The Sky at Night - The End

[JB80]

Well I don't know if you can really compare the magazine readership with number of tv viewers but I'm positive the sales of the mag are around 250,000 last time I checked.

I would imagine most of those would watch and probably a lot more casual viewers.

Not an actual solid number anyway so I'm not sure it's very helpful.

[Kai]

Sky at Night gets a million viewers a month, (and by the way I believe that the magazine has a circulation of about 100,000).

Not bad for a show that doesn't have a regular slot...

In that case only 4% of the viewers are actually bothered enough to do anything about it

Pretty saddening really given the exposure it has had in the media , I can't say I wouldnt be surprised if it was cancelled given the strength of public reaction

[x6gas]

Seeing you asked... I'm saying that if in fact there is 1M viewers then 40 000 (4%) signing a petition to save the show is at best pretty low. whether or not the other 96% can';t be bothered or don't care if the show is cancelled, I don't know them so I'll leave the speculation to others. what I would like to see is some figures on the shows audience from an unbiased source. 

Now 40 000 sigs from an audience of 200 000 (20%) I'd say sounds pretty reasonable. Sorry if questioning your figures seems unreasonable although I would have thought if anything, science has told us to question everything.

I don't want to have an argument about it, but these aren't my figures - they are a quote from one of the presenters of the show and I'd therefore assume more reliable than "doubt it gets a million viewers a month. Maybe worldwide.............but certainly not in the UK" or "I've heard figures of 200 000 and dropping" where do these estimates come from?

Maybe we'd be better putting our energy in to trying to save the show

[Scott]

yes you are probably right re: putting energy into trying to save the show, however, you asked a question, I answered it. 

wouldn't hurt to get a definitive viewing figure and not one quoted by a presenter (precisely why I would not assume them to be more reliable) who it could be argued, as a personal interest in the outcome. I've looked and can't find figures on the internet although I'm sure they must be available.

I guess both figures could be right depending on how "roughly" the roughly 1M is.

Edit:- I should add that I by no means imply that C.L's figures are fabricated. Just that independent figures would carry more weight

[Astrobits]

Some rather wild estimates of the circulation for The Sky at Night magazine in these posts.

The press Gazette lists the circulation of S@N mag as 22,803 monthly for the first half of 2011. I doubt that it is much different now.

http://www.pressgazette.co.uk/node/47723

Nigel

[JamesF]

I think 4% of the audience is actually quite a lot.  I've heard nothing first hand about S@N ending other than here and I think one piece on the BBC News website, so I think it's entirely possible that a good proportion of the audience doesn't know anything about it.

By comparison, when the closure of Radio 6 was proposed the audience figures were supposed to be just over one million.  The facebook group for people who didn't want it to close had less than 180,000 members, so not even 20% there.  And coverage of that was all over all the media for weeks.  Jerry Springer the Opera generated 55,000 complaints when it was shown on BBC television from an audience of 1.7 million which is about 3.2%, and again the press coverage was massive.

I don't think response figures have to be very at all high before they're considered quite a significant issue.

James

[Scott]

I think 4% of the audience is actually quite a lot.  I've heard nothing first hand about S@N ending other than here and I think one piece on the BBC News website, so I think it's entirely possible that a good proportion of the audience doesn't know anything about it.

By comparison, when the closure of Radio 6 was proposed the audience figures were supposed to be just over one million.  The facebook group for people who didn't want it to close had less than 180,000 members, so not even 20% there.  And coverage of that was all over all the media for weeks.  Jerry Springer the Opera generated 55,000 complaints when it was shown on BBC television from an audience of 1.7 million which is about 3.2%, and again the press coverage was massive.

I don't think response figures have to be very at all high before they're considered quite a significant issue.

James

radio 6 not close = 18%.............s@n not close 4% this is a massive difference

as for comparing complaints about closure to complaints about content....apples and oranges comes to mind

numbers are so easily manipulated

[BinocularSky]

with twitter, fb, sgl I'd imagine you'll have reached 95% of the viewers within the first 48 hrs. I think it took me all of two minutes to sign. By my reckoning using your figures 4% of the viewers have signed. 

Given that many, possibly most, of the S@N viewers I know are not on Facebook, Twitter or any astronomy forums (some don't even use the internet), I'd be interested to see the calculation by which you arrived at 95%.

[JamesF]

radio 6 not close = 18%.............s@n not close 4% this is a massive difference

as for comparing complaints about closure to complaints about content....apples and oranges comes to mind

It is a massive difference. But as I pointed out, the coverage of the proposal to close R6 was enormous; in the media every day for weeks. The coverage of S@N being taken off the air has been almost non-existent by comparison. And perhaps it's comparing apples with oranges, or perhaps it's just counting people who can be bothered to complain about something they don't want to happen.

numbers are so easily manipulated

If you left it there you'd never be able to trust any of them.

James

[x6gas]

Some rather wild estimates of the circulation for The Sky at Night magazine in these posts.

The press Gazette lists the circulation of S@N mag as 22,803 monthly for the first half of 2011. I doubt that it is much different now.

http://www.pressgazette.co.uk/node/47723

Nigel

That's a fair cop and I could have checked this quite easily, so apologies.  Magazine sells ~25,000 including digital http://www.abc.org.uk/Certificates/18554470.pdf

Apologies again.

[bob1957]

As a member of the BAA I have received the following bulletin which is encouraging:

THE SKY AT NIGHT

There has recently been much public speculation about the future of the 
BBC's "The Sky at Night". It would appear that programmes are scheduled 
until December, but no decision has been taken about what happens beyond 
that date.

The Councils of both the British Astronomical Association and the Royal 
Astronomical Society have approved a joint letter, to be sent on behalf of 
both societies to the Director-General of the BBC emphasising the 
contribution that "The Sky at Night" has made to British science since 1957 
and urging the retention of a monthly programme devoted to astronomy.

There is also an on-line petition for your consideration and possible 
signature. A link is given below:

http://www.change.org/en-GB/petitions/the-bbc-please-do-not-axe-the-sky-at-night

Bill Leatherbarrow
President, British Astronomical Association
2013 October 5

Let's hope this adds weight to the strength of feeling.

[SteveNickolls]

That's excellent news bob1957.

Steve

[Bukko]

And on the BBC news this morning, they announced the new DG wants to increase the BBC Arts budget by 20%.

Assuming they don't plan to increase the overall budget and saving money from the Executives payrole is unlikely, I assume they would plan to make cuts elsewhere.

Pushing S@N to the backwaters and showing at unreasonable times is a good way to decline figures, so ensuring the stats look bad and the decision to can it easy.

It's pathetic and SHAME ON HIM !!!

Gordon.

[starman1969]

Damn right about some the execs at the BBC getting huge pay offs well in excess of what it should have been, and it was already too much.

The BBC is a public service and should not be run by fat cats, but it clearly has been. A bunch of overpaid numpties, many with invented positions who are only too eager to slap each other on the back when they get something right yet they seem to disappear when things go wrong.

Petition signed.

[DaveS]

Too many arty types in the beeb who probably gave up science before GCSE or given their ages, O levels / CSEs.

I despair.

[RT65CB-SWL]

This could be encouraging if it has got the councils of the BAA & RAS involved!

[LukeSkywatcher]

As a member of the BAA I have received the following bulletin which is encouraging:

THE SKY AT NIGHT

There has recently been much public speculation about the future of the 

BBC's "The Sky at Night". It would appear that programmes are scheduled 

until December, but no decision has been taken about what happens beyond 

that date.

The Councils of both the British Astronomical Association and the Royal 

Astronomical Society have approved a joint letter, to be sent on behalf of 

both societies to the Director-General of the BBC emphasising the 

contribution that "The Sky at Night" has made to British science since 1957 

and urging the retention of a monthly programme devoted to astronomy.

There is also an on-line petition for your consideration and possible 

signature. A link is given below:

http://www.change.org/en-GB/petitions/the-bbc-please-do-not-axe-the-sky-at-night

Bill Leatherbarrow

President, British Astronomical Association

2013 October 5

Let's hope this adds weight to the strength of feeling.

Now that's adding a lot of weight behind the campaign. I still feel that the Beeb will do exactly what they want and no amount of people power will change that.

[Paranoidsam]

I've signed it, asked my family to sign and I've posted the link on some other forums.

There's a lot of support for it... it'd be a shame if it fell short by just a few signatures. 

Spread the word...

[Helite]

Repost: Summary of the relevant info: 

 

Petition http://www.change.or...he-sky-at-night

 

Facebook group https://www.facebook...98459717050634/

 

BBC complaints: http://www.bbc.co.uk...omplain-online/

 

Hashtag #SaveSkyAtNight

 

BBC email addresses: danny.cohen@bbc.co.uk, kim.shillinglaw@bbc.co.uk, john.lynch@bbc.co.uk, david.jordan@bbc.co.uk, janice.hadlow@bbc.co.uk, natalie.humphreys@bbc.co.uk, emma.swain@bbc.co.uk

Another bump for the links again to keep them readily available.

I do hope a lot of the UK astro society's are encouraging any supportive members to sign up, I don't belong to one but I know I would be trying to sign them up to show support if I was a member.

[Rockrae78]

Top episode tonight... Not biased at all... I was on it! And so were my cakes! The giant Jaffa cake looked good even if I do say so myself!

[Paranoidsam]

Top episode tonight... Not biased at all... I was on it! And so were my cakes! The giant Jaffa cake looked good even if I do say so myself!

I bet you were green with envy when Chris picked the Shuttle cake.

[DaveS]

Couldn't catch it last night, but I'm making a date for the Thu repeat.

[jnb]

Last night's episode was the sort of episode I'm not so keen on. S@N is at it's best when they are doing the one on one interviews with someone who really knows their stuff, the recent interview with Sir Martin Rees was a good example. The 'space surgery' and general beginner questions episodes are probably better presented in something like SGL. S@N is tucked away in an obscure slot so it's audience will be people who have sought it out and probably did so because they know something of their subject already. SGL is on in a much more prominent slot and so is better suited to a more general audience who may well ask the sort of beginner questions they tackled last night.

[DaveGarland]

I bet you were green with envy when Chris picked the Shuttle cake.

Well thats taken all the suspense out of Thursdays episode then. Haven't seen it yet lol.

[tdyal]

I was at that Astrocamp featured yesterday...and unfortunately my mug face was in view right in between Chris and Lucy for far too long, so distracting seeing myself while I try to listen to them, lol.  I hate being caught on camera, even on a mobile phone!

Anyway, I am pro saving S&N.  Its a terrific team, each one with their own virtues.  Pete Lawrence, the sky master, he's a walking star map and a good teacher on the show.  Chris Lintott, a fine prodigee of Patrick, jolly, enthusiastic, clearly spoken main presenter.  Lucy, the physicist, very pleasant co-presenter, Paul, the bumbling learner (I hear bad words about Paul but as far as I see on the program, he seems humble and comedic), Chris North, the youthful scientist, no distinguishing feature characteristic but another pleasant part and informative part of the team.

The structure is a delightful improvisation to keep the show alive taking us on interesting locations to continue educating, inspire new generations and still informing us of all the new astronomical developments as the Patrick Moore era had done.  I see nothing has changed in terms of content, only in presentation which I find refreshing.  With respect to those who view the season as dumbed down, if it is, then Sky at night has always been dumbed down but I dont think that is the case.  The presentation, however do occasionally (only very occasionally) feel CBBC style as the thing that did irritate me was Chris and Lucy's synched "hello" whereupon I expected them to tell me what Window we'll be looking through today and then be interupted by George and Zippy arguing over what colour the sun is while Paul distracts them with a peacemaking "eh-oh".  Thankfully, they stopped doing that...so they're improving and learning what works as they go along.  But that criticism is minute, the program still rocks and is actually more refreshing.

This is the only series we have on Astronomy.  Yes, it is niche but it is part of Science...which is far from being a niche.  S&N is fun and inspiring to watch, of which the latter is of vital importance as our country can take pride of their high contribution to the world in the scientific/astronomical field of pioneering development by which many high profile scientists state their insprations were inspired by S&N.  How can the BBC ignore that?

Take S&N away, will be like banning Sunday Roasts in Britain.  Long live S&N and may the BBC find ways to keep it fresh rather than to ponder its death.  And may the BBC continue to give us magnificent supporting documentataries on the cosmos, science and history, such as "How the Universe Works" (brilliant), Brian Cos's Wonders series, Dara O'Brian's Science club, the superb long running Horizon series.  Each one with their own distinct style to suit all tastes. 

Damn, you know I only came on here at lunch time to ask a quick question on dslr remotes but then saw this thread...I'll have to get back to work and ask my imaging question later, lol.