21 replies to this topic

[TGIF]

A new poll on this setup:

I've shut the current poll and I'm going to take a slightly different approach to the next question..we'd like your opinions on this setup now

Three forums.
* News - Bulletins, Presenters, Content and Appearance
* Breakfast and Current Affairs - Sunrise, Today, Sunday Night, 60 Minutes, TT, ACA, The 7:30 Report etc.
* Special event coverage - Elections, Bushfire crisis etc.

There's a bit of pestering happening but I'm sure you'll understand this is something we'd quite like to get right

Following on from the changes to the radio forum we're also looking at tweaking the setup for the news threads.

You may have noticed a few questions in the membership survey about how people felt about the changes to the forum. As it transpired, the majority of people were actually happy with the changes although there was a fairly large proportion of people who felt that we could improve on the setup we put into place a few weeks ago.

So. We're putting forward three choices for how you'd like things to be set out: one is the same as it is now, two are tweaks on the same theme. Because the changes were reasonably popular, we don't plan on moving back to a single forum.

Option 1: Splitting the forums along topical lines - 9 votes or 25.71%

* News bulletins: content and appearance
* Breakfast and morning television
* Current affairs programs
* Presenters and reporters - an extension on the threads we have now
* Special Events - coverage of special events - elections, natural disasters, major news events.

Option 2: A somewhat more consolidated approach, much like what we have at the moment but with fewer forums - 11 votes or 31.43%

* Commercial networks
* Public broadcasters
* Subscription and international broadcasters
* General news discussion

Option 3: the present setup - 15 votes or 42.86%

* Seven
* Nine
* Ten
* Public broadcasters
* Subscription and international broadcasters
* General news discussion

Most importantly, we'd love to hear comments, questions, feedback etc about the idea. There's a poll attached so you can vote on the choice you find most attractive.

[Mike Retter]

I think the current way or the last option (3) is better than any others sugested. I still think it should go back to the way it was. I knew nothing about a survey. Actauly wait, the first one isnt bad. I like it because it isnt so commercially skewed and can encoumpas ABC, Sky etc. Well I dont know. I'll think more about it...

Edited by retter2critical, 19 April 2009 - 08:07 PM.

[trisreed]

I think the second option is better, as the current format does work but it is a little overkill with seperate 7, 9 and 10 forums.

[Tom]

I'm inclined to vote for the second of the proposed optiosn, but think the best option would be to revert back to how NCAF was originally organised.

[Cyril Washbrook]

I'm for Option 3.

Option 1 is problematic, because IMHO there's a greater tendency on the forum to discuss things along network lines. Perhaps that's just a consequence of the fact that the forums are organised that way, but still, I've noticed that people will talk about Nine's news/caff, largely in isolation. We get a bit of cross-over/comparison, but I find that the discussion tends mostly to be fairly self-contained to each network's programmes. To put it into rather obvious and banal terms... if a network relaunched its news/caff/paff package, you'd end up with the first three forums (News bulletins: content and appearance, Breakfast and morning television, Current affairs programs) each being inundated with posts about one network's relaunch.

The other problem with Option 1 is that I'm not convinced about the merits of putting "Presenters and Reporters" as its own forum. There's a significant danger that it would just be a repeat broadcast of the Television Personalities forum (given that almost all the personalities in that forum are in news/caff/paff/puff anyway).

Option 2 isn't necessarily problematic, but it isn't the most practical step: while equity might be appealing, it's just a fact that the commercial news/caff/paff/puff/pastry threads get much more discussion than those of the public broadcasters. The appeal of those particular news/caff/paff/puff/pastry/frangipane forums may be regarded as a good or a bad thing, but that's just how it is.

[Bureidenkune]

I voted Option 3. Just seems it will work better to me.

[SA TV]

I voted for 3, but it was better before 'the big change'.....

[Mike]

I think the second option is better, as the current format does work but it is a little overkill with seperate 7, 9 and 10 forums.

Agreed.

[Media Munger]

Agree with Trisreed and Mike 360.

[Adam]

I see option 3 is leading, (8 8 and 12 at the time of this post) though I hope the results can be looked at in this way: 12 people like the current way and 16 people want it different

[Cyril Washbrook]

I see option 3 is leading, (8 8 and 12 at the time of this post) though I hope the results can be looked at in this way: 12 people like the current way and 16 people want it different

Just my two cents, but I don't think this poll is an absolute first-past-the-post vote - I sense that it's more a qualitative barometer of what people are generally liking about the current setup and what they'd like to be changed.

(Also, as an aside: if you were to switch to option 1 or 2, then only 8 people would think that's the best option, while 20 people would think that another system is different. Because the voting is a plurality split, no option garners consensus. Much as in Australia's parliamentary system, about 60% of people give their first-preference vote to someone other than the candidates of the party which wins government. )

[Lepatron]

What about a more consolidated Option 1...

* News - Bulletins, Presenters, Content and Appearance
* Breakfast and Current Affairs - Sunrise, Today, Sunday Night, 60 Minutes, TT, ACA, The 7:30 Report etc.
* Special event coverage - Elections, Bushfire crisis etc.

Almost back to the old News and Current Affairs set up but with more room to expand on discussion.

Thoughts?

[regionaltv]

I still prefer Option 3.

[TGIF]

What about a more consolidated Option 1...

* News - Bulletins, Presenters, Content and Appearance
* Breakfast and Current Affairs - Sunrise, Today, Sunday Night, 60 Minutes, TT, ACA, The 7:30 Report etc.
* Special event coverage - Elections, Bushfire crisis etc.

Almost back to the old News and Current Affairs set up but with more room to expand on discussion.

Thoughts?

We'll need another poll

Oh well

[Tom W]

I liked how it was before October 28, 2008, with all the individual threads on one page because it was easier and quicker to see what was new, instead of going through multiple categories as is required now.

But if it sticks to the categories format, however paradoxical this is, I would like option 3 (the current setup) but the creation of further categories for ABC, SBS and Sky News, leaving the other 'Subscription/International Broadcasters' and 'General News Discussion' categories for their own, more diverse but less prominent purposes.

I would also like all the 'Content & Appearance' and 'Presenters and Reporters' threads consolidated into a single thread as they were before, as I find all the info interesting and I don't know how necessary it is that they be split up.

Edited by Tom W, 21 April 2009 - 10:58 PM.

[TGIF]

What if we consolidated things back to two or maybe three forums? Lep's proposal could work:

* News - Bulletins, Presenters, Content and Appearance
* Breakfast and Current Affairs - Sunrise, Today, Sunday Night, 60 Minutes, TT, ACA, The 7:30 Report etc.
* Special event coverage - Elections, Bushfire crisis etc.

Going back to one single forum would be a bit of a step backwards as far as we're concerned, so it's not something we want to do straight away. Here you have what are effectively 2.5 forums - two which are going to attract the lion's share of traffic, plus another to step in for special events and topics.

[Reuder7]

What if we consolidated things back to two or maybe three forums? Lep's proposal could work:



Going back to one single forum would be a bit of a step backwards as far as we're concerned, so it's not something we want to do straight away. Here you have what are effectively 2.5 forums - two which are going to attract the lion's share of traffic, plus another to step in for special events and topics.

Isn't that what we had before?

[TGIF]

I've shut the current poll and I'm going to take a slightly different approach to the next question..we'd like your opinions on this setup now

Three forums.
* News - Bulletins, Presenters, Content and Appearance
* Breakfast and Current Affairs - Sunrise, Today, Sunday Night, 60 Minutes, TT, ACA, The 7:30 Report etc.
* Special event coverage - Elections, Bushfire crisis etc.

There's a bit of pestering happening but I'm sure you'll understand this is something we'd quite like to get right

[SA TV]

So does that mean 1 thread to discuss the presenters of all channels, or still a thread for each channel?

[Palmer]

Three threads sounds ideal - five is a bit too much.
Would Special Event Coverage incorporate this thread as well http://www.mediaspy....hp?showforum=87 - its the General News and Current Affairs Matters, which doesn't get much talk anyway

Edited by Palmerz, 21 April 2009 - 10:35 PM.