MS
ITV always sell the news channel with having the famous faces, but does anyone specifically watch a channel because the presenter is recognisable? I know that for me, the content of the news is more important than the person who introduces the reports, and anyway, in the vast majority of times, a 'famous face' hardly ever presents - most of the schedule is filled with Chris Rogers, Leyla Deybelge, Owen Thomas etc, who, although we all know who they are, they arent exactly known to the average viewer.
The studio is vile - its too large, empty, sterile and cold looking, and looks crap when a close up shot is used. The graphics of the ticker and slug look like they were designed in 5mins by a small child fond of primary colours.
I also have to agree with the intital point made about the ad breaks. Im sure that on a day to day basis, they have the same number of ad-breaks as Sky, but it doesnt feel like that! Sky seems to just flow into a break, which doesnt seem to last too long, whereas ITV have a long intro into and returning from the break which slows the pace down. Ive often said on here the handling of breaks is poorly managed, and I think it is true that the channel willingly key speeches or events in favour of some ads.
Due to simulcasting of ITV1 bulletins, many events theyve advertised all morning are also missed, which is another problem.
If ITV want to make money from the channel, maybe someone should give them a reality check - no news channel turns over a healthy profit, if at all, and they suck up rescources. If they want to try and cut their losses, the only option they have is to invest more in the channel, and bring its budget up to a significant level where it can compete with its rivals.
Oh, and one other thing, for gods sake hurry up and get the channel back on freeview, its supposed best platform, or pull the plug altogether. Use the new CC slot theyve won, put the channel on there, and delay the launch of ITV4 until the engineering work is done on the news channels old slot. That way, the news channel is there during the election, a vital and important time, and ITV4 will be developed for longer, with the posibility that it may have time to commision decent programmes!
The studio is vile - its too large, empty, sterile and cold looking, and looks crap when a close up shot is used. The graphics of the ticker and slug look like they were designed in 5mins by a small child fond of primary colours.
I also have to agree with the intital point made about the ad breaks. Im sure that on a day to day basis, they have the same number of ad-breaks as Sky, but it doesnt feel like that! Sky seems to just flow into a break, which doesnt seem to last too long, whereas ITV have a long intro into and returning from the break which slows the pace down. Ive often said on here the handling of breaks is poorly managed, and I think it is true that the channel willingly key speeches or events in favour of some ads.
Due to simulcasting of ITV1 bulletins, many events theyve advertised all morning are also missed, which is another problem.
If ITV want to make money from the channel, maybe someone should give them a reality check - no news channel turns over a healthy profit, if at all, and they suck up rescources. If they want to try and cut their losses, the only option they have is to invest more in the channel, and bring its budget up to a significant level where it can compete with its rivals.
Oh, and one other thing, for gods sake hurry up and get the channel back on freeview, its supposed best platform, or pull the plug altogether. Use the new CC slot theyve won, put the channel on there, and delay the launch of ITV4 until the engineering work is done on the news channels old slot. That way, the news channel is there during the election, a vital and important time, and ITV4 will be developed for longer, with the posibility that it may have time to commision decent programmes!