5Action

[all new Phil]

I think having the channels called 5 USA / 5 Action etc. are having a detrimental effect as they are pigeonholing themselves and means people would be less likely to check out the channel because of the name and perceived content of it.

Some odd logic there. Surely people are more attracted to a clear name and brand than they are to a vague spin-off channel they’ve never heard of?

[Rick]

In a sense, maybe they are, but on the contrary, I think people are more curious to what is on offer from a non-specific branded channel from a successful master brand. More 4 is a perfect example, more from Channel 4, and shows a variety of programme genres, so worth a look to see what is on offer. Not like 5 USA where the name basically says it all and unless you want to watch that kind of content, you'll skip over it without giving it a look. Then we have channels like Yesterday, a history focused channel that was for documentaries, but then started showing classic comedies, which it kind of got away with but was still odd for them to introduce.

Then the core brand behind it comes into play. Channel 4 is known for cutting edge and alternative programming so you expect that sort of programming on spin-off channels bearing its master brand. Channel 5 is only now starting to improve its master brand image but that hasn't filtered down to the spin-offs yet and they are still known for showing the reality dross that currently fills up the daytime and sometimes prime time hours on 5 STAR and Paramount.

[zeebre12]

I think having the channels called 5 USA / 5 Action etc. are having a detrimental effect as they are pigeonholing themselves and means people would be less likely to check out the channel because of the name and perceived content of it.

If they had have went with the name 5 Max for example when 5 Spike was closing then it would have suited the channel better as it has a non specific name and could have showed a range of programming. Calling it Paramount was a costly mistake. Limiting 5 USA to only showing American TV shows (and very rarely a film) I don't think is a good idea, when you have 5 Action showing, amongst other things, American TV shows and the odd film which really should be put on their USA branded channel to beef it up.

I think the 5 network could do with a shake up to reinvigorate itself. The main channel is doing much better these days and getting a lot of praise for some new content they are coming out with, but it seems the spin-offs are an afterthought and there's no real care or attention put into them.

What do you mean? 5STAR has several original series. 5Select also has an original show almost every weekday night. I'm actually surprised 5Select is airing so much original content for such a small channel like proper documentaries that you would find on the main channel.

[Mateus Honrado]

Merging 5Spike and Paramount was a huge mistake, it cheapened the latter's branding. 5Action just sounds like a better fit for the kind of content it shows

Quite right. Paramount Network was a lot better before the merger.

[Blubatt]

We'll have:

5
5Select
5USA
5Star
5Action (Once the rename takes place, at least)

On one hand, there are going to be five '5' Channels, which is neat if you like your numbers to match up. But as has been spoken about on here, and my own opinions, Viacom has the resources to run multiple channels, and does so. But does Channel 5 have the portfolio to have multiple channels. Channel 4, ITV, and the BBC certainly do, and have done for a long time? While I get that running multiple channels makes your name stand out against hundreds of competitors, and gives the viewer a choice of what to watch, doesn't spreading yourself so thin make that choice pretty poor? I've said it before, I am not a regular Channel 5 watcher. From what I've seen of the main 5 Channel, it is making some decent stuff that I would watch, and have. The others don't, really. 5 Action is probably the channel aimed at my demographic, but even then, the content doesn't sound like stuff I would choose to watch (WWE notwithstanding).

On a complete tangent, the sister channels, 5Star and Para5 Netaction, wouldn't they be better as one channel? Both aim at similar audiences (18-34), and show a lot of programmes that would complement each other. If it were me, that would be the Channel 5 answer to ITV2, BBC3, and E4. And wouldn't a Milkshake Channel be ideal for the older Nickelodeon programming and the current stuff they show on that block? Food for thought, and probably a hundred reasons why not.

[benzj]

Probably they had realised they're not Sky and they don't have so much premium content to fill an entire channel, and it's better to have them spread out on their array of channels...

More specifically, there are plans for Paramount Network US to move away from premium series content and focus on movies (with a corresponding rebrand to "Paramount Movie Network"), so there's ultimately no content to be shared between them anymore.

[benzj]

On a complete tangent, the sister channels, 5Star and Para5 Netaction, wouldn't they be better as one channel? Both aim at similar audiences (18-34), and show a lot of programmes that would complement each other. If it were me, that would be the Channel 5 answer to ITV2, BBC3, and E4.

From my understanding of it, 5Star itself is meant to be the rival to the likes of ITV2, BBC Three, and E4; the new 5Action, in theory, I would guess is aiming for the male-skewing ITV4 demographic (as 5Spike tried to previously). Whether or not either channel is all that successful at their aims, I'm not familiar enough with their content to really say (though personally I have my doubts).

[XIII]

I think 5USA will end up becoming 5Drama so they can show the original Channel 5 dramas alongside imports.

5Select does have a lot of original content but that's because Channel 5 tends to overcommission and so a lot of documentaries end up on 5Select/

[NicolasPLanning]

Not another "gender-specific" channel, they're becoming too old and they're nothing new, like reality TV oriented channels that are theoretically "female " focused such as ITVBe, Lifetime (bust), Style Network, 9Life, LIVING and E!

Note 1: I used airquotes because anyone can watch whatever they want, TV channels shouldn't be gendered.
Note 2: 9Life is Australian.

[Brekkie]

You've gendered the channel, not C5.

[Internationalman]

On a complete tangent, the sister channels, 5Star and Para5 Netaction, wouldn't they be better as one channel? Both aim at similar audiences (18-34), and show a lot of programmes that would complement each other. If it were me, that would be the Channel 5 answer to ITV2, BBC3, and E4.

From my understanding of it, 5Star itself is meant to be the rival to the likes of ITV2, BBC Three, and E4; the new 5Action, in theory, I would guess is aiming for the male-skewing ITV4 demographic (as 5Spike tried to previously). Whether or not either channel is all that successful at their aims, I'm not familiar enough with their content to really say (though personally I have my doubts).

Heheh, 2, 3, 4, 5.

[Inspector Sands]

This isn't the first time that the Paramount brand has been quietly smothered with a pillow in its sleep in the UK.

In 1995 we had the Paramount Channel, then Paramount Comedy, eventually to become Comedy Central.

Yes, I don't think the recent channels called 'Paramount' have made any impact on the public at all, if anything its the original Paramount that people remember. The name means nothing here, it's just another heritage Hollywood brand that the current media conglomerates who own them just reuse for whatever new thing they need a name for.

See also CBS, a brand with absolutely no heritage or value in the UK, used for random TV channels

Mind you even the original Paramount had an image problem, it was a hotch potch and then changed to comedy. However no one really associated the name with comedy and even though the channel name had 'comedy' in it I remember reading the letters page on their teletext constantly explaining why they won't show wrestling


It's kind of similar to the Virgin Radio brand which like Paramount left the British market and then returned as a different station with a different format and now nobody really knows what it is

[JAS84]

It's funny how important branding can be. Together used to be called The Community Channel, and then TCC. The second name change was due to a change of ownership, but older viewers might remember TCC as being The Children's Channel, so it was definitely needed.

Bravo is another example - the US station of that name is no relation to the former UK one. It would probably confuse viewers if that launched here.

Blaze is called what it is because it's US counterpart, A&E, sounds like a casualty department at a hospital. And hospital shows are not in it's schedule.

[Kunst]

It seems they're retiring the Paramount Network brand in Europe, slowly but surely.

First in Scandinavia on the 1st of January, then also in Italy, the relatively successful DTT Paramount Network channel will be gone on the 15th of January, apparently.

That and also Spike Italy.

[JAS84]

Are they rebranding like here in the UK, or just closing?