcast, scheduled, over the air transmission. However it’s a leap to go from a focus on streaming or on demand content to closing down altogether.

[Legendkiller2k]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

It’s going to have to jump out and bite you in the bum before you actually acknowledge where all this is going.

Firstly, the first paragraph says:

‘Channel 4 has said it no longer sees its future in traditional television channels, in a decision that could spell the end for some documentaries and other programmes that do not attract younger online audiences.’

You say the channel is a public service broadcaster. So what? Not only can they provide free streaming services through Freeview, but the government is looking to sell off the channel. Additionally, they are also reviewing whether ‘public service broadcasting’ is relevant today, and if so, what it should embrace.

I accept completely that the channel is not closing down tomorrow, but the process might not take as long as I originally envisaged.

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



I think it is pretty clear that Channel 4 will migrate to streaming. I never said the company would be closing. The content will still be there.

Channel 4 has a 20 year plan for it's distribution so it won't be going anywhere, if and it is a huge if any of the big 5 go streaming only it'll be Channel 5.
I'll defo check the system on Monday though incase anything about ch4 has come through whilst we've all been off work.

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by Legendkiller2k

Channel 4 has a 20 year plan for it's distribution so it won't be going anywhere, if and it is a huge if any of the big 5 go streaming only it'll be Channel 5.
I'll defo check the system on Monday though incase anything about ch4 has come through whilst we've all been off work.

Nothing is happening immediately, Legendkiller! This is the mistake so many people are making! Nobody is saying these changes are happening right now. But the process will start within a few years, and then will accelerate exponentially.

I have not seen Channel 4’s 20-year-deal, but I dare say that if you read the small print, there will be no problem in closing down the channels and transferring the content to their streaming service. They will have been pretty incompetent not to have foreseen this.

---------- Post added at 23:01 ---------- Previous post was at 22:51 ----------

Originally Posted by jfman

It’s also important to note it’s not a quote of an individual at C4 it was the journalist who wrote it.

Context is important here because at each iteration what has actually been said is being stretched further.

I don’t think anyone sees their future as primarily in broadcast, scheduled, over the air transmission. However it’s a leap to go from a focus on streaming or on demand content to closing down altogether.

Stop nitpicking, jfman, just because it doesn’t suit your narrative. The reporter was quoting what was said, and if he misquoted, no doubt law suits will follow. You are being disingenuous. Let’s just address the way things seem to be going.

Happy to consider any reasoned arguments. I am happy to debate whether TV channels will actually disappear altogether, which is a reasonable point to make, but surely, that is the point we should be debating.

I appreciate that when losing an argument, this can be difficult. But this is a debating forum....

[jfman]

The reporter clearly isn't reporting what was said - hence they did not use quotation marks or attribute a quote to that end. They are offering their own input/analysis and no such law suit, on such an uncontroversial topic, would be considered a reasonable or proportionate response.

"The future" being streaming doesn't equate to the end of linear broadcasting entirely. Nobody, at any point, on the forum has contested that the way people are consuming content is changing or that as companies chase revenues/profits they will have to shift their content delivery in a way that suits these habits.

That doesn't equate to the end of linear, scheduled broadcasting over DTT, cable or satellite (or even IPTV - I'm completely agnostic on the technology). You know this already. I wouldn't consider myself losing any such argument - I've set the extremely low bar throughout where if a single linear channel exists in 2035 I'm proven right. With Amazon and Netflix testing a linear channel I think there's life in them for a good while yet.

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

Nothing is happening immediately, Legendkiller! This is the mistake so many people are making! Nobody is saying these changes are happening right now. But the process will start within a few years, and then will accelerate exponentially.

I have not seen Channel 4’s 20-year-deal, but I dare say that if you read the small print, there will be no problem in closing down the channels and transferring the content to their streaming service. They will have been pretty incompetent not to have foreseen this.

---------- Post added at 23:01 ---------- Previous post was at 22:51 ----------



Stop nitpicking, jfman, just because it doesn’t suit your narrative. The reporter was quoting what was said, and if he misquoted, no doubt law suits will follow. You are being disingenuous. Let’s just address the way things seem to be going.

Happy to consider any reasoned arguments. I am happy to debate whether TV channels will actually disappear altogether, which is a reasonable point to make, but surely, that is the point we should be debating.

I appreciate that when losing an argument, this can be difficult. But this is a debating forum....

Opinion stated as fact - citation, please...

Have you thought of standing for the US Presidency?

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by Hugh

Opinion stated as fact - citation, please...

Have you thought of standing for the US Presidency?

I don’t have to explain myself, Hugh. Maybe you should just answer the points I have made. Feel free to disagree.

That is all that’s required.This is a forum. Oh, sorry, you know that, you are a moderator.

God help us all!

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

I don’t have to explain myself, Hugh. Maybe you should just answer the points I have made. Feel free to disagree.

That is all that’s required.This is a forum. Oh, sorry, you know that, you are a moderator.

God help us all!

That entire post is tautological....

You don’t have to explain yourself, but I do - God (other deities are available) help us...

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by Hugh

That entire post is tautological....

You don’t have to explain yourself, but I do - God (other deities are available) help us...

I’m not trying to be difficult, Hugh. I just don’t understand why you are responding, but don’t address the points made. If you did, we could have a discussion. Alternatively, I must just accept your point of view.

However, whatever!