Loading Profile...
Twitter,
Facebook, or email.
Hi Guys,
Why did you get rid of the TV listings in the last issue? Is this going to be a permanent feature. We use Time Out mainly for event listings, but having two small children means we can't go out that much, hence a TV guide was very helpful.
Please don't make me buy Radio Times!
Cheerio
Daniel, Finchley
I’m
disappointed
Official
Response
-
EMPLOYEE
2Hello everyone. Thanks you very much for all your feedback over the last few weeks. Sorry I haven't been in touch sooner. We have been working very hard on coming up with a solution and this will appear in next week's magazine. We will be returning the grids and keeping our editorial. We have had to re-jig it all a bit to make it fit the pages but hopefully this will go some way towards adressing your concerns. I'm genuinely sorry that you have felt let down by us on this matter.
Yours,
Tim Arthur
Editor-in-Chief
Promoted
Responses
-
I’m
angry
4Got TO today - yes there are listings - but no, TO out has not listened, they've just invented their own solution - primetime only. Pity's sake. Cut the tedious fashion/shopping pages which you've been promoting ever more heavily in the past year and a bit, cut the stupid Alex's Time In slot, cut whatever but could we please have proper FULL tv listings back? And you outright lied, you said 'some way towards' and when someone called you on that (and they were right to) you said it was just a 'style' thing. It's not a style thing, it's a content thing.
And by the way your initial letters page on this subject was outright cheeky - you took the letters from this forum and printed two for, two against as though the debate were equal. It's not. You have hundreds of people asking for them back and hardly anyone happy with the change. We can read, you know. -
I’m
waiting for TV to replace travel
5Why don't you cut the travel instead? Paying to send your reporters on 'jollies' around the country and overseas has got to cover a big chunk of the TV listings cost.
If I was on holiday in London, the last thing I would want to read about is another country. As a London resident, I buy TO for London info, not 'Where to go out in Sydney'!
-
I’m
more frustrated
3Further to my comments a few days ago I note that in the magazine this week there are four letters printed on the subject of which two commend the online TV listing which is more than a little misleading judging from the scale of the reaction here. It is telling that neither comment on the withdrawal of the printed listing which leads me to believe that these are online users only rather than committed subscribers.The online listing per se is not the problem - it is the fact that the printed listing has been withdrawn from the magazine where numerous people subscribe expecting comprehensive activity information including what is on TV.
We need Time In as well as Time Out! I am not encouraged by the responses so far from TO as they are far too general and do not address what is clearly a contentious issue. -
I’m
annoyed
3Could you do one of your excellent comparison features on TV guides so we can decide which one to buy to replace your TV section?
Oh wait, I won't be able to see it because I've stopped buying Time Out. -
I’m
frustrated
3I too am a long time subscriber to TO and use it for TV listings as well as for what is going on outside of my home! As others have commented we are living in straitened times and quite simply many people just cannot afford to go out as much as they would like. This is why it is so strange that TO should make such an ill conceived decision which does suggest it being out of step with its readership.
As far as I am concerned you have until the end of the month to reinstate otherwise I'll be cancelling my subscription too and believe me I will be upset to lose my weekly dose of Michael Hodges! Looks like it will be the Guardian Guide instead. -
I’m
irritated
4My second thoughts: Why did you not do a survey of your readers to find out how important the TV (and brief radio highlights - that's good too) are/were to them? Who in your office made the decision and ignore your readers? You haven't yet given a reason. Saying you are providing a "very swishy, fully interactive listings grid to our website" is childish. We're not logging on to your website to see what's on TV! I check several days ahead, or a week sometimes, to mark what I want to see (or record). You have changed the contract between yourselves and your readers who have paid subs for one thing and are now getting another, so denying your reader above, johnrossadam, a refund, is possibly illegal. Is your Editor or a senior manager going to reply to our complaints, or is this just a cynical exercise to enable us to let off steam and still ignore us?
-
3I totally agree with all of the other complainants. We have subscribed to Time Out for at least 15 years but read it for many more. I use the computer all day - sometimes whilst watching TV - and even I do not want to have to log back and forth just to marvel at the 'swishy' listings. Neither do I want to have to keep hot-footing it back to the computer every half hour whilst sitting on the sofa in case there is something else I might want to watch on the other channel. This is so ill-conceived, inconvenient and rubbish.
Time Out has always been a comprehensive entertainment listings magazine which, like many of your other readers, we originally bought for the events listings but now find ourselves, with a child, turning first to the TV listings. We still enjoy keeping up with the reviews, previews and current trends of all the other cultural and arts events which we may not now be able to attend as readily as once we could, but myself and my partner both read all sections of the magazine.
I am wondering if this decision to drop the TV listings section from the magazine is a conscious decision to appear more highbrow and exclusive and therefore ditch those readers who, horror of horrors, spend their evenings watching TV and must surely be more suited to TV Quick?
Gutted and incredulous. Cancelling my subscription unless the guide is reinstated. -
I’m
a bit disapointed
3HUGE mistake timeout. We've subscribed to timeout for nearly 20 years, since we were students living in central london. Removing the tv listings is forcing us to admit that now we are 40-something suburbians with small children, who rarely venture into London, and use timeout primarily as a tv guide.
-
I’m
annoyed
3I agree too, and have already written to cancel my subscription.
Please restore the TV listings. If I wanted to read them online I wouldn't have needed to buy Timeout in the first place. -
3This is not helpful for me either. Having to open up my computer just to check what is on TV today? Ridiculous. Having a paper copy of Time Out by the television is so much more useful (and no, I'm not a Luddite but sometimes having something printed on paper really just is the best way!). And that is the point of a Listings guide, isn't it: usefulness, functionality and comprehensiveness. If anything, you should have expanded your Time In section by twice the size to include a second page for cable and satellite options and more in-depth radio editorial.
Please, please reconsider this content change. Otherwise, sadly, I will be forced to look elsewhere for comprehensive listings. -
I’m
annoyed
3This is a huge mistake. I`m going to have to get a different print version of a weekly tv guide now, and drop my Time Out subscription. Please rethink this decision as soon as possible.
Rob
Greenwich
-
‘Hi Daniel,
I'm really sorry that you’re missing the TV grid. We've made the choice to concentrate more on our editorial content in the TV section rather than just pure listings information, hence the redesign. The magazine is now more of a digest of what we think about the biggest, best and newest shows on telly. We have, however, added a very swishy, fully interactive listings grid to our website at http://www.timeout.com/london/tv. This is far more comprehensive and accurate than the listings in the magazine were because it is not constrained in the same ways by publication deadlines or space restrictions. Thank you so much for giving us your feedback.
Tim Arthur, Editor-in-Chief.’ -
-
I’m
annoyed
3This is a huge mistake. I`m going to have to get a different print version of a weekly tv guide now, and drop my Time Out subscription. Please rethink this decision as soon as possible.
Rob
Greenwich -
-
Have to say I agree with that.
Daniel -
-
3This is not helpful for me either. Having to open up my computer just to check what is on TV today? Ridiculous. Having a paper copy of Time Out by the television is so much more useful (and no, I'm not a Luddite but sometimes having something printed on paper really just is the best way!). And that is the point of a Listings guide, isn't it: usefulness, functionality and comprehensiveness. If anything, you should have expanded your Time In section by twice the size to include a second page for cable and satellite options and more in-depth radio editorial.
Please, please reconsider this content change. Otherwise, sadly, I will be forced to look elsewhere for comprehensive listings. -
-
I’m
annoyed
3I agree too, and have already written to cancel my subscription.
Please restore the TV listings. If I wanted to read them online I wouldn't have needed to buy Timeout in the first place.- view 1 more comment
-
-
Received confirmation today that I was given a refund along with my cancellation. Which is fair enough - thank you Timeout for the good service up to now.
-
-
Totally in agreement with Melissa. Not happy with your version of 'some way towards' either. Please go 'all the way' for your readers. Get rid of Michael Hodges and do us all a favour!
-
-
-
-
1Lame Time Out - you can't pare 14 pages? I'm going to cancel my subscription as well. Just when it was getting better as well - less like Heat more like a listings mag.
-
-
I’m
vvvvvvv annoyed
2agree with other complainants - without tv listings the magazine isn't worth subscribing too
your limited recommendations are ok as a highlight of the week, but i'd like to make up my own mind as to what to watch and what to record
a swish listings weblink won't be of any use when making this choice at the spur of the moment on my sofa
every other section of art and entertainment gets a full listings rundown so it's bizarre tv/radio don't
unless these listings return (or the cost of the magazine is reduced since it's at least 10/12 pages lighter) you can count me out as a subscriber -
-
I’m
a bit disapointed
3HUGE mistake timeout. We've subscribed to timeout for nearly 20 years, since we were students living in central london. Removing the tv listings is forcing us to admit that now we are 40-something suburbians with small children, who rarely venture into London, and use timeout primarily as a tv guide.
-
-
2One of the main reasons I buy time out is to get week of tv listings together with all the other entertainment in london. I do not want to have to go on line to see what is on tv nor do I want to buy a tv guide, please bring the listings back
This reply was created from a merged topic originally titled
ae you going to bring back tv listings. -
-
2I turned to this week's magazine to see what was on TV this evening, only to find a day by day "best of" the day's programs. I want to be able to read all the listings for each day and make up my own mind about what to watch or record. Are you going to bring the Guide back?
This reply was created from a merged topic originally titled
Why is the day by day TV guide missing in this week's edition?. -
-
2I have been subscribing to Timeout for 11 years. I also pay for a subscription for my mother. We both use the magazine not only for information on where to go and what to see but also when sitting on the sofa deciding what to watch when we're not out enjoying ourselves. I will be cancelling my subscriptions as I want the TV listings. I'll have to buy a weekend newspaper instead. I have no intention of paying for both.
-
-
I’m
I feel ripped-off
1I am totally cheesed off with the TV listings cutback, I renewed my annual subscription only last week and have been informed that I cannot get any part of a refund. I work evenings and TimeOut's choice of TV highlights tonight Thursday 5th all start at 9pm. I will not be renewing my subscription and will further pursue a refund unless Full TV listings are brought back sharpish!
-
-
3I totally agree with all of the other complainants. We have subscribed to Time Out for at least 15 years but read it for many more. I use the computer all day - sometimes whilst watching TV - and even I do not want to have to log back and forth just to marvel at the 'swishy' listings. Neither do I want to have to keep hot-footing it back to the computer every half hour whilst sitting on the sofa in case there is something else I might want to watch on the other channel. This is so ill-conceived, inconvenient and rubbish.
Time Out has always been a comprehensive entertainment listings magazine which, like many of your other readers, we originally bought for the events listings but now find ourselves, with a child, turning first to the TV listings. We still enjoy keeping up with the reviews, previews and current trends of all the other cultural and arts events which we may not now be able to attend as readily as once we could, but myself and my partner both read all sections of the magazine.
I am wondering if this decision to drop the TV listings section from the magazine is a conscious decision to appear more highbrow and exclusive and therefore ditch those readers who, horror of horrors, spend their evenings watching TV and must surely be more suited to TV Quick?
Gutted and incredulous. Cancelling my subscription unless the guide is reinstated. -
-
1Please bring back the tv listings. How can a time-in section not include them?? I too do not want to have to go on-line to review what I want to be watching that evening. It's an important part of why my husband and I subscribe (yes, we also have a young family so are often stuck in during the week).
-
-
I’m
angry!
1Please bring back the printed TV listing! This is the part of Time Out that I use the most, every single day! I like the printed version as I can highlight & circle items that I want to watch and see everything on 1 page.
It's all very well having an online version but that
a: assumes that your customers have an internet connection when they want to know whats going to be on TV, and not good when travelling around the country when internet may not be available.
b: takes a lot more of my time to look at.
I don't want to have to buy a separate TV guide.
Don't destroy my faith in Time Out! -
-
I’m
frustrated
1Are the TV listings no longer to be included in TIME OUT, LONDON ?? Received the magazine yesterday and suddenly only TV highlights included.
Going online is NO replacement and will force us to buy alternative magazine.
A quick response will be appreciated. Thanks
OK now I've read many other messages all disagreeing with the removal of TV listings. Unless the decision is reversed then we'll have to leave Time Out; I've already bought the Radio Times for this week but I'm not doing this many more times. The person who complained about having to log on to see what's on TV every time they want to know says a lot, ridiculous. WAKE UP, TIME OUT !!
This reply was created from a merged topic originally titled
Bring back the TV listings. -
-
I’m
frustrated
1big big mistake time out....you will lose many readers and subscriptions i m sure...
you have now made the tv guide totally irrelevant...you might as well just remove the few pathetic previews offered and not bother at all
I shall certainly have second thoughts about renewing my subscription
please dont be so silly -
-
I’m
irritated
4My second thoughts: Why did you not do a survey of your readers to find out how important the TV (and brief radio highlights - that's good too) are/were to them? Who in your office made the decision and ignore your readers? You haven't yet given a reason. Saying you are providing a "very swishy, fully interactive listings grid to our website" is childish. We're not logging on to your website to see what's on TV! I check several days ahead, or a week sometimes, to mark what I want to see (or record). You have changed the contract between yourselves and your readers who have paid subs for one thing and are now getting another, so denying your reader above, johnrossadam, a refund, is possibly illegal. Is your Editor or a senior manager going to reply to our complaints, or is this just a cynical exercise to enable us to let off steam and still ignore us?
-
-
I’m
frustrated
1I agree with all the other people complaining about this. I've been subscribed to the magazine for over 10 years, generally still love it but have been thinking of maybe ditching the subscription, as there is only so much time, money and energy you have in one week to experience all the things being written about as Time Out ; the Time In section has become one of the most actually used sections, and while it's fine to have features and highlights, the actual listings for the main channels ARE essential!
As an aside... the second most used section for me is probably the Music section which is still great but again, I'm not happy that it only lists a *selection* of the gigs happening in a week, and mostly the bigger, more established shows. Apparently more are available on the website but as a sometimes DIY promoter and frequent gig goer I do find this frustrating, I do like to know about the smaller gigs happening too. I realize there are space issues and we should move more to the website but really the magazine is poorer without the actual information you withheld here. Thanks for listening! -
-
1crazy ! - agree with other posts
we love time out for all the London reasons
but like most people we like to cosy in front of the tv too
and if you're so sure about this decision why no editorial or warning - it's almost like you're ashamed cos it's a cost cut or something
i am a subscriber, core audience and all -
-
I’m
frustrated
1Yeah i would have to agree with this topic. Although i love the time out recommendations it is nice to have a tv guide for the nights when laziness and money issues prevents me from going out and enjoy the city. The new format limits the recommendations and is also less clear cut. If it is a space issue i feel that the niche sections on Cabaret, Gay, Other film etc would be more ripe to cut.
-
-
I’m
frustrated
3I too am a long time subscriber to TO and use it for TV listings as well as for what is going on outside of my home! As others have commented we are living in straitened times and quite simply many people just cannot afford to go out as much as they would like. This is why it is so strange that TO should make such an ill conceived decision which does suggest it being out of step with its readership.
As far as I am concerned you have until the end of the month to reinstate otherwise I'll be cancelling my subscription too and believe me I will be upset to lose my weekly dose of Michael Hodges! Looks like it will be the Guardian Guide instead. -
-
I’m
frustrated
1Totally agree with the complaints registered above. My subscription will not be renewed.
-
-
I’m
angry
2Every time I start thinking about this, the issue moves me up a level, from Frustrated to Irritated and now to Angry. How dare TO highhandedly change the parameters of its mag without consultation with its core and loyal readership? I've bought the Radio Times to have proper listings from tomorrow. This left two days, Thurs and Fri, when I had to log on for TV progs info and write down the progs I wanted to watch both evenings, which just proved to me how thoroughly inconvenient and stupid that is. Now I have 7 days with the RT, during which time I hope TO sees sense and gives us back our TV listings.
-
-
I’m
annoyed
1I wrote a comment yesterday and yes we are still missing the TV guide tonight. The best alternative is to buy the Saturday Guardian and use their guide. Not as "swish" asTimeout but reminiscent of the smaller version of Timeout which we used many years ago. It was particularlly sneaky to make this move in Jan just after we had all renewed our subscriptions.
-
-
I’m
peeved
1On second thoughts, I withdraw my earlier complaint, and suggest you extend this philosophy to the other sections. Now you can just send us all an email/text/tweet saying "See timeout.com for details". Lovely jubbley.
Rob
Greenwich
Seriously though, I just had to buy a copy of Radio Times, and it took me forever to scan 1 days worth of TV. Your previous TV section was compact and contained just about the right mix of channels. I could read it anywhere and annotate it as required for when I was back in front of the TV. Please bring it back before someone makes a Nazi analogy. It`s not life threatening, but it is very annoying. At the very least get Hodges to give us his view. -
-
I’m
feeling bullied
1As we struggle with our Radio Times(s), Rob Ross has hit it on the head for all of us probably, as there is too much info in the RT. Your TV Listings pages were compact, the right mix, plus giving interesting radio recommendations. Ian Lee above says TO fought many years to be allowed to print TV Listings so why drop the section now? I think I'm average, say I go out 3 or 4 nights a week and stay in 3 or 4 nights a week, therefore a good TV Guide essential. Is TO aiming at people who are never in? Why doesn't TO come back to us with their reason? And why, realising they will lose customers, don't they just reverse this bad policy decision?
-
-
I’m
feeling bullied
1PS
I see it's Tim Arthur, Editor-in-Chief, who should be doing something about this unhappy situation, and on 'The Mood in Here' grid at the top there is one happy person, who pray? The TO employee?! Irrelevant. -
-
I’m
Sylvie C
1I agree with all the comments... I have subscribed to Time Out for years and will give them until the end of the month to reinstate the TV listing.After this I will cancel my subscription.
-
-
I’m
Sylvie C
1I agree with all the comments... I have subscribed to Time Out for years and will give them until the end of the month to reinstate the TV listing.After this I will cancel my subscription.
-
-
1I'm in a more fortunate situation than many above, in that my subscription lapses in May. My cancellation letter is already printed beside me. Like Sylvie, I'll give you a few weeks to realise the error of your ways before I post it.
Part of the family ritual is ringing our TV choices when the magazine arrives, and it then lives on the coffee table as a reference all week. We ain't gonna be buying an iPad to try and recreate the same thing! It's a shame, as it's going to be hard to find a replacement whose opinions we trust, and usually agree with. -
-
I’m
annoyed
1I can only agree with all the other people commenting about the loss of the paper TV listings. I will also be cancelling my subscription if the TV listings do not return.
The "swishy" online listings grid is a poor response.
Tim Arthur has a choice:
a) Put the TV listings back and admit he and the Time Out team got it wrong
b) Do nothing, lose subscribers, then explain to the owners of Time Out why sales have dropped substantially (and justify his decision as Editor-in-chief). -
-
I’m
sad and frustrated
1We've subscribed to Time Out for the last four years. While we are keen to read the entire magazine, the TV listings along with the recommendations are the first section we turn to every week. Seeing the listings on your website or on other listings doesn't allow us the immediate involvement with what is going on at any particular time in tandem with your recommendations: it's all now disparate pieces of information we have to search for ourselves. We'll continue subscribing in the near term in the hope that you will reintroduce the previous more comprehensive format but if you know already that this is not a possibility, please inform me so I can unsubscribe. Sincerely, Michael
This reply was created from a merged topic originally titled
The New Spare TV Section. -
-
I’m
annoyed
3Could you do one of your excellent comparison features on TV guides so we can decide which one to buy to replace your TV section?
Oh wait, I won't be able to see it because I've stopped buying Time Out. -
-
Thank you so much for your emails. We are taking this matter very seriously and are looking at a number of possible solutions. As you can imagine everyone here loves Time Out as much as you all do and all we want to do is produce a magazine that is as useful to you and as engaging as it possibly can be given the constraints we are currently working under. These are tough times in the magazine world and we sometimes have to make difficult decisions, however, we're not arrogant enough to think we always know best and we always listen to the views of our readers – after all you're the people we create the magazine for. I'll update you regularly here about where we are with the TV pages and the rest of the magazine and if any of you would like to form part of a readers' panel to give us feedback on the latest designs I'd be very grateful for the input.
Tim Arthur, Editor-in-Chief- view 2 more comments
-
-
-
I don't love Time Out, I believe they have behaved in an arrogant and misleading manner. My gut feeling is that if they worked for newspapers they wouldn't be beyond hacking phones.
My decision to subscribe was based in part upon TV listings.
Notice Tim Arthur's previous comment 'We've made the choice...' there was no evidence of consulting readership.
Also, in the letters column this week, they posted two letters 'for' the change and two 'against'. Are they really suggesting that this is representative of reader's views?
Somehow I really doubt it.
Why I should I give my money to this business? Before I go though, Tim Arthur - please don't keep us in suspense - Are you or are you not going to reinstate the listings? -
-
Good question, Moss - would love to hear an answer to that one. Now if he says "I am not going to dignify this question with an answer" then we know we won't get the listings back.
-
-
-
-
-
2My husband subscribed me to Time Out for Christmas, primarily because we decided we needed a TV guide having done away with our TV, and because nowadays we watch everything through the internet, either via TVCatchup (i.e. live streaming) or the channels' catchup services (iPlayer, itvPlayer, 4od, etc). Amongst my friends (I'm age 29), this is becoming the norm. TV guides are therefore becoming an essential; we are no longer picking up promotions for forthcoming shows during ad breaks on mainstream TV, and need valuable recommendations from trusted sources. TimeOut is surely therefore missing a trick in removing its listings, particularly during these recession-hit times when people are going to be spending more and more 'Time In'.
TimeOut's removal of the listings is doubly galling as it has occurred straight after Christmas - my very first issue in a subscription for which my husband has paid a not inconsiderable sum, and the main reason for his having done so has disappeared. This is not the product we signed up for. I wonder how TimeOut can justify having plugged the subscription so strongly as a Christmas gift within its own pages, knowing the magazine would not be the same upon takeup for any new subscribers. In the ads which it ran ahead of Christmas, plugging Christmas gift subscriptions, was it flagged that the magazine would be a very different thing in January from that in which the ads were appearing?
I hope that TimeOut will take note that the TV Listings alone were enough to ensure a subscription from us, a relatively young couple who might have continued to subscribe for years to come. We cannot be alone in this. There's a clear business case in the age of internet TV for their retention, and surely this is strengthened by the effects of the recession. In the meantime I will be cancelling our new subscription and seeking a full refund, upon which I hope the company will look favourably, and will re-subscribe when, and if, the listings reappear. -
-
2big problem---where the hell is the proper telly guide???!!! I love timeout and have been a subscriber for many years now, but this business of having to dig out my laptop or other just to see what's on telly won't do! Bring the regular end of magazine paper listings back so I can see the evening at a glance whilst already in front of the telly. This should never have happened---what were you thinking? Whoever decided this has no understanding of why people buy the hardcopies instead of going on line anyhow (so they should be relieved of their position, naturally...)
This reply was created from a merged topic originally titled
Where the hell is the tangible telly guide?!. -
-
I’m
sad
1Dear TimeOut
Please can you help me?...my internet access has been down for 4 days so I havent been able to access your "swishy" site..(who on earth dreams up these silly terms?)
I could have tried contacting my next door neighbours to ask, but at 11pm, I dont think that would have been very well received....
Of course I used to be able to look in Timeout magazine but alas no more..
Please advise -
-
I’m
very fed up
1Just got this weeks mag and oh, no TV listings again. Thought last week may have been Xmas blues, but clearly not by the correspondence above.
I have been subscribing for over 14 years and this was one of my main reasons for buying the magazine. Everything else is great and I enjoy the reviews, but without the TV I cannot justify the subscription.
You have clearly misjudged the needs of your readership and if the situation does not change next week I will be cancelling in advance of my next direct debit on the 25th Jan.
I would personally like to see an expansion of the TV listings.
Sort this out now and whoever the bright spark was that decided to adopt the current approach should step down from their position and take up politics full time because they are clearly not in touch with people! -
-
1We agree with all the above.Please bring back the TV listings. Very disappointed....
-
-
I’m
disappointed
1I also agree with all the above (I think John Wilkinson perfectly puts forward the argument).
This is a huge mistake. The TV listings is a big reason why I buy timeout. Without it I may well be cancelling my subscription of many years.
I would also expect to see a reduction in the price of the magazine if you are lopping out a dozen or so pages of prime content. -
-
I’m
Sylvie
We wrote to Time Out directly to complain about the sudden disappearance of the TV listings and this is what we got back:
Thank you for your email regarding Time Out magazine. I can confirm that the TV Listings are no longer to be published within the magazine, they are still available online however.
I apologise for any inconvenience caused.
If I can be of any further assistance please do not hesitate to contact me.
Kind Regards
Anna Tong
Email Response Team
Time Out magazine
T: +44 (0) 800 068 0050
F: +44 (0) 1795 414 555
www.timeout.com-
is Anna Tong a person or a machine ?
-
-
-
-
-
I’m
Caz and confused
1I agree with all the above. Time Out's just not the same without the TV listings. I don't want to get all my information from a screen - I can't curl up in bed with a screen. I thought perhaps you'd all been mega busy over Christmas and missed a deadline but alas... Please, please, please bring back the TV listings.
-
-
1I would also like to add my disappointment at no TV listings. I thought it was just a 'blip' over the Christmas/New Year period - but very sad to see they were missing from this week's issue as well. I saw no warning or explanation to say that you were making such a drastic alteration. Like others I will now be considering cancelling my subscription.
But I sincerely hope you will re-consider and reinstate the listings. The magazine seems very thin - so don't what you have actuallly replaced them with.... -
-
I’m
disappointed
1I too am really disappointed to lose the TV listings. I thought last week that it must have been something to do with it being the post holidays edition. I'd so appreciate it if you would reconsider this decision as I've used the guide for years and even created my breakfast ritual around it: sit down with tea and see if there's anything I want to record. This has eased me into my day for years. It would be v cumbersome and unpleasant to balance tea and laptop to read listings online and I'm not prepared to do that. So, my early mornings and my rare precious evenings in at home are all of a whatnot AND last week I hurled myself onto the scrapheap of mediocrity and middle-age when I ended up making an emergency purchase of the Radio Times. This was not good.I cannot justify paying for two listings magazines and so regretfully I will I'm sure end up cancelling my TO subscription.
-
-
1I can only second all the readers missing the TV listings: it was one of my great pleasures to sit in the evening in the kitchen, eating a biscuit, and reading what's on TV. Oddly extremely relaxing. I also have my time out next to the sofa when I'm watching TV, not my computer. Please, please bring the TV listings back.
Best regards, Bettina -
-
I’m
astounded at the disrespect!
1Our household has subscribed to TO for longer than I can remember! We used to use the mag for boozing, clubbing and thetre going. Now, with 2 little ones, we use it for family events and: TV evenings in. Surely the appeal of TO is its adaptability and the appeal it has to so many different Londoners. Omitting a considerable chunk of the magazine (it actually looks and feels flimsey now!) without much warning or explanation is extremely unconsiderate of your readership. Our subscription comes up in the spring and unless this change is revoked we shall, without a doubt, cancel.
-
-
I’m
annoyed.
1No good. All salient points already made. Very cheeky right after subscription time and with no warning / consultation. Please bring back.
-
-
I’m
disappointed
2Just to add my voice to the above....Please please bring back the TV listings in your magazine. I am also a long time subscriber and love the Around Town section, Restaurants, Bars, Music and Arts listings both in print and online, however, on the evenings when I decide to crash out on the sofa after work, a large glass of wine in hand looking forward to tuning in to a couple of hours of TV, it is far easier for me to grab your magazine rather than fire up my old laptop, which takes 20 mins to connect, and yes I am one of those people who does not have an iPhone, iPad or other android device. Please don’t penalise me! It just means I get to look at Time Out magazine on a daily basis for the TV listings and much more which can only be a good thing?! Unfortunately as mentioned by others if the removal of the TV listing is permanent I would feel forced to cancel.
-
-
I’m
more frustrated
3Further to my comments a few days ago I note that in the magazine this week there are four letters printed on the subject of which two commend the online TV listing which is more than a little misleading judging from the scale of the reaction here. It is telling that neither comment on the withdrawal of the printed listing which leads me to believe that these are online users only rather than committed subscribers.The online listing per se is not the problem - it is the fact that the printed listing has been withdrawn from the magazine where numerous people subscribe expecting comprehensive activity information including what is on TV.
We need Time In as well as Time Out! I am not encouraged by the responses so far from TO as they are far too general and do not address what is clearly a contentious issue. -
-
1oh dear, i too am another subscriber who bought into Time Out as a comprehensive guide of what was going on in london and for the tv for the week too.
As i work on a mac all day the last thing i want to do when on the sofa is get my macbook out just to see whats on tv later, grabbing the weekly off the coffee table was perfect solution and it also meant i could plan my friday night too!
Why did you not poll your readers to see what they thought of what appears to be such a massively important section of our Time Out in london.
Wrong move guys -
-
I'm afraid the online version doesn't even work properly. You can't use the drop down menus in the most popular browsers ( I've tried it in IE8, Firefox and Safari ).
The fact it doesn't even work on Safari means that the Ipad version is also handicapped, the very bit of tech that magazines have found gives their online content a workable platform.
Why not print the basic listings in the magazine and keep the more indepth listings and your so called editorial content for the online version?
As a subsciber I feel you've messed up here and can quite understand why many are considering canceling their magazines.
BTW, I actually do read a number of magazine's online versions on my Ipad. I suggest you check out publications such as the Economist, to learn how to do it properly. -
-
1I'm a subscriber and rely on the TV listings in Time Out. Please please please bring them back. For me, it's Time Out's adaptability in being both a cultural/going out listings mag and (a really good) TV guide which makes the magazine essential. I would feel short-changed without both elements of the mag.
-
-
I’m
impatient
1I can see this question has a little yellow tag on it saying "ANSWERED," but surely, given the flood of posts here, a single response from TO staff over a week ago is not an appropriate reaction. TIME OUT EDITORS: WHERE ARE YOU???? Your readers are looking for answers!
-
-
I’m
annoyed
1I'm in total agreement with the comments above. My husband wants to cancel the subscription immediately and move to the Guardian Guide. I'm more in favour of giving TO the chance to rectify the situation. I love London, have subscribed to TO for 8 years since moving here but now I've a baby I just can't get out and about as much as I used to. Having TO drop through my door these days still makes me feel like I have a modicum of culture about me but without the TV guide I can't really justify getting it any more.
Please re-think the decision as soon as possible. Once we cancel our subscription, we won't see the magazine again to know if the TV guide is indeed reinstated in the future. -
-
I’m
Dismayed
1We are VERY disappointed to find that there are no longer full TV listings. We used Time Out for that every day. Unless this changes VERY SOON, as a direct result, we will be terminating our subscription after very many years.
Of course we can see listings online - there are loads of sites to see this, and i doubt that we'd use the Time Out site - but the point is that we all spend every day stuck in front of computer screens, and have NO INTEREST in going online in the evenings to check what's on...
Another comment re. the gig listings: why is there no longer a list of the addresses for the venues as there used to be? Hardly helpful for us when we're out and about - or tourists without web access. -
-
-
I’m
disgruntled
1Same here. I've been a subscriber for I don't remember how many years. I am now considering cancelling my subscription but was going to wait and see if the TV listings were to be reinstated - any news on that (going beyond the usual "we take your feedback very seriously" blurb) would be greatly appreciated!
Of course, the magazine is not all about the TV listings, but living outside London I don't go into London every week and the TV listings have become the one part of the magazine which I use daily. Online listings are just not practical - I want it on paper to flick through while sitting in front of the telly.
And it's not that you needed the space for other content. You simply made the magazine thinner.
If the TV listings don't come back I will probably cancel my subscription. Finding out about events, concerts and exhibitions is easy enough online. -
-
I’m
disappointed
1Dear Madam/Sir,
We are VERY disappointed to find that there are no longer full TV listings. We used Time Out for that every day. Unless this changes VERY SOON, as a direct result, we will be terminating our subscription after very many years.
Of course we can see listings online - there are loads of sites to see this, and i doubt that we'd use the Time Out site - but the point is that we all spend every day stuck in front of computer screens, and have NO INTEREST in going online in the evenings to check what's on...
Another comment re. the gig listings: why is there no longer a list of the addresses for the venues as there used to be? Hardly helpful for us when we're out and about - or tourists without web access.
Regards,
michael herrmann
077 1427 0069
This reply was created from a merged topic originally titled
Disappointed re. TV listings. -
-
I’m
waiting for TV to replace travel
5Why don't you cut the travel instead? Paying to send your reporters on 'jollies' around the country and overseas has got to cover a big chunk of the TV listings cost.
If I was on holiday in London, the last thing I would want to read about is another country. As a London resident, I buy TO for London info, not 'Where to go out in Sydney'!
-
I agree. Overseas travel is something that the internet does best. Weekly magazines are best at TV listings. Still straining my eyes using the Sat. Guardian guide. Can't be bothered to open our subscription Time Out as I am so fed up with it .
-
-
Oh dear Moss - think you should avert your eyes this week!
-
-
-
-
-
I’m
annoyed yet hopeful
You fucked up. Let's get over it and move on.
-
-
1It is a mistake to have removed the TV listings. We will not be renewing our subscription unless you restore them.
-
-
I’m
disappointed
1Not at all impressed by the decision to remove the TV Listings, big mistake. Like many others won't be renewing my subscription.
-
-
I’m
frustrated
*tumbleweed*
8 days since someone from TIme Out responded on this subject...
C'mon guys, this is pretty poor in terms of at least keeping communicating nevermind the issue itself.
I can only imagine that if there have been this many replies on the online community direct letters and e-mails must be in their 100s. What's going to happen? At least tell us something!-
Well said B.M.
Please Time Out, don't be shy. We need to now what's happening.
My finger is ready to dial your subscription phone line number. -
-
I agree, I can hardly bring myself to read Timeout any more. It is due through the letter box today and the first thing I will do is see if the TV listings have returned. Fingers crossed.
-
-
-
-
-
EMPLOYEE
2Hello everyone. Thanks you very much for all your feedback over the last few weeks. Sorry I haven't been in touch sooner. We have been working very hard on coming up with a solution and this will appear in next week's magazine. We will be returning the grids and keeping our editorial. We have had to re-jig it all a bit to make it fit the pages but hopefully this will go some way towards adressing your concerns. I'm genuinely sorry that you have felt let down by us on this matter.
Yours,
Tim Arthur
Editor-in-Chief- view 1 more comment
-
-
Thanks, Tim. Love TIme Out - was really disappointed about having to cancel my subscription. Hooray for people power.
-
-
Great, thank you for the reply. Look forward to seeing this, bit worried by the "some way towards", but hopefully enough to keep us all happy, loving Time Out, and still buying it.
-
-
-
-
Finally!! The "re-jig" "solution" and "will go some way towards" all sound a little ominous! We shall wait and see, i look forward to Timeout falling onto my doormat this evening. Hopefully the Guardian won't get my money again this week-end and you a cancelled subscription.
-
Hi Esmeej. It really isn't that ominous. It's more a style thing rather than a content thing.
-
-
-
-
-
Hurrah! Thank you for listening to us! I'll look forward to seeing the results, and hope that it is all good. Thanks again.
-
-
Excellent news. After all, I seem to recall Time Out putting up one hell of a fight to have the right to publish the TV listings many years ago. To see this section seemingly tossed casually aside for no apparent good reason other than a design issue has seemed very short sighted.
I look forward to my new issue and the Saturday Guardian can stay at the news agents this weekend.
Well done and thanks for listening. -
-
This is great news. Thank you for listening.
-
-
I’m
annoyed
I like everyone else here was very annoyed about the removal of the tv guide section of Timeout magazine. I used to buy another tv guide and stopped buying this as Timeout enabled me to look at films, music and a range of other things a single tv guide wouldnt. However, the tv guide is still the main reason for purchasing it and now that it has gone I had to buy another tv guide. I cant justify the cost of purchasing two weekly magazines and Timeout will be the one to go. I agree with the above post asking why Timeout did not carry out a survey amongst readers first before making this decison.
I hope next week's edition does bring back the tv guide in full and not an edited version. -
-
I’m
sad
I am on the cancel list too
on line guides are 2 a penny (and handy)
but the quips on real paper is the reason I buy time out (or did.....)-
Lee, please see Tim's (our Editor) comment a little further up this page - the TV listings grid will return to the magazine from next week.
-
-
-
-
-
HURRAH!! Thanks so much for listening, I look forward to hunkering down for the night with my trusty Time In by my side.....
-
-
I’m
getting better.
this is excellent news.
i came to check the status of this topic after i received my Timr Out in the post today and noticed how the usual feeling of excitement had been replaced by one of disappointment.
i will wait until i see the listings return before getting too jubilant, though... -
-
I’m
trying to be patient!
First week of no TV listings I bought the Sunday Telegraph: gave very good TV listings and I enjoyed the Culture bits generally, although not enough and not as good as Time Out was. Second week I tried the Observer, which has a rubbish layout and I won't buy that again. Fed up I was VERY pleased to read Tim Arthur says the Listings are back from the next issue to arrive next Wednesday. Can't wait. But shall have to get another Sunday or Saturday paper first - at least I'm doing some market research!
-
-
I’m
undecided
Uhmmmmm. "Some way towards" rather ominous but at least we are heading in the right direction. I will reserve judgement until next week, but a cancellation after 20 years is possible in the TV listings to not work well enough. -
-
Chuffed to hear the TV listings will return, though agree sounds ominous. Why Time Out just can't reinstate the TV listings as they were is beyond me. If it ain't broke....
I'd decided to give it a month to see whether the listings would return before parting company with my subscription, so will watch the next issue with interest.-
Nope, it's returned but it's crap and it's not a 'style' issue as the TO person said - it's cutting all the non prime time - that's not a style thing, that's a content thing!
-
-
-
-
-
I started reading Time Out in the early 70's and have remained faithful (every week) having rejected City Limits and then the broadsheets on weekends. However, if the TV listings do not return I will definately stop my subscription and go to Saturday Guardian. I really hope I don't have to do this ....
- view 1 more comment
-
-
Keeping my fingers crossed for the return of the TV listings next week. The Guardian guide has even smaller print than TO. so I hope you haven't made yours it any smaller to fit it in. Also while on the subject of text size and style. Your current trend to print captions in white on red makes them almost unreadable without 20/20 vision and a magnifying glass !
-
-
Good point Pam, about text size and colour contrasts. The text size is ridiculous even in bright light, if you were in a dark bar or outside at night, you'd find it nigh on impossible even with good eyesight. It is a shame that usability is sacrificed for reducing the page count.
-
-
-
-
I will also be cancelling my subscription unless the grid returns. Phil Goodyer.
-
-
I’m
undecided
1Actually Tim it is a "content thing" as well as a "style thing". Have just received this week's issue and the listings are only partly restored (perhaps the ominous "some way towards"...). I have a feeling that not all subscribers are going to be entirely happy.
TO as a whole just feels all a bit flimsy at the moment and to be honest I'm still considering cancelling my subscription. It is clearly less expensive to only have partial listings and Time Out is not a cheap listings magazine. For the price I pay I feel I should get a premium service. -
-
wowzer
people power!
nice one TO - i'll live without knowing what time Pingu and Loose Women are on
thanks
ps been a revelation seeing how rude people can be on these forums too- view 3 more comments
-
-
-
-
Agree - TO should acknowledge it has a wide variety of readers with differing requirements , situations and working hours
-
-
Thanks for the TV listings restoration. Just realised that it is evenings only. Guess I can handle that. Although at home a lot more now I try to resist daytime TV. Hard for people with kids and those even older than me to whom day time TV is important.
-
-
-
-
Thanks for restoring TV listings - at least partially, for evening programmes. Not perfect but much better.
-
-
I'm very glad Time Out has brought back TV listings. It's great to know that feedback from subscribers is taken seriously. Thank you!
-
-
I’m
angry
4Got TO today - yes there are listings - but no, TO out has not listened, they've just invented their own solution - primetime only. Pity's sake. Cut the tedious fashion/shopping pages which you've been promoting ever more heavily in the past year and a bit, cut the stupid Alex's Time In slot, cut whatever but could we please have proper FULL tv listings back? And you outright lied, you said 'some way towards' and when someone called you on that (and they were right to) you said it was just a 'style' thing. It's not a style thing, it's a content thing.
And by the way your initial letters page on this subject was outright cheeky - you took the letters from this forum and printed two for, two against as though the debate were equal. It's not. You have hundreds of people asking for them back and hardly anyone happy with the change. We can read, you know. -
-
I’m
undecided
1I rushed out to my letterbox last night (24th Jan) to see the "new" TV listings.
As I suspected, they were not really back to normal and again as I suspected, they only had part (peak) listings for each day. So, we now have about 30% of the listings perhaps covering 80% of most of our viewing time.
Whilst it is better than nothing, there is still a substantial problem with this:
1. There is a risk of missing something (I watch very little TV by the way)
2. There will be times of the year when this is just not enough information (holidays, sick days, school holidays etc)
3. There are times of the week then this is not enough (weekends!)
4. It is not, by any stretch of the imagination a "complete guide" to TV listings.
5. What about the 70%+ of your readers that have children who do watch earlier in the day? (I have 3)
6. What about the classic films that are often on during the day or late night?
So, to really get a good idea of what is going on we are still going to have to rely on another source.
Jury is very much out for me. I sort of understand Time Out's position as this is largely a financial problem with the cost of getting a license to publish the listings (I think it is ridiculous that there are charges for this as the channels will have less viewers and therefore get less ad revenue so this information should be totally free to publish).
There is clearly a more serious problem here with the magazine getting thinner, general editorial decreasing, the cinema listings getting more incomplete etc. All which means we are having to rely more on the internet for detailed information.
Maybe the days of printed magazines are numbered - particularly those that contain constantly changing information.
It's a shame to admit, but I suspect our children will all laugh at us in a few years when we look to see what time something is on TV. They will just decide that they want to watch something and go on-line and watch it there and then.
Sorry for the long post.
Charles.-
Agree with your numbered points and you're being very generous in seeing the other side - but how will our children know what's available online without some sort of listings? ;-)
-
-
-
-
-
I’m
still not convinced that I will renew my subscription, if it stays like this, I won't
Err, OK, some TV has reappeared, but only a snaphot. My main issue is are you actually talking to your readers? Have you asked whether it's useful to see a review of a programme that scores 2 stars out of 5? [Are you encouraging/daring me to watch it? that's another question]
I, and I suspect many others, want listings. listings, listings, listings. Not TV reviews, listings.
I would rather sacrifice the reviews on each page for full listings (and, that would save you money).
The big questions is, have you actually asked your subscribers what they want? Or, is it a small, young unrepresentative group of your editorial team taking blinkered decisions from the perspective of Tottenham Court Road? Rather than a seeing it from say the view of a 45 mother in Hillingdon? -
-
I’m
sad to say goodbye
2I've cancelled my Time Out direct debit after losing patience over the sorry-looking TV listings. Sorry Tim, but it really isn't just "a style thing." Please direct some of the money saved on reducing the listings into some reader research, otherwise I fear it'll be curtains for one of London's most stalwart brands.
Whilst I appreciate it's a tough economic climate, it's hard times for us all and I can't justify spending the same on something less useful. Looks like it'll be a combination of the Guardian Guide and following you on Twitter from now on. Anyway, so long and good luck. It's been fun. -
-
I’m
indifferent but resigned to acceptance
There is really more of an issue here than we probably understand. I did suggest TO to come clean on this with us as I think it would be easier for long time subscribers to understand if they knew the full story.
However, as they won't, a simple search on-line does reveal a few things. It seems that the circulation of TO is in decline to quite a significant degree (a lot of subscription losses). Latest circulation figures are 55,171 for Jan-Jun 2011 which is a decline of over 5% on the previous period. In 2009 the figure was over 61,000 and in 2006 it was 92,000, so, a 40% decline in 5 years.
Loads of this decline must be due to the internet, the recession plus the free London papers like Metro and the Standard (advertising revenues must have declined as a result of these in particular).
Below is a quote from an article in the press 2 years ago which adds a bit more detail that I doubt has improved during the past 2 difficult years...
"The move follows the group posting pre-tax losses of more than £3m for 2008 yesterday, more than double its losses of £1.35m reported the year before.
Founder Tony Elliott, who has had to inject in the region of £3m to ensure it remains a "going concern", will be slightly buoyed by today's results, although he'll be hoping to stop copy declines altogether by August."
So, the truth is, with the cost of getting the license to publish full TV listings plus all the above declines, perhaps it would kill the publication (at least in London) to continue as we really would like it to.
Tony has been at the heart of the magazine since it started and has been heavily involved in these recent decisions and discussions with readers (all though it was after the damage had been initially done). He, it seems, has also been keeping things afloat.
I guess we would be more upset if there was no Time Out at all.
So, my plan, at least for now, is to see how things go over the next month or two and see how much I miss the full TV listings etc. I think we have made our point, they have listened (to some degree), and I hope it is enough to keep me as a reader and the magazine as a weekly publication.
I know this represents a U turn for me as I was furious when I first noticed the removal of the TV listings, but there are some tough times ahead for all of us, and there are cutbacks everywhere. Nothing and no-one is immune. -
-
2I've been following the Time Out TV listings debacle with some interest and agree with charlesmarks to some extent - TO is dying on its arse and the culling of the TV section was a last-ditch attempt to save on print costs without increasing the cover price.
Unfotunately they picked the wrong bit to cut, which will surely only hasten its demise.
Things have moved on in the world a lot recently and TO has failed to keep up. There are many online listings sites now, several of them much better than TO's in terms of content and usability, and you can pick up a cheap telly guide for 50p to have next to the sofa fog vegging nights; so I guess it time to say farewell to this once august organ ( Duncan Campbell vs Michael Hodges anyone?) and get on with our lives. -
-
1well, what can i say, the art department had a rush job on with the tv listing redesign last week and boy does it show, 'quick chuck something on a page that will shut them up'
what was wrong with the way it looked before!
Come on Time out, in these times of belt tightening and saving the pennies, Time in is more even more valuable and important. especially in the dark month of January.
Sort it out or lose us forever -
-
I’m
unhappy
1Any update Time Out...? Are you going to re-instate the old TV Listing style, continue with last weeks rather half-way (or perhaps not even that) approach or...?
I feel the Guardian W/E supplements might be winning this battle unfortunately... -
-
1Yes, can we have an update? I am waiting to see whether you're going to fully reinstate so I know whether I need to cancel my subscription. I was on the brink of it when you said you were going to make changes so I waited but since the result was pretty rubbish I'm back on the brink. Come on, just give us proper TV listings, how hard can it be! It's also pretty annoying that you just don't even reply to these comments. Way to get rid of subscribers!
-
-
I’m
Fed Up Again
1I'm back in the Comments. My spirits were up when we were promised return of TV Listings and then they dropped again when only evening listings were printed. It isn't only OLD people who want to know what happens before 6.30 pm! And what about the weekends? Most of us are around more at home, especially in the Winter. I'm also missing the one side of a page for radio highlights. Why can't you just put the listings back as they were and let us make our own choices! I feel you are playing with us which is bad business when you have such a big fan base.
-
-
I’m
sad
2Sent earlier today to subs@timeout.com
Hi,
I would like to give you notice that I have cancelled my direct debit and wish to end my subscription to TimeOut when its expires.
TimeOut has been part of my life in London for five years. I have cancelled with regret because of your decision to ditch your TV guide, and then reinstate it with a dramatically cut down version covering prime time television - and no radio - only.
I'd like to share some reasons why the Time In section was so valuable:
* It's always handy to have a TV and radio guide lying around, and TimeOut's was wonderfully laid out and written - it wasn't broken, so why try and fix it?
* Even when TimeOut had an off week or two, or it told me about things later than the Londonist or the Twitterati did, I still got plenty of value from the TV Guide - now it's worth less to me.
* I'll now be resorting to a weekend newspaper instead (probably the Guardian Guide, groan) and I can't justify buying two weekly guides.
* I work in front of a computer every day. The last thing I want to in the evening is turn on a laptop / tablet and navigate to an online TV guide when I can reach for a magazine in the rack by the telly - it's not nearly as convenient
* Prime-time only is no good. If I'm at home at week during the day, or off work ill, or on holiday, or want to check what time the Grand Prix starts on a Sunday, it's of no use.
* I've been really disappointed with the way the whole episode has been handled - and lack of judgement shown throughout. Of course you need to evolve the magazine, but I'm sure a tiny bit of reader research would have revealed this would have been a daft decision.
I'll happily resubscribe if you bring your TV Guide back. But if you do, I hope you do so quickly - before us readers get too used to sourcing the information we need on how to make the most of our precious nights out and in from elsewhere.
Kind regards,
Paul, N14
Subscriber number xxxx -
-
I’m
Sad
Just phoned to cancel my subscription (the letter in today's issue saying how wonderful it is to have the TV guide back in its 'original superb format' being the last straw) only to find that the only way you can cancel a subscription is in writing by post or fax! You may have a swishy new online TV guide but not accepting subscription cancellations by email is just a wee bit backward. Shame as I used to love this magazine.
- view 1 more comment
-
-
Bring back the FULL tv guide!!
-
-
Yes. Bring back the FULL TV Guide. Stop avoiding this issue. example: Mr Hodges is amusing but not worth losing the full TV Guide. As I said earlier, you could start with replacing the full weekend TV Guide.
-
-
-
-
I’m
frustrated
1http://cdn.timeout.com/documents/TO_c...
Billed as London's weekly entertainment bible but without a nod to any of the London radio stations, and the TV listings are simply token.
Can we just have what we subscribed in part for, and that's the reinstatement of the FULL TV guide (and radio - don't want to keep clicking on the web for info etc, that's why we buy the mag).
Are you hoping we'll lose interest and that readers will forget how good you used to be? -
-
Yes I think Carols' right - TO is just hoping we'll forget what we were asking for - we haven't - oh and Tim Arthur, I rang your line and left a message asking you to call me back - still no reply! And no replies on this forum, I see. If TO are just ignoring us then have the gumption to print a note in To saying 'sorry folks, we've made up our minds this is how it's going to be...".
-
-
Ditch the travel please - what's the point of it?
-
-
Hi all - here's a message from Tim:
"I'm really sorry that some of you are still unhappy with the TV listings pages. I'm afraid they won't be returning in full. I know this isn't the answer that some of you were hoping for but the compromise solution that we have offered is as far as we are able to go. I fully appreciate how disappointing/frustrating this may be but we have had to make some strategic changes to the magazine. Once again I'm genuinely sorry we can't make everyone happy on this matter but this is how it's going to stay."
Tim Arthur, Time Out Editor -
-
Thank you for being honest at last. I shall go and cancel my subscription.
-
-
I’m
frustrated
Thank you for finally replying with a decision.
Unfortunately, as a result I think I'll be cancelling my subscription and resorting the Saturday Guardian and perusing Time Out on line occasionally. -
-
I’m
incredulous
Hmm. So one must rely on The Metro on morning weekdays and hope for the best at weekends? Have you even discussed amongst yourselves the merits of AT LEAST giving us full listings for Saturday and Sunday - that's one extra side if you miss out your recommendations. Surely you can MANAGE this?
-
-
On TO's front page it now says "7 *Day* TV Listings" to advertise the mag, but really you only cover the evenings, a bit misleading maybe? For me, this is ok as I don't usually need the daytime listings but I understand why people are still upset about it. Oh well, thanks for listening and replying... eventually. It made me realize that it's not actually as easy as you sometimes make it seem to interact with TO, and how heavily edited the letters page really is...
-
-
Very interesting European Court ruling last week that may mean the TV listings can come back. I believe the issue is down to the cost to TO buying the rights to publish the TV listings. It has just been ruled in Luxembourg that football fixture lists are not copyrightable. Legal comment seems to imply that this will probably also apply to things like "program schedules". Read more here http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-03.... Tim - are you ready to be the first to try this out?
-
-
I’m
Hopeful
TIM: GO GO GO. Print the Listings again. Rome
-
EMPLOYEE
This is a very silly idea of TimeOut
Ian Lee, Birmingham
Chris Bateson
june mccarthy