I see where you are coming from but there are issues with it. There are the odd programmes that aren’t on All 4 but is on Channel 4.
If someone says “I’m looking forward to Somewhere Boy on Channel 4” does that mean it will only be only C4 because they don’t have the rights, what time will it air? Does that mean it will be an All 4 exclusive and won’t air on TV? Does that mean it will be on both?
You then have the shows that can’t be streamed live on All 4. There probably aren’t many but I’ve experienced at least one.
Obviously, a lot of stuff is on both but there are anough exceptions that it doesn’t work.
And then you have the issue about how you say when shows are airing/streaming
Even if you can work your way through what that means, it simply isn’t clear. Channel 4 and All 4 are still two distinct products with their own differences. Why give two products the same name?
That is what I don’t understand. I think their currently naming of the channels is pretty good. I don’t see how you can incorporate the C4 brand without it just sounding odd.
Yep. That rebrand a few years ago made it obvious to pretty much everyone they were part of the same company. Why potentially ruin what is a very good brand?
Not a fan of the name, but even E4 Extra fits in well with everything else
I have a suspicion that ITV Player was rebranded because everyone just generally called ‘BBC iPlayer’ as ‘iPlayer’.
So, there’s a possibility of some confusion between iPlayer and ITV Player…
Also, the BBC isn’t completely off the hook with renaming things and changing their minds - remember BBC Choice and BBC Knowledge channels? And the whole ‘take BBC Three off of linear broadcasting cos the kids only watch stuff online’ followed by ‘we don’t have any kids watching our channels anymore because there’s no linear broadcasting for them - put BBC Three back!’.
I’ve also had a bit of an issue with BBC Radio 5 Live. Why is that one different from BBC Radio 1, 2, 3 or 4?
I wouldn’t say renaming something once and sticking with it 20 years later is the same as ITV and C4 repeatedly changing their branding every few years.
Although I do agree with you about BBC Three, but that’s more about trying to save money due to government cuts rather than doing stuff they genuinely want to do.
I don’t have much of an idea why they have Radio 5 Live different though.
Radio 5 launched in the early nineties. It was very light entertainment, comedy, chat, stand–up, that kind of thing. A couple of years later it was pivoted to be live news and sport, hence the additional name change.
I’m absolutely gutted that the genuinely informative, educational and entertaining BBC4 has being turned into an archive-only channel because of the cuts.
As for the rebrandings, I’m in two minds. One the one hand, if someone says “I watched [thing] on channel x last night” then I’m going to assume it will also be on the related streaming service if I’m interested in checking it out. Oh the other hand, the point about using one name potentially resulting in unclear nonsense being advertised is a fair one.
3 Likes
Anarchist
(Press ‘Help’ search ‘Contact us’ or email help@monzo.com or call 0800 802 1281)
141
It became a rolling news channel at the start of one of true Gulf Wars, if I recall correctly.
I am aware of that, and I’m also aware that the Ultra HD on iPlayer isn’t available on all devices (even if the device supports Ultra HD) but it just shows straight away that even their newest streaming service is falling behind some of its competition.
Trying to find reliable stats on this online is tricky, but I’m finding a consensus of around 5 to 10% of people in the UK DON’T have access to a HD TV.
Much lower than I expected.
