Comments on: Sentenced to death

By: Nick Biskinis

Nick Biskinis — Tue, 02 Sep 2025 12:39:36 +0000

Is it true that ABC did have the resources to run a weekday London franchise? I always thought this wasn’t the case which is why Rediffusion was needed in order for Thames Television have adequate funding.

In retrospect Thames really was the balance of both ABC and Rediffusion rather than be seen as ABC London: the Rediffusion strengths were carried forward into existing programmes and in new production which drew on Rediffusion’s traditions. The World at War, TV Eye, This Week etc all can be seen as the legacy of Rediffusion. Things came full circle when Jeremy Issacs become Director of Programmes at Thames. When Thames was in its last days of transmission in 1992 it stressed it had begun life as Associated-Rediffusion in 1955.

Separately was it ever true that at one point Rediffusion’s parent company BET did own a majority of Thames Television’s shares?

By: Ronnie MB

Ronnie MB — Sat, 07 Oct 2023 20:42:41 +0000

I’d to see the context to be sure, but I’m not entirely convinced that one of the reviews* was as complimentary as it was claimed to be.

*”Lord Hill of ITA must be plaintively asking himself why the rest of the boys can’t make programmes as wholesome and morally sound as the sentimental homily we got last night in London.”

By: Phil Nott

Phil Nott — Fri, 06 Oct 2023 11:25:17 +0000

A very interesting read – but quite a ‘blinkered’ view – they didn’t see the bigger picture / made to many wrong assumptions (i.e.Postmaster General comments). The forming of LWT and application acceptance upset the whole process – pushing ABC out of the weekends in London slot – but as a result gained the greater prize weekdays in London (ABC did not need Rediussion to run the London weekday franchise – and this was made quite clear to Rediffusion – so they had no choice but to go along with it!

By: cjodell12

cjodell12 — Tue, 23 Feb 2021 08:46:17 +0000

Rediffusion’s complacency is arguably what did them in.