10:45 on average - I’m in bed by 9 though
For a news service to have any chance it would have to have a consistent 9.30 start time. If a late news service had run this week is would have been shown at 10:05pm on Monday and Thursday and 10:45 on Wednesday. Only on Tuesday would it have got close to the suggested time with a start time of 9:45pm. Ten isn’t going to adjust its prime-time schedule of 75-90 minutes reality at 7.30 just to fit in a 9.30 late news bulletin. They would end up with fewer viewers.
Scripted imports are a much better fit for these times and cheaper in the long run. The cost of scripted shows is spread across multiple airings on the main channel as well as also providing filler for multichannels. They also attract a significant consolidated audience (often around 50%) and feature at the top of catch up service viewing.
why? no one will watch it, it’ll last six months and then everyone will be laid off and Ten’ll find an excuse to hack at the progress (small) that 5pm has made in rebuilding the staff.
930 is primetime
And 4pm gets about 250k - yet we as seeing nine and seven launch local into that slot all over the nation
I’d only agree to a local 9.30 news bulletin if TEN stuck by it and didn’t axe it 6 months later. Slowly build up an audience and bring people back to FTA. (I’d even be happy with a national bulletin)
The problem is that all our networks air garbage after their reality shows, so of course people are going to switch off and use other media
… and when you have Seven air LOL at 7.30PM, no one will even switch on at all for that night
I’m not familiar with ABC Nightline. What’s the format like?
Oh then basically Ten Late News from 2012. That used the news-magazine format.
I think there’s been some good arguments here both for and against Ten launching late news.
A large part of the reason the 9.30 slot rates so poorly these day isn’t because no one wants to watch TV, but more because there’s nothing people want to watch. This is largely because reality and drama draws different audiences, although some of the audience is the same, so it’s hard to get good follow on of audiences through the night.
News might be different and draw in new audiences and retain the audience better, but other viewers would be lost. Realistically viewer numbers and ad revenue aren’t going to charge all that much, and any increase comes with a huge risk- both news and imported dramas are expensive, but it’s a lot easier and cheaper to cancel a show that you don’t have to produce yourself if it doesn’t work out.
As much as Nine and Seven are investing a lot in bulletins at 4pm, with low ratings, these are designed to draw in viewers for the rest of the night. They hope that once someone tunes in they won’t change channel until after the 6pm bulletin or even prime time - are largely that is true. It’s also turned into a highly competitive time slot, so the networks will happily spend more money there than in a non competitive slot with no follow on benefit.
TEN would be better off to focus on the 6am-8.30 slot. Whatever they have there, be it news or otherwise, needs to draw viewers away from 7&9 to help get viewers follow on to Studio 10. That way any investment they make gives a secondary benefit in boosting Studio 10’s numbers as well.
I thought the Sandra Sully 2000 bulletin was perfect. It felt youthful, edgy, yet consistent each night.
I also really enjoyed Anne Fulwood’s original Late Edition. A straight forward bulletin with an emphasis on world news but she was a brilliant reader - much missed.
This was just a random thought, but what about mini news updates inbetween Studio 10, similar to The Daily Show on Seven?
Just be be clear, news is not an expensive form of programming. Which is exactly why you see it taking up 7 hours a day of ABC, 7 and 9’s schedule.
Running a news division and newsrooms IS expensive. But Ten already does that.
The way you justify this and put that huge investment “to work” is by Adding incremental hours of news out of the same resources. The added cost is incremental, and the cost of running a news division is amortized across more hours of content.
Seven and nine have figured this out.
Ten - not so much
How do you know? Also the staffing would be far lower than expanding daytime services. The anchors are there, change their schedules- yes and have a reporter do daytime updates. But primetime news is the future of network TV. Not a low rated 5pm bulletin.
The viewership is so, so low during those hours. At 9.30 you would have far more viewers, and a chance to innovate unlike oversaturated breakfast TV which requires far more investment.
Because those networks are trying to improve their 6pm figures.
They did do this briefly in 2014 however, when I think about it… why would Ten do news updates during Studio 10 when they struggle to provide a decent 5pm bulletin nightly? They don’t care. Can we move on?
Long form interviews & reports and an emphasis on international news & current affairs? Unlikely.
We all know local news at 930 on Ten won’t happen. National news on Ten at 930 won’t happen.
But the reason is not economics: news is cheap programming compared to other genres - even US content which is upwards of 100k an hour
Or Low viewership: as there are less people watching FTA at 5am, 11am and 3pm - all which support news.
Or that people go to bed to early: in fact as others have stated, people are still
Watching TV at 930 - they just just not watching live TV - as the networks have programmed us to turn off at 930.
And yes, for it to work - they need
To commit to it, -and have a consistent start time.
The reason it won’t happen is Ten are not that interested in news, and don’t see the merit in it. And honestly I think they are just not that smart about programming decisions. Especially regarding news. They have been BURNED so many times with news programming. -
But not because of bad ideas - because of bad execution.
Running expensive news divisions in 6 cities - to produce one hour of content outside of primetime - is not smart TV economics. I would
Actually support moving the 5pm to 930pm if they are only going to have one hour a day. News at 3 and 4 on seven and nine and abc news at 5, have all reduced tens 5pm. At 930pm they own the market.
At the very least - Ten could
Trial a 930 news in one market - say Perth - over 6 weeks over the summer.
But we know again they won’t. But it’s not economics.
It’s lack of smarts and innovation. And aversion to risk.
Well if they really don’t care about news, why not outsource it completely offshore! I’m sure MediaWorks in NZ would love to produce another bulletin. Cheaper labour, borrow footage from 7 & 9, hell, we’ll even get Paul Henry to host it! There’ll be no news on ten by April!
Exactly right. Previous management and owners knew this and tried to do it. They didn’t promote it or go about it in the right way and now they’re stuck with this schamozzle.
The potential is there. One day they will realise it.
I think the only chance of a reset in viewers minds is if something dramatic happens like a merger with Sky News Australia and the launch of a dedicated multichannel. Perhaps only then can they have a chance of quickly re-establishing their news brand.
In the meantime, I think Ten are content with their 5pm bulletin and making it as cost effective as possible. They have good people there both on and off camera.