Damned if you do, damned if you dont?
To multichannel or to HD? That is Nine's question, and everyone has an opinion...
- Published by David Knox
- on
Nine has come in for a social media whack by those who are unhappy it is showing one broadcast of the Olympics on both Nine and Gem.
Nine would have had to apply to Senator Conroy in order to split its broadcasting, because the new anti-siphoning rules still have not been legislated.
A Nine Spokesperson told TV Tonight it had chosen to offer its viewers the broadcast in High Definition.
That’s small comfort to those who are frustrated that there aren’t alternative, or long-form, sports on Gem.
But in many ways is this a case of damned if you do, damned if you don’t?
Sports fans have bleated long and loud for sport to be shown Live and in HD, which for the most part is what Nine is attempting to offer. But when the broadcast veers from event to event, it has the cumulative effect of feeling like a highlights show.
Olympics, in all their multiple glory, just aren’t a perfect fit for Free to Air broadcasting.
When Seven had the Beijing Games, it on-sold less-popular sports to SBS.
By the time we get to Rio in 2016 analogue will have been switched off.
In the meantime, serious sports fans are satisfied customers paying for Foxtel’s 8 HD channels showing uninterrupted, long-form coverage. And it’s rather wonderful.
Amended.
Share
- Tagged with Olympics
35 Responses
I remember they advertised in 3D as well… Is that happening and working? (Don’t have a 3D TV)
Think we’ll have to get Foxtel for the next one… The coverage is pretty poor, the time difference doesn’t help…
“Numbers are merged by OzTAM not Nine” – But they weren’t for the Commonwealth Games in 2010 – Ten and ONE showed separate figures, resulting in ONE reaching 8% some nights.
Now we’d be seeing for example Nine 18%, GEM 20% – total for both 38%.
did anyone else just see the blue screen of death on 9?
i agree with a couple comments here, that the majority of aussies don’t care about HD… would rather have simply better coverage
and it’s obvious that Channel 9 can’t show everything… that’s not the point here
i was watching yesterday morning and the (in my opinion) abysmal presenters Leila McKinnon and Cameron Adams sat replaying swimming races for the umpdeenth time and going through “highlights” packages (no live footage) over and over and over…
meanwhile still playing Livein London (according to the official olympics website) was badmintoon, basketball, beach volleyball, boxing, football, gymnastics, handball, hockey, table tennis, tennis and volleyball
I’ve actually found myself switching over to 7 during the mornings… even without footage they’re doing a more interesting coverage… showing sights around london where events are taking place… chatting to fans and patrons and family members of athletes…
and interviewing the atheletes themselves one-on-one…
that’s another thing that flabbergasts me about Channel 9, is the interviews i’ve seen via video hook up! not live in their studio!
They fly to the other side of the world to sit in a studio with no windows… and they interview athletes via satelitte… seriously??? why are they even there?
I do not watch sport unless it is live,bit of a sook but kind of feel cheated otherwise.
Problem I have is a simple one,why can’t they have a live watermark.
Watching the rowing right now and unless I had of heard Karl say this is live I would have changed channels…..little live watermark can’t be that hard.
@Mr. J – I fully agree.
Exactly right JezzaTFOO… Nine had plenty of time to organise a multi-channel system. I seriously doubt that Sen. Conroy would have said no. So in this case David, they are being damned because they didn’t!
At the very least they could onsell the rights to less popular (but IMO more interesting) sports. I have zero interest in swimming or athletics and this will be the bulk of what Nine show… they always do.