91Èȱ¬

My guess is that you will always use highlights programmes as they are cheap way of filling the schedules at times of day where you would otherwise be broadcasting inevitable repeats. Look at the current Wimbledon schedules: we start the day with "Wimbledon Yesterday" and end it with "Wimbledon Today". The question is what would the alternative programmes be? Repeats of "Cash In The Attic" and "Dad's Army"? Of course you will have highlights programmes.

I don't think highlights shows are necessary unless they provide us with interviews to add to the insight as well as analysis from the people in the know.

In the context of the Olympics, I think it will be good to have a highlights programme since so many sports are represented.

This isn't something that I'd thought about, but I can see how the use of iplayer via the TV and other mediums will eventually lead to the demise of the highlight programme at these sort of events.

With the scheduled not yet formalised, would I be correct in thinking that everything that's being broadcast will be available online? Even if the event doesn't have any audio, still being able to view it would be an advantage. However, would the current website be able to cope with the demand, and bandwidth required for virtually 15 hours a day constant streaming of events?

Those of us who don't want to watch hours of all the Olympic sports will still need a highlights package to watch all the important and/or entertaining action in one or two hours

Highlights programmes are a vital aspect of every major sporting event.

As the name suggests, they highlight the key momemts of a day, and give the viewer the opportunity to witness a wider away of sports (for the Olympics) and receive summaries and the moment of victory with more ease.

Not every body has the time to scour through the iPlayer to see all the sporting events of the day. In terms of the Andy Murray match, while yes there is the opportunity to view the whole match, it is far more convenient to watch the Today at Wimbledon highlights, to be taken through the progress of the match at a faster pace, and still getting to see the key points, or best shots.
Or Brazil vs Chile. I could watch the full 90 minutes, or tune in to the highlights programme with Colin Murray, to see 5-10 minutes of the best bits, plus a bit of punditry afterwards - aswell as the pointing out of something amusing, that may otherwise have been missed.

Plus, it is still far from the case that all sport coverage goes on the iPlayer. The various interactive channels cover different matches during Wimbledon, and will show a wide array of sports during the Olympics. But unless they were also shown on one of the 'main' 91Èȱ¬ channels (1/2/3/4) they will not appear on the iPlayer.

If the 'red button' is the way forward....where were the F1 European GP highlights over the weekend?

I missed a chunk of the race and was looking forward to hitting the 'red button' that night - but when I got there the only option was 'World Cup Highlights' and within that it was running repeats of the days WC news.....I know it was a Sunday so I wasn't expecting anything Wimbledon related but there was definitely no F1 there on Sunday or yesterday...

That said - I absolutely love 99% of the way things are being presented to us during the WC, Wimbledon and most of the GPs - so I would have to say that most of the time your team are doing a great job taking the way we watch sport forward

I've loved having the highlights available on TV and iplayer through the world cup. As 'SportingNonsense' has said above, not everyone wants to watch a whole match, and the additional punditry on highlights programmes is an additional positive element. The highlights have nicely bridged the gap between the 3 minute round-ups online, and watching a match that has already happened in its entirety.

The highlights shows are still vital, even if many will watch them on iplayer more often than on TV.

I still think highlights will be important in 2012 as the quality of action on a normal PC is not quite as good as on the telly to date. It's miles better than a few years ago, but still a bit inferior. So I'd choose highlights on the telly if the option existed.....

There should always be a place for the highlights on tv especially for something as big as the 2012 Olympics.

Working on GMT, the daytime events are going to be out of reach for a large % of people who work standard business hours.

Website/iPlayer highlights are certainly useful for wanting to watch specifc sports coverage but a broad show on tv has to be the easiest watch and the best way to soak in the event as a whole.

The only gripe with 91Èȱ¬ highlights is whether they can 'limit' the amount of time spent on presenters and sports pundits talking and focus on the actual games....wasn't the most featured person on 2008 Olympic coverage the face of Gabby Logan presenting?

The Olympic Highlights were good for me as I could switch on around 7 and see whats being going on.
Do the same for Wimbledon but have not bothered for the World Cup, Too much laddish banter then the seriousness of ITV's World Cup Highlights which have been a bit better.
Highlights have to stay but they need to be on the major channels, F1 isnt, why isnt that on 91Èȱ¬1 or 91Èȱ¬2 rather then squashed on 91Èȱ¬3?
ITV showed F1 Highlights on its Main Channel, why cant the 91Èȱ¬ do the same??

Please, Please, Please do not scrap your highlights programmes!!

The highlights are perfect for so many people who suffer from having work/college/families and many other commitments during any major sporting event. This is especially true for an event like the Olympics.
Yes iPlayer is fantastic if you miss an event that you are particularly interested in, but the joy of the Olympics is being able to watch the 'best bits' from so many different sports. Personally, I would always watch the highlights shows (whether live or via iPlayer), however would only be able to watch a fraction of the live shows due to other commitments, and due to the fact that the Olympics are almost non-stop, would struggle to find any time to 'catch-up' using your on-demand service.

Please keep your highlights programmes, people simply don't have the time to watch a 4 hour tennis match or 90 minute football game, unless they can fit the live event into their busy schedule.

Ultimately it seems clear that highlight shows will be a thing of the past, but we are not upon that era yet.

Not to get into the usual age debates, but right now the way the world operates is still largely dictated by the elder generation (50+). A large proportion of these people, perhaps not willingly or knowingly, are why analogue TV still hasn't been switched over to digital, they are why TV companies are still limited in keeping on-screen data within non-widescreen formats, and are holding back many other aspects of the modernisation of TV because Ofcom requires UK broadcasters continue to cater for the those still watching on out-dated technology - and unfortunately of all the world's generations the 50+ are the ones least capable of adapting to the modern world (big generilastion there obviously).

Thats perhaps not a bad thing, as it allows the technology to be better developed to get it ready for when the audiance is ready, but what it essentialy means is that you won't see the real modern change in TV until my generation (25-40) have replaced the current elder generation.

Between now and then there will be a big fundamental change to TV - it will un-doubtedly be streamed through the internet in a 91Èȱ¬ iPlayer-style format where the audiance picks what they want to watch when they want to watch it with the only aspect of scheduling left being the time from which the programs become available. Even "live broadcasts" would be streamed, allowing the user to either watch a delayed full coverage or actually stream it live.

We aren't talking hovering cars or cities on the moon here, this is a progression of TV that has already started happening over the last 5 years and we're effectively waiting for a higher national average broadband speed before we see the first trials. That will lead to internet TV broadcasting and digital broadcasting running side by side until the net broadcasting becomes the dominant style and it ceases to be financialy viable to keep digital.

Because of this change, of which there is absolutely no doubt is on the (perhaps distant) horizon, a lot of traditional show formats will be lost.

I wonder how many of those i-player viewers were people at work premises that dont have TV licences? Has the 91Èȱ¬ decided to back down on its rather luddite stance that people who pay their TV licence cant watch sport at work without their employer buying a licence too?

There's still the casual sports-watcher, or the suddenly-busy ex-student who doesn't have the time to keep up on the coverage across all those sports. If you're only interested in the most extraordinary events of the Olympics, then a pre-packaged highlights program is still the best place to get that.

There's still going to be a demand for quality sports journalism, selection and presentation of clips, and content earmarked for everyone in the country to bring us all together. That niche will be filled by highlights programs for years to come, I hope.

Highlights are as important now as ever as although we may have more options to watch content we want to see live, it still means we're watching that at the expense of other action. And of course on the oh-so wonderful iPlayer (yes, I am being ironic) viewers choosing to watch on-demand are much more likely to be looking for a highlights show rather than the 15 hours or so of live coverage for the day.


No reason at all to change the status quo for 2012 - kick off with Olympic Breakfast to preview the day, have Olympic Report around 12.30pm and 5.30pm and then the highlights around 11pm to round up the day.

P.S.

And also note the Olympics isn't the World Cup. They've just got roughly three games a day to cover in highlights whilst with the Olympics there are literally hundreds of events to cover each day - and viewers can't see them all live, whether or not they stick with 91Èȱ¬1/2 or watch the interactive/online streams.

Highlights are also crucial for bringing to attention moments which probably wouldn't attract people live either - for example a surprising achievement in one of the less popular Olympic sports (the Taekwando Brits come to mind from Beijing). It's also a time to reflect on the day, bring in the medalists and preview forthcoming events - something which shouldn't intrude too much on the live coverage.

From a personal point of view, the World Cup highlights shows have been redundant to me. Even if I missed a daytime game, you always get a couple of minutes during the live coverage of the evening game.

Of course, the problem is, for the slightly less dedicated viewer in 2012, they don't want to sit down for 3 hours just to see that Gold medal they heard about earlier. And if they don't want to do that - they probably can't be bothered to go hunting it out online.

I suspect it will all come down to scheduling. Essentially, highlights serve a more casual TV audience who would be less inclined to spend hours watching live coverage or finding what they wanted online. If the scheduling of events pushes a highlights show so late of an evening that it no longer reaches these casual viewers, there's really little point in it at all.

It's not just about the casual viewer though - you've also got an obligation to provide the service to the fans who expect it and will be still watching towards the midnight hour and soaking up every second of it. Plus exactly what else will the 91Èȱ¬ be showing - much better to show highlights of the biggest event this country has ever seen than some old American film as usual.


What time do we expect live action to be continuing too during the games - considering London's record with major events, I'd imagine the local authorities probably want everyone tucked up in bed by about 10.30pm.

I was perhaps a little too eager in my age generalisation, but I think the point still stands whether the age group in question is 50+ or 70+ or 90+ etc.

The 91Èȱ¬ did a piece on the digital switchover a while back and in it they predicted 1000's of people, mostly those of pensioner age, will discover their TV no longer working when analogue is switched off because, even despite all the advertising, there are still sizeable collections of people that either don't understand or aren't even aware of it.

In the same report, they also mentioned how the 91Èȱ¬ collected data suggesting that there are still 1000's of people watching the 91Èȱ¬ in black and white. That was from last year.

These are the people that are unlikely to have a computer or anything else connected to the internet, and if they're watching in black and white then the only "red button" for them turns the TV off.

These people are also still license fee payers, and I would expect Ofcom will be on the 91Èȱ¬'s back to ensure it still caters for them - so for that reason alone I would be somewhat surprised if something like a highlights show stops anytime soon.

That said, I do honestly believe that, as I said above, the concept of "TV broadcasting" will eventualy become a thing of the past.

As you mentioned, there is a question about how to access all the new content on offer via things like 91Èȱ¬ iPlayer - and its that accessability that will ultimately drive the change. People want all that the iPlayer offers, and more, but while the iPlayer remains a seperate entity to the TV broadcast, which is still the case even on Virgin Media while its accessable from the red button, its going to remain somewhat long-winded to find what you want - and that gets made worse by each broadcaster having a different system.

That is what will change, and broadcast schedules as whole will be lost as a result, I feel.

So instead of switching on your TV and flicking to 91Èȱ¬1, you would instead bring up a menu that offers the "broadcasters" alphabeticaly - so you pick "91Èȱ¬" and then you'd be faced with one menu system that allows you to stream any 91Èȱ¬ show currently available, similar to the iPlayer.

Essentialy its a merge of everything on the red button, everything on the iPlayer, everything currently in a normal broadcast schedule - all acessable from one TV menu but with no fixed scheduling.

When that happens, there is no longer any real point to a highlight show because there is no longer any way to miss any coverage at all.

Roger - many Olympic fans would like to watch both the Swimming and the Rowing though, but if they clash in the schedules (as athletics and swimming usually does over the middle weekend) you can't watch both - so the highlights are still needed.


I understand though now the question you're asking if lesser events will continue through to midnight - there is a huge difference between highlights at 10.35pm (or later if the news is pushed back), and after midnight. I think though you have to play it like Today at Wimbledon - schedule the highlights in the expectation the "big blockbusters" ending at 10.35pm, but be flexible enough to continue with live coverage if something of note is happening elsewhere.

Hi Roger,

Appreciate the dilemma regarding the highlights and you can't please everybody, but live action has to take precedent.

However I hope to be going to the Games as will no doubt a few million people over the 16 days, so when getting back to my hotel I would still want a highlights show to catch up on what I have missed. If I am at the cycling, I want to know how the athletics got on and vice versa. A late night 11pm to midnight slot is the obvious answer, perhaps repeated the following breakfast time before the live action begins again.

Personally I would love to go to two or three different events each day, but I love all of the Olympic sports, and what puts me off is that I would be missing other events whilst I am at one event. I have an ipod touch and would love to be able to get live streaming of say the athletics in the evening whilst I am at the cycling, to keep abreast of what is going on elsewhere. Is there any chance that the various venues could include free wifi connection, as otherwise it will be very costly?

Another reason for retaining some sort of highlights show is that I love to keep an archive of the major events for my own personal collection. Come the build up to London, I love getting out my DVDs of the games in Beijing etc and my old VHS from Seoul and watch some memorable moments again. The only way to capture the best bits for me is by recording your highlights shows to keep for posterity! If you have highlights on the red button only then I can't tape them on my Sky+ box as you cannot record the interactive streams - unless that will be sorted by 2012 in line with the ability to do so on Sky's football first programme when you can record an interactive stream of any game you choose?

Finally, slightly off-topic, but I love the theme tunes from the 91Èȱ¬ for the major events, although for the first time I am hugely disappointed by the 91Èȱ¬s effort for the World Cup which is much too short and much less memorable than ITVs on this occasion (in my opinion). Not a criticism, as 91Èȱ¬ usually wins 9 times out of 10. My point is, how about getting some public involvement for suggestions of what iconic British tune to use for the theme to London 2012 to make sure it is one that most of us will love and cherish, rather than risk choosing your own and a facing possible backlash if it is not popular?

Andy

Probably for the best not to let the public choose the theme tune! I'd back a return of Chariots of Fire myself, but the 91Èȱ¬ do more often than not end up getting it right by not going for the blatantly obvious.


Re: highlights on the news channel. I think there needs to be a distinction between what I'd call Olympic News and Olympic Highlights. Usually a sports news programme would be rounding up the events, while "highlights" will include some events being played out as they were broadcast.

If the news channel is to be involved I think it's better it becomes the home of Newsnight for the fortnight and that 91Èȱ¬2 carries on with live coverage through to midnight or so whilst 91Èȱ¬1 switches to highlights after the late news. (I'm hoping if things like athletics continue past 10pm, the news would be pushed back accordingly to keep channel hopping to a minimum.)


And with highlights possibly running late, it is very important they are scheduled on a channel rather than on the red button. It's surprising to see World Cup Football Focus on the red button (but not on Freeview) whilst 91Èȱ¬1 airs Bargain Hunt. Apart from the news, there is absolutely nothing during the Olympic fortnight which should take priority over the games - whether that's at midday or midnight.

What is important about a 'highlights' show is that it concentrates on the actual events and has absoilutly NO waffle by the so called experts about what someines victory 'means' to them or how they 'felt'. This needs to be at the end of the day and needs to include ALL the medal winning events at the very least.

Lets have the proper highlights on the main 91Èȱ¬ channels and leave the touchy feely stuff to the red button.

I was in the US during part of the winter olympics and the prime time evening shows on NBC were dire because they often missed out on the live action and prefered to show the 'emotional' stuff rather than the action.

yes iplayer and the net are fine for watching one off sporting contests, ie football or rugby games etc, but for a multi event occasions like the olympics or the commenwealth games, i would much rather be able to sit down and watch well presented highlights show on my nice big telly in glorious HD, with analysis and interviews.
The only down side the highlights show is that they tend to concentrate on the sports like athletics and swimming which i probably already seen, what i want to to catch up, and see more of, the ones i have'nt like shooting canoeing archery etc.