Talk:History of ITV

	Television portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Television, a collaborative effort to develop and improve Wikipedia articles about television programs. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page where you can join the discussion. To improve this article, please refer to the style guidelines for the type of work.TelevisionWikipedia:WikiProject TelevisionTemplate:WikiProject Televisiontelevision articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the British television task force (assessed as High-importance).

What's the connection?

The article says:

In June 2005, Ofcom, the channel's regulator since the demise of the Independent Television Commission announced huge reductions in the licence fees payable by the Channel 3 contractors (and Five). This move reflects the significant shift towards digital viewing in the UK, and the British government's desire to switch off analogue television signals altogether by 2012.

What is the connection between digital television and licence fees (really taxes) paid by the commercial television channels? There's no inherent reason why this should be so, and in other countries the opposite is true. 121a0012 05:01, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Here's a news story - from RTE in Ireland - about the subject: [1]; and commentary from my ever-authoritative but never NPOV namesake over at Transdiffusion's blog: [2];

I think the sentence in the article has a couple of problems, the first being, as you say 121a0012, that it doesn't assert a reason for the reduction. Unfortunately, the reason appears to be "ITV lobbied for this change for years and has now succeeded as a sop to them in the face of the BBC surviving for another Charter". But there's no way to easily say this in the context of an encyclopedia. Perhaps it needs to be better put by editing rather than addition: In June 2005, Ofcom, the channel's regulator since the demise of the Independent Television Commission, announced huge reductions in the licence fees payable by the Channel 3 contractors (and Five) after years of lobbying. ➨ ❝R E DVERS❞ 20:36, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Rebid possible?

Another question left unanswered by the article is: under the current regulatory regime, will the Channel 3 contracts ever be rebid, or are the current operators now the permanent licensees in their respective regions? (This would parallel developments in the United States, where stations were once subject to competing applications at every renewal, but today, renewal is automatic absent gross misconduct. Similarly, competing applicants were once subject to a "competitive hearing" process, similar to the IBA "beauty contest" described in the article, but now, open frequencies are put directly to auction. In this case the UK blazed the trail; US broadcast spectrum auctions were not authorized until about 2002.) 121a0012 05:01, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This subject is a bit of a horrible fudge, in the way that British law is often a horrible fudge. The Tories' Broadcasting Act 1990 and the subsequent Labour-derived Communications Acts allow for ITV franchises to be awarded on a rolling basis. So, without anyone really noticing, the franchises have all been renewed for between 10 and 25 years when they expired at the end of 2002.

Notionally, there is a requirement for an open competition, at some point, for the licences. But this has been disregarded (and may have been removed by the 2004 Act, I'm not sure). So, one way or another, no, there will never be another franchise round and the present contractors are now permanent, but the reserve power of defranchising or readvertising still exists. It's just seen as pointless, as ITV plc, if they lost their franchises, could just move the popular programmes to ITV2... or start a new digital channel called ITV1 with all the popular programmes on it, and leave the old "ITV" to a new entrant. Or have someone else win, then buy them up anyway. Or lose a single region to someone else, but then refuse to supply them with certain programmes until they went under.

Whatever, ITV as we now know it is, unfortunately, very permanent. The article could say this, but the research to prove it would be tough: the reserve powers remain and the 1993 system is still in place... it's just unenforcable and everyone in power knows it, but people rarely if ever say it. ➨ ❝R E DVERS❞ 20:36, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's quite depressing when you think about it. PMA 07:59, 17 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:ITVlogoscollection2001.gif

Image:ITVlogoscollection2001.gif is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 11:42, 1 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:ITV Corporate logo 1998-2006.png

Image:ITV Corporate logo 1998-2006.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 20:04, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:ITV logo.svg

The image Image:ITV logo.svg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --22:35, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on History of ITV. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/20050208115258/http://tynetees.tv:80/about/about_history-2.htm to http://www.tynetees.tv/about/about_history-2.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 08:27, 14 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

UTV Ireland New Region

Hello Wouldn't UTV Ireland Be considered a ITV Region, if so maybe add it to the map on the region + ITV Now owns UTV and UTV Ireland TrapdoorSmoke (talk) 08:56, 3 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I know it's not a channel 3 region TrapdoorSmoke (talk) 08:58, 3 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

No, it's a separate channel altogether and isn't part of the ITV network. Bbb2007 (talk) 17:11, 3 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified (January 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on History of ITV. 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) 16:08, 19 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]