« Topics
1234...103104105106...128129130
buster1,467 posts since 15 Mar 2006
London London
Except RT isn't a BBC magazine anymore, despite at times still appearing so.

Some of the letters are clearly things no-one would ever say without knowing the answer...things in the digital section like "I heard there are some channel changes coming soon on Freeview, why is this?"
Whataday6,786 posts since 13 Sep 2001
HTV Wales Wales Today
Whether the general public care or not is irrelevant. To follow up on the airline example a few pages back, most people choose Ryanair based solely on price, so why do they bother with a consistent brand image? Why not just stuck the Ryanair logo in the side of the planes in Times New Roman or whatever font the graphic designers have to hand at that moment?



Well now that's an interesting discussion to be had. Firstly, you'd be surprised how much the value of your brand can be inflated in order to make your company's book balance. Secondly, if you become successful without a distinctive brand, you open yourself up to people imitating you and it's harder to anything about it. Say Ryanair had an inconsistent brand as you describe... what if another company decided to apply for a rail franchise and ran it as Ryanrail using a similarly inconsistent image?

However when it comes to having a 'no-frills' identity, you can have the best of both worlds. The easyjet brand is a perfect example of this. A very plain font, plastered in various sizes across planes, cinemas, gyms etc, but unique enough to protect.
scottishtv1,462 posts since 6 Nov 2001
STV Central Reporting Scotland
I can't take the airlines example seriously, without thinking of the BA ethnic tail fins:

Wikipedia posted:
Former Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher showed her displeasure at the designs by covering one of the new tailfins on a model 747 with a handkerchief. She declared, "We fly the British flag, not these awful things." Thatcher also indicated with these fins the airline would lose its identity.



Maybe Theresa May will throw a hanky at a television next time she meets the BBC chairman? That might get them to change their minds.
MetalGearRex685 posts since 11 May 2016
London London
Ok that seems to be a bit better... It started off good then it become just like all the others.

Yep - it's slightly better but suffers from the same problems as the others towards the end. Liked the start of it though.
'What is the only planet capable of sustaining life?'
'Mars.'
globaltraffic24305 posts since 23 Jun 2013
STV Central Reporting Scotland
Ryanair is a shockingly bad example to use! They only recently invested millions softening their brand image to keep hold of customers. They publicly admitted that their own research found consumers were abandoning them because of their 'brash brand' and 'unwelcoming image'.

Budget brands go through a very simple business process. They almost always reach a 'maturing' stage. At this point, new rivals enter the market and tend to offer a more upmarket, polished brand but the same level of value. In the case of Ryanair, it was brands like Norwegian, Air Berlin and Hop who offered a 'bit' more style for the same price and convenience. Brand does matter and not just to the branding team. Big companies know this. It can have a major impact on bottom line.

Anyway, we're going way off-topic. Let's focus all our energy on getting the BBC to change those bloo*y idents!
Hatton Cross2,054 posts since 4 Jan 2003
Central (West) Midlands Today


Knowing the print deadlines of that issue of the RadioTimes, I'm incredibly suspicious of that letter and response.


I'm not. Seems legit..
Arrow Viewer emailed RT on the evening of the 1st/2nd Jan.
Arrow RT Letters monkey e-mails BBC Press Office on the morning of the 3rd.
Arrow BBC Press Office email back a pre-prep'ed presser (knowing exactly this subject would be heading their way before the Christmas decorations are back up in the attic) same day.
Arrow Letters page last feature to be put to bed for this issue at the end of last week.
Arrow Printed over the weekend.
Arrow On sale yesterday.

Normal timeline for this feature, I'd say.
ITV "Occasionally it gives us something good, but for the most part, it is pathetic and puerile". Lord Taylor, House Of Commons, 1959.
Wicko1,355 posts since 3 Dec 2003
Meridian (South) South Today
.

Let's focus all our energy on getting the BBC to change those bloo*y idents!


They won't change them, at least not until next year. As more idents are added to the set, the more people will care less. It will just be a film used to introduce a programme. I think we are all thinking that they're worse than they really are! Probably because they launched with just two and had nothing suitable for serious programming.
I am the Optimistic Goldfish.
MetalGearRex685 posts since 11 May 2016
London London
.

Let's focus all our energy on getting the BBC to change those bloo*y idents!


They won't change them, at least not until next year. As more idents are added to the set, the more people will care less. It will just be a film used to introduce a programme. I think we are all thinking that they're worse than they really are! Probably because they launched with just two and had nothing suitable for serious programming.

The whole 'oneness' project is being done throughout the year - by next year, one of two scenarios:

1 - The BBC refreshes their three main channels by the next year or so
2 - The oneness set will last beyond this year.
'What is the only planet capable of sustaining life?'
'Mars.'
Brekkie26,508 posts since 4 Jan 2003
HTV Wales Wales Today
Ok that seems to be a bit better... It started off good then it become just like all the others.

At least there is a bit of action at the beginning but ultimately still suffers from being a logo slapped on a bit of film with no visual or audio cohesion between the idents. Probably the least worse so far though.
Shouldn't that have been posted in the "John Logie Baird has Invented Television" thread?