Broadcasting duration

"Paul Ratcliffe" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 08 Jan 2014 07:29:58 +0000, Chris J Dixon
wrote:

It's so they have time to shove in the otherwise unscheduled 90s news
bulletin just before 8pm.

I reckon it is a ploy to start ahead of other channels on the
same nominal timing (like publishing magazines progressively
earlier each month).

IIRC, when tackled about the issue, the official response was to
the effect that, to make it "simpler for the viewer" timings were
tidied up to the nearest 5 minute point.

I raised the matter on a visit to the BBC studio locally, where I
was actually able to sit in a control room and hear the network
give the countdown down the line, for The One Show, in compliance
with the printed running sheet in front of me, at 18:58. No
explanation was forthcoming.

Did you not read what I wrote and what you quoted? That IS the reason.

Yes, I both read and understood your assertion, and am looking
forward to reading your evidence for this.

It's not rocket science is it?
How else would there be time for an unscheduled bulletin if something
else wasn't either significantly shorter than its nominal duration or
started earlier?

no-one is suggesting otherwise

what they are querying is why having to shoe horn in a news bulletin
justifies showing a scheduled start time different from the time that you
actually plan to start!

There doesn't seem to be any connection

tim

On Thu, 9 Jan 2014 20:52:30 +0100, tim...... wrote:

It's so they have time to shove in the otherwise unscheduled 90s news
bulletin just before 8pm.

I reckon it is a ploy to start ahead of other channels on the
same nominal timing (like publishing magazines progressively
earlier each month).

IIRC, when tackled about the issue, the official response was to
the effect that, to make it "simpler for the viewer" timings were
tidied up to the nearest 5 minute point.

I raised the matter on a visit to the BBC studio locally, where I
was actually able to sit in a control room and hear the network
give the countdown down the line, for The One Show, in compliance
with the printed running sheet in front of me, at 18:58. No
explanation was forthcoming.

Did you not read what I wrote and what you quoted? That IS the reason.

Yes, I both read and understood your assertion, and am looking
forward to reading your evidence for this.

It's not rocket science is it?
How else would there be time for an unscheduled bulletin if something
else wasn't either significantly shorter than its nominal duration or
started earlier?

no-one is suggesting otherwise

what they are querying is why having to shoe horn in a news bulletin
justifies showing a scheduled start time different from the time that you
actually plan to start!

There doesn't seem to be any connection

All broadcasters seems to use a 5 minute granularity, with the possible
exception of Ch.5 who I have seen use things like 20:58 or similar.
It's just how people read time - everyone rounds stuff to the nearest
5 mostly, and it gives the broadcasters more margin for flexibility.
Image the aggro. and number of complaints if something was scheduled
for 18:58 and it started at 18:57 with 1 minute granularity.
With 5 minute granularity it is an acceptable amount of error.

"Paul Ratcliffe" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 9 Jan 2014 20:52:30 +0100, tim......
wrote:

It's so they have time to shove in the otherwise unscheduled 90s news
bulletin just before 8pm.

I reckon it is a ploy to start ahead of other channels on the
same nominal timing (like publishing magazines progressively
earlier each month).

IIRC, when tackled about the issue, the official response was to
the effect that, to make it "simpler for the viewer" timings were
tidied up to the nearest 5 minute point.

I raised the matter on a visit to the BBC studio locally, where I
was actually able to sit in a control room and hear the network
give the countdown down the line, for The One Show, in compliance
with the printed running sheet in front of me, at 18:58. No
explanation was forthcoming.

Did you not read what I wrote and what you quoted? That IS the reason.

Yes, I both read and understood your assertion, and am looking
forward to reading your evidence for this.

It's not rocket science is it?
How else would there be time for an unscheduled bulletin if something
else wasn't either significantly shorter than its nominal duration or
started earlier?

no-one is suggesting otherwise

what they are querying is why having to shoe horn in a news bulletin
justifies showing a scheduled start time different from the time that you
actually plan to start!

There doesn't seem to be any connection

All broadcasters seems to use a 5 minute granularity, with the possible
exception of Ch.5 who I have seen use things like 20:58 or similar.
It's just how people read time - everyone rounds stuff to the nearest
5 mostly, and it gives the broadcasters more margin for flexibility.
Image the aggro. and number of complaints if something was scheduled
for 18:58 and it started at 18:57 with 1 minute granularity.
With 5 minute granularity it is an acceptable amount of error.

not when you are setting a recording off an EPG, it isn't (not that you'd
want to record "the one show", but that's irrelevant)

tim