Shock News: Reporting Scotland is now watched regularly by less than 5% (1 in 20) of Scots and Good Morning Scotland is listened to regularly by less than 2% (1 in 50).

I’ve just been contacted by a recently-retired senior BBC England staff member to tell me confidentially of the collapse in audiences for BBC Scotland’s two flagship news programmes. Reporting Scotland’s audience has fallen from around 500 000 in 2014 to less than 200 000 while Good Morning Scotland’s audience is now less than 40 000.

According to my source these figures are evidence that even confirmed NO voters have become so depressed by the negative fear-based coverage on these two programmes that they cannot bear to watch.

It’s been coming for some time: BBC audience study shows Scottish viewers are most critical of all

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/scotland-blog/2016/may/20/bbc-audience-study-shows-scottish-viewers-are-most-critical-of-all

It is possible that my source is unreliable. If so, BBC Scotland will hopefully provide the figures they have.

 

54 thoughts on “Shock News: Reporting Scotland is now watched regularly by less than 5% (1 in 20) of Scots and Good Morning Scotland is listened to regularly by less than 2% (1 in 50).

  1. Kenzie January 10, 2017 / 1:00 pm

    About the BBC Scotland, Mr Robertson; too good to be true? I hope it is and furthermore, I hope it gets worse.

    Liked by 1 person

      • broadbield January 10, 2017 / 5:06 pm

        You may be waiting a long time. Apparently listening figures are copyright so I doubt if they will release them. An organisation called RAJAR, jointly owned by the BBC, collects listening figures using listening diaries but doesn’t supply any data to the public. Just as well we don’t fund the BBC then.

        Liked by 2 people

  2. Andrew Leslie January 10, 2017 / 1:17 pm

    I have to ask why, if the information was given to you confidentially, you are spreading it all over Twitter?

    Like

  3. Finnmacollie January 10, 2017 / 1:29 pm

    “An independent, impartial report has suggested”

    Critics say it’s because they are shite,

    Liked by 2 people

  4. Jackie January 10, 2017 / 1:38 pm

    shock news in your case means “fake news”… and you’re the academic “media analyst”? What a clown.

    Like

  5. bedelsten January 10, 2017 / 2:16 pm

    The BBC annual reports detail, somewhere, the number of licence payers in Scotland. While there is not a 1:1 relationship between households:licences, think student halls of residence, it is probably near enough. There are scottish government figures somewhere detaling the number of households in Scotland – needed for rates I suppose. When I last looked, the percentage of households with licences declined by one percentage point 2013/14 to 2014/15. I don’t imagine the trend reversed 2015/16.

    I am using a wee tablet thing or I would go and hunt out the data for you.

    Like

  6. johnrobertson834 January 10, 2017 / 2:30 pm

    Thanks. Having a licence might just be for the nice nature progs?

    Like

    • maureen7264 January 11, 2017 / 4:38 pm

      I agree, I have a licence but never watch any of the news channels. Prefer to get my news online from the alternate media, which is a damn sight more trustworthy.

      Liked by 1 person

      • Bob nugent January 11, 2017 / 5:30 pm

        THAT IS THE INJUSTICE
        WE MUST BUY A TV LICENCE TO SUPPORT ONE 1 CHANNEL THAT IS SUPPOSED TO BE UNBIASED
        IF THEY’RE NOT FULFILLING THEIR LEGAL OBLIGATIONS WHY SHOULD PEOPLE BE PRESCUTED BY A CHEATING ORGANISATION

        Like

      • Bob nugent January 11, 2017 / 5:04 pm

        Phew thought itvwis SNP BAD NOO IT BBCBAD

        Like

    • johnrobertson834 January 10, 2017 / 5:17 pm

      Yes, they’re getting so obvious, more and more must see through it especially if they watch BBC at 6 first and see the state of NHS England.

      Like

      • John ROBINSON January 10, 2017 / 8:11 pm

        I agree John BBc to me means ” British Bullshit Conservatives”.

        Like

  7. Iain January 10, 2017 / 5:41 pm

    I am one of the 95% of the population who don’t watch Reporting Scotland, not because of the bias but because of the cloyingly twee presentation. Long ago my parents used to watch North Tonight on Grampian TV which was awful, and in a smugly superior way I was proud to avoid it and watch Reporting Scotland instead. Bring back North Tonight!

    The contrast between the rigorous investigation carried out by the likes of BR in Bavaria and RTE in Ireland, and the parish pump tedium on BBC Scotland is dramatic. BBC Alba’s An Là manages to convey a seriousness and respect for the ausience than Reporting Scotland has lacked for years.

    Liked by 1 person

  8. Norman Martin January 10, 2017 / 7:17 pm

    They specialise in reporting the spun lies in the press, thus giving them traction with a bigger audience than their tiny sales. Good to know that the radio audience is just as miniscule.

    Like

  9. Brian McGraw January 10, 2017 / 8:47 pm

    No surprise. My wife and I don’t bother with Good Morning Scotland at all and only occasionally follow reporting Scotland but really just to check if their weather forecast chimes with our online weather app. When I’m stupid enough to tune into Reporting Scotland, I’m scunnered within a couple of minutes and have to change channel .

    Liked by 1 person

  10. Bob nugent January 10, 2017 / 10:50 pm

    DOES THAT MEAN WE GETVA REBATE BASED ON WASTAGE
    NAE WUNNER GARY SOUNDS WORRIED (deer in the headlights) AT EVERY INTERVIEW

    Liked by 1 person

  11. Kevin Taylor January 10, 2017 / 11:48 pm

    Way-back in my naive pre-fake-news days, I got so sick of reading the Daily Record that I stopped buying it. Must’ve been around the time Ewan Bain passed, and the Record – copying The Sun – thought it was somehow ‘in the public interest’ to publish sensational details of pop-star Madonna’s rear-seat dalliances with ‘young Hispanic men with twelve-inch penises’ (I shit you not) – children were exposed to that unecessary tripe.
    It was also during that time they deemed it a brilliant idea – again copying The Sun – to bombard Scots with daily news about Lady Diana (David Beckham polluted us later) until we were completely turned-off by Diana – nae-hermm tae the lassie. Anyway, I could no longer justify buying a rag that, up until that point, had only Angus Og as a good reason to spend my money on their rubbish. I stopped buying that publication.

    Then some time passed and I discovered the Daily Mail, I thought; ‘Now that’s a mature read from clever contributors and professional writers, writing for a thinking individual’.. and I took to purchasing that rag.

    Apart from being pro-independence, I was never really that political, considering politics as a strange pleasure for City-types and, well, politicians. However I was slowly transformed from being apolitical and not very passionate into someone with an opinion, someone who cared about what goes on in our country – thanks to the Daily Mail. The transformation came about when it dawned on me that the Daily Mail constantly and persistently used their powerful position to denigrate, vehemently, everything Labour stood for. Hardly a day went-by when they had vicious HEADLINES accompanied by a ‘vile’ diatribe about this-and-that-Labour. Phew… “They never let-up, do they?” I thought. But I would see it that way, wouldn’t I? I mean, I was Labour through-and-through? Actually, no. I’d always and without fail, voted SNP – and that was the essence of the objectivity of my personal disgust. I was able to see what the Daily Mail was up to without being the target, the wronged individual. I wasn’t a Labour sympathiser, I just thought it was cowardly, not professional, to attack from such a responsible position. I was a bit naive, I suppose..

    Sickened once more, I ceased buying that publication, but this time I stopped buying, not because of banality, but because of constant bias and carping – no wonder folk don’t buy newspapers!
    I’ve only recently (occasionally) bought a newspaper again, The National, because they’re on our side…

    I’m completely sick once more, and confused, because I’m concerned that buying The National means ‘The Herald’ will have the means to behave like The Daily Mail – only it’s not Labour they’re attacking but ‘us’. Am I helping to finance that? Would The Herald sink if I wasn’t patronising it? Would their demise send a strong message to all Scottish publications? Wouldn’t that be a headline?

    ‘HERALD FOLDS ON BACK OF ANTI-INDEPENDENCE STANCE’

    Yes, The National does give us a voice, and we should be grateful for that voice. But as in a game of Chess, if I lose my Bishop, a sacrifice, for my opponent’s Queen, would the end-game be to my advantage?

    Back to my original point. The BBC remind me of The Daily Mail: if they keep banging Scots’ heads against a wall about ‘the bloody SNP’, those Scots will eventually become fed-up hearing the constant bias and carping – and they’ll stop listening.

    Vote SNP in the Scottish Council Elections on May 4th

    Liked by 1 person

  12. Kevin Taylor January 10, 2017 / 11:52 pm

    Btw, Excellent stuff, Prof!

    Like

      • Bob nugent January 12, 2017 / 3:28 pm

        OOOOOONNNNN THAT MEANS THURS NAEBIDI LISTENING OR WATCHIN THUM BIASED REPORTS
        THAT MIGHT MAKE DONNANLDA SIT UP
        A ONCE WELL RESPECTED NEWS SERVICE RDUCED TO A LAUGHING STOCK IN MEDIA TERMS
        NEARLY AS BAD AS SCOTSMAN CIRCULATION WHICH IS BEIN HIGHLIGHTED ON BBC 2 TONITE
        200 YEARS AND NOW THEY GO DOON THE DRAIN
        WHY DID THIS APPEN EH !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

        Liked by 1 person

  13. caltonjock January 11, 2017 / 4:11 am

    I expect viewing figures will decrease further in the coming months as the “we speak” policy (the voice of London) takes effect. It matters not to the corporation that the vast bulk of Scots are dissatisfied with the mind manipulating propaganda being force fed to viewers day and night.

    Judging the present circumstance I am reminded of Geldorf’s offensive public announcement at the time of the much criticised “Band Aid” appeal and subsequent provision of aid to Ethiopia.. Just give me your f*****g money.

    Liked by 1 person

  14. johnrobertson834 January 11, 2017 / 8:55 am

    In my last few years as Professor of Media Politics, several contacts in other universities had told me of anecdotal evidence that audiences for these two programmes were collapsing because of a massive switch to online news agencies, an increasing distrust of all MSM by younger audiences and a spreading distaste amongst people of all political persuasions for the massive negativity in coverage. I understand perceived hostility in BBC reporting to the Conservative Party in England is having similar effects. BBC is oif course not subject to the FoI act. As a retired freelance researcher, neither am I. My source only provided a verbal recollection of the information so it’s not entirely reliable. If it’s wrong, BBC can tell us why.

    Like

  15. Alex Beveridge January 11, 2017 / 9:54 am

    I had an interesting conversation with two of my grandsons recently, both teenagers, one of whom voted Yes in 2014, the other will get his first vote in this year’s council elections.
    Cutting a long story short, it turned out that neither of them has ever bought a newspaper, watches or listens to M.S.M news, but instead get all their information from the internet. They didn’t see anything unusual in this, and said that most of their pals did the same. So no wonder the B.B.C, and I bet S.T.V/I.T.V/Sky News viewing figures are collapsing. And of course, we all too aware of the, hoped for, demise of the print media.
    I bring this up because of an article written by the excellent James Kelly, when he described the methodology of the polling companies use when collecting peoples views, in this case, on the support for Scottish Independence. Apparently, on occasions, this is done by calling voters on a landline. Now from what I gather from my grandchildren, landlines are for old fogeys like me, they are all in the digital age, and it’s mobiles or tablets all the way.
    So could it be that the polls are wrong, and with this coming of age generation, the majority for independence is much greater? Just thinking.

    Like

    • Bob nugent January 11, 2017 / 11:27 am

      That is exactly how we should play the INDY 2campaign in 2018 (not 2017) thats a squib thrown in by THE RAGS AN GOGGLEBOXES NOT TODAYS PEOPLE.
      USE THE SOCIAL MEDIA

      Liked by 1 person

  16. Clydebuilt January 11, 2017 / 11:49 am

    Couldn’t the BBC just lie about their audience figures, how would we know their validity.

    Like

  17. Jackie January 13, 2017 / 10:48 am

    You really are a sham, “Retired professor”. You print a fake story, then instigate debate about it as if it were true, meanwhile lecturing “the media” about their failure to present analysis and fact based on research. You should be ashamed of yourself, but since you obviously censor comments you don’t like your audience will never know (viz. my previous attempt to comment on this thread). Shameful behaviour from a supposed “expert”.

    Like

    • johnrobertson834 January 13, 2017 / 12:55 pm

      This and your previous comment are up on the site for all to see. I never censor. Why don’t BBC release the viewing figures do you think?

      Like

      • johnrobertson834 January 13, 2017 / 12:56 pm

        Including your nasty turns of phrase – clown? sham? I’m honestly reporting what I was told.

        Like

  18. Jackie January 13, 2017 / 6:11 pm

    My earlier comment was “awaiting moderation” a heck of a long time… So, by “reporting what I was told”, you mean repeating what somebody is alleged to have said. No names, no evidence. In fact, precisely the sort of reporting you criticise. I am frankly amazed at the unchecked statements you make here, Mr Robertson, given that people (including me, in the past) have assumed that your criticisms are based on research and proper analysis. You do not seem to live up to the high standards you expect of other academics, and I say that on the basis of several of your items lately.Surely your criticism of organisations is diluted by lapses such as this, can you not see that point?
    And no I’m not Jackie Bird.

    Like

    • johnrobertson834 January 14, 2017 / 9:35 am

      I agree you could see it as a lapse but it seemed like a reasonable way to flush them out. Why are they allowed to hide the figures when we pay for the service?

      Like

  19. johnrobertson834 January 14, 2017 / 10:52 am

    I say that on the basis of several of your items lately – such as?

    Like

  20. Jackie January 18, 2017 / 3:15 pm

    Such as your extremely lazy and misleading assumptions that any story even vaguely critical of health / education in Scotland is automatically “antiNSP” “anti Government” or “pro Union” and you categorise them accordingly and quite subjectively.Fair enough – it’s your wee blog – but please don’t pretend this is as a result of some impartial judgement on your part – it’s your interpretation, your prejudice.
    As for posting a load of baloney on this blog and then demanding the BBC responds, it smacks of either high handed arrogance, or delusion. You present yourself as an objective academic when you are nothing of the kind. You don’t like being called “a clown” but you instantly make a joke about someone’s first name, and that’s OK. Pathetic.

    Like

    • Bob nugent January 18, 2017 / 5:11 pm

      HOW CAN THE 1.9millin+ ASK FOR A REBATE, A CONTRACT IS A CONTRACT
      ANDCTHEY ARE FAILING TO PROVIDE WHAT IS PAID FOR
      ANY LAWYERS IN THE CROWD

      Like

  21. johnrobertson834 January 18, 2017 / 4:30 pm

    OK Jackie. Too offensive for my health. Don’t send any more. I won’t approve them.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s