Wikipedia

Talk:Mass media in the United Kingdom/Archive 1

< Talk:Mass media in the United Kingdom
Latest comment: 7 years ago by InternetArchiveBot in topic External links modified
Archive 1

[Untitled]

Latest comment: 14 years ago4 comments4 people in discussion

How can Channel 4 be a 'public' channel? Al 14:40, 6 September 2005 (UTC)

I think because it is not commercial. It only shows adverts to pay for programmes because it gets no funding from the goverment. --βjweþþ (talk) 17:27, 7 September 2005 (UTC)

Begun a cleanup of this article starting with the analogue tv pages. need to sectionise digital/analogue tv and add some stuff about switchover, plus change the section about newspapers to talk about the guardians change and expand some more. This is a bit of a bitty article so it seems wise to keep it reasonably concise and leave the subject pages to expand on it Zeph1rus 18:35, 19 September 2005 (UTC)

Channel 4 was created by Act of Parliament and like the BBC it has statutory duties. It's funded mostly by advertisements and it's publicly owned. In the early days it was supported by money from independent television companies (ITV) which had an income from its advertising revenue. It has an immensely stimulative effect on independent television producers, not broadcasters. ITV is close to death, but that's mostly because of a string of strategic blunders on a playing field that was always stacked in favour of the public broadcasters. --TS 23:44, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

Opening sentence

Latest comment: 14 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

This is crying out for a rewrite. It has no references, and it's got some POV problems too in my opinion. If anyone could have a crack at it it would be great. Thanks. Chevymontecarlo. 19:53, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

It's crap, and very crap at that. There are good articles in this subject area but this one has languished for years. Maybe there's another article that covers the subject better--at least, I hope so. --TS 23:47, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

Media regulation: Ofcom, ASA and PCC

Latest comment: 13 years ago2 comments1 person in discussion

Ofcom are mentioned once, but as the official regulator, they should be explained a bit more, perhaps also with mention of the other self-regulatory bodied, the Press Complaints Commission and Advertising Standards Authority. Other media regulation includes things like libel law, which is very strong in the UK. There are also restrictions such as D notices which might deserve a mention. If there is a separate article covering UK media regulation maybe that could be mentioned? (Declaration of interest: my day job has an interest in media regulation) Jim Killock (talk) 16:28, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

The Digital Economy Act could be mentioned in relation to digital switchover too. (Delcaration of interest: We opposed aspects of the Act) Jim Killock (talk) 16:30, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

Traditional vs new media

Latest comment: 13 years ago4 comments2 people in discussion

Should this article include "new media", or online platforms? I'd say convergence and other topics would be worth covering. This also leads into debates such as net neutrality and telecoms regulation, which are also part of Ofcom's brief. Jim Killock (talk) 17:38, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

It should certainly cover online mass media such as online newspapers. We should be aware that there is a separate Internet in the United Kingdom article however, and discussion about internet regualtion should go there in my view. Telecoms regualtion should go in Telecommunications in the United Kingdom. Rangoon11 (talk) 18:53, 27 February 2011 (UTC)
Fair comment, as there are a million ways of dissecting the same information. I note there is Television_in_the_United_Kingdom with a regulation section as well as Radio in the United Kingdom with no mention of regulation. Jim Killock (talk) 19:54, 27 February 2011 (UTC)
Agreed. I should add that I would be supportive of the creation of a stand-alone 'Media regulation in the United Kingdom' article, but that would be a major project.Rangoon11 (talk) 19:58, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

Suppression

Latest comment: 11 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Need to log stuff like this and this. Its become a big issue(Lihaas (talk) 14:05, 20 August 2013 (UTC)).

Leading Scottish Sunday paper

Latest comment: 10 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

"the Sunday Mail similarly leads the Sunday newspaper market .... the Scotland on Sunday that leads in the Sunday newspaper market." Seems to be contradictory. Nurg (talk) 02:44, 23 August 2014 (UTC)

Title

Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Shouldn't the title be Media in the United Kingdom? There is something about the word of that I find jarring. What do others think?

See also:

Firebrace (talk) 18:36, 3 April 2016 (UTC)

Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Media of the United Kingdom. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:21, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

Out of date

Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

This looks like it hasn't been updated for quite some time. 77.103.46.118 (talk) 21:22, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 11 external links on Media of the United Kingdom. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:13, 7 June 2017 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Mass_media_in_the_United_Kingdom/Archive_1&oldid=1170133721"