The Newsroom

Bradby at Ten

ITN Presenter Shake-Up (June 2015)

This site closed in March 2021 and is now a read-only archive
CU
Custard56
DTV posted:
Jay Lee posted:
And he actually personally went to John Whittingdale, David Cameron and George Osborne complaining about the BBC News at Ten? Seriously?


I wasn't aware of this, do we know this for certain? If it is true that is a disgusting abuse of position and put's him on a par with Murdoch. It is quite frankly disgraceful to go running to the government to winge about this knowing full well the government is hostile to the BBC and looking for any excuse possible to bash it. If a BBC employee, hell even a BBC executive, went to the government to complain about their opponents they would have the door slammed in their face, criticised heavily in the right-wing press and end up having to tender their resignation. The Anti-BBC cabal grows larger by the day.

Furthermore the 'BBC News at Ten' branding has been in place since 2008 and even that was a revision from the 'BBC News at Ten O'Clock' from 2007. ITV made a tactical error in 1999 and the BBC took the advantage. Nobody has bought up that Bradby's Agenda (I think we all know his real agenda) is nought but a sh*t rip off of Question Time. ITV are acting like the Unionists in Northern Ireland, acting like they've never done anything wrong while criticising their opponents for something that they have also done.


Re. Bradby going personally to the Government about the BBC News at Ten bulletin - this is what the Evening Standard article says:

"Bradby is not the most typical of sharp-elbowed of news reporters. Not only is he a novelist (one of his books has been made into a TV series) but he’s a discreet friend of Prince William and Kate, and netted a world exclusive with the happy couple on their engagement in 2010. He was the first to alert William to the fact that his voicemail messages might be being intercepted (which inadvertently makes him a power player in the uncovering of the tabloid phone hacking scandal).

He’s lobbied the Government on the question of BBC’s 10 o’clock slot, speaking to John Whittingdale, Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport as well as Chancellor George Osborne and David Cameron about whether it’s fair that a taxpayer-funded organisation like the BBC should hog the best spot."
IT
itsrobert Founding member
dosxuk posted:
Nicky posted:
The Ten O'Clock News as a brand, to me, oozes gravitas and authority, so why the BBC has all but got rid of it is beyond me.


The same reason they got rid of News 24 - it stops people saying "BBC News". The "BBC News at Ten" cements the brand of "BBC News" at the heart. The "BBC Ten O'clock News" put's the "BBC" as the main brand, with News a secondary element.

(N24 going because people were calling it News 24, not BBC News 24, completely excluding the BBC)

Marketing droids basically.


I still find it ironic that in getting rid of the News 24 brand, the BBC hoped to cement the BBC News brand. In reality, most people now refer to it as "the News Channel" which could mean anything really. I've always thought they would have been better sticking with "News 24" - at least it was unique.

Brekkie posted:
Although this all goes back to 1999 - the first thing Sky did was launch Sky News at Ten, while IIRC BBC News 24 beefed up their 10pm bulletin too, though not sure if it was branded as the BBC News at Ten.

It will be interesting to see whether the bulletin retains the ITV prefix - in 2008 it just went for "News at Ten" but obviously less than two years later it was bought back in under the ITV News brand. I wouldn't be surprised if the same happens here - the current look is three years old so probably destined to be replaced in a couple of years or so.


Do you remember when the ITN News Channel launched, their 10pm bulletin was "News at Ten" as well? They even had a voiceover (albeit not the traditional voice of Andrew Burt) stating "From ITN, News at Ten". I always found that amusing - clearly it was ITV's decision to get rid of News at Ten and this was ITN's way of keeping it going!
AN
Andrew Founding member
I do find the BBC's use of 'News at Ten' grates, considering how it is so associated with ITN. Not sure what was wrong with theirs being called Ten o'clock news. It doesn't deflect from the strength of the bulletin at all.
DT
DTV
Andrew posted:
I do find the BBC's use of 'News at Ten' grates, considering how it is so associated with ITN. Not sure what was wrong with theirs being called Ten o'clock news. It doesn't deflect from the strength of the bulletin at all.


To be honest though how many viewers would notice/care if the BBC changed the name of its bulletins from BBC News at __ to BBC __ O'Clock News or BBC News at __ O'Clock? It seems like a fuss over nothing, what next "Sorry ITV you can't call ITV2, ITV Two as we at the BBC invented the use of sentence case words after a three letter brand name."
LS
Lou Scannon
DTV posted:
To be honest though how many viewers would notice/care if the BBC changed the name of its bulletins from BBC News at __ to BBC __ O'Clock News or BBC News at __ O'Clock? It seems like a fuss over nothing


Quite.

Especially as it's been many years now since the actual title sequences visually featured whatever the supposed full-form name of the bulletins are - they just say "BBC News" and a big numeral!

By the time that they were all changed from "_ o'Clock News" to "BBC News at _", we were already well into the era in which viewers' only exposure to these full names in visual/written form is in listings/EPGs etc. That being the case, was there actually any chuffing point in making the change?

"Ooh, I know... let's 'rename' a programme whose supposed name doesn't actually appear on-screen at any point during its airtime, and will also continue to not appear even *after* said renaming exercise!" Rolling Eyes
NI
Nicky
DTV posted:
Andrew posted:
I do find the BBC's use of 'News at Ten' grates, considering how it is so associated with ITN. Not sure what was wrong with theirs being called Ten o'clock news. It doesn't deflect from the strength of the bulletin at all.


To be honest though how many viewers would notice/care if the BBC changed the name of its bulletins from BBC News at __ to BBC __ O'Clock News or BBC News at __ O'Clock? It seems like a fuss over nothing, what next "Sorry ITV you can't call ITV2, ITV Two as we at the BBC invented the use of sentence case words after a three letter brand name."


Please try reading other members' posts more carefully - the issue is with the BBC using the 'News at Ten' phrase without a 'BBC' prefix, examples of which are given in my earlier post.
BR
Brekkie
This is going off on a tangent and drifting off to the BBC but as long as I can remember reporters have always signed off BBC News. Did they used to sign off specifically for the Nine o'clock News as they did and do once again for News at Ten?


Worth remembering with these Tom Bradby interviews is he's asking the questions asked of him and the reports are probably embellished slightly, so although I very much agree he is best just focusing on what is happening at ITV News and strengthening the profile of his show rather than berating his competitors it is inevitable that any interviewers is going to include reference to the BBC at some time, especially as the "battle of the bongs" seems to be the angle the media is taking on all of this.
AN
Andrew Founding member
DTV posted:
Andrew posted:
I do find the BBC's use of 'News at Ten' grates, considering how it is so associated with ITN. Not sure what was wrong with theirs being called Ten o'clock news. It doesn't deflect from the strength of the bulletin at all.


To be honest though how many viewers would notice/care if the BBC changed the name of its bulletins from BBC News at __ to BBC __ O'Clock News or BBC News at __ O'Clock? It seems like a fuss over nothing, what next "Sorry ITV you can't call ITV2, ITV Two as we at the BBC invented the use of sentence case words after a three letter brand name."

Not sure viewers knowing or caring about something is up for debate though or a reason to do or not do something.

Viewers wouldn't notice if every caption on the BBC News was written in a different font each time, and the bulletin came from a CSO broom cupboard or if the bulletin still had the same look from 1999.
DT
DTV
Nicky posted:
DTV posted:
Andrew posted:
I do find the BBC's use of 'News at Ten' grates, considering how it is so associated with ITN. Not sure what was wrong with theirs being called Ten o'clock news. It doesn't deflect from the strength of the bulletin at all.


To be honest though how many viewers would notice/care if the BBC changed the name of its bulletins from BBC News at __ to BBC __ O'Clock News or BBC News at __ O'Clock? It seems like a fuss over nothing, what next "Sorry ITV you can't call ITV2, ITV Two as we at the BBC invented the use of sentence case words after a three letter brand name."


Please try reading other members' posts more carefully - the issue is with the BBC using the 'News at Ten' phrase without a 'BBC' prefix, examples of which are given in my earlier post.


I have read others post carefully and my point still stands with or without the BBC prefix. If it's referred to as the News at Ten on the BBC then viewers presumably know they are watching the BBC. If viewers hear the phrase 'News at Ten' on ITV then hopefully they know they are watching ITV. If they don't know what News at Ten they are watching then it probably doesn't bother them if they are watching BBC or ITV and thus any rebranding is unlikely to affect them. Changing the style from 'News at Ten' to 'Ten O'Clock News' wouldn't have any discernible difference to most viewers and would make no difference to whether they watched the BBC or ITV. The group of 'floating viewers' are unlikely to make a shift from ITV to BBC or vice versa based purely on a name that is uttered maybe once or twice in a bulletin. Also don't be so presumptuous in assuming that other members are lazy and don't read other members posts.
NI
Nicky
DTV posted:
Nicky posted:
DTV posted:

To be honest though how many viewers would notice/care if the BBC changed the name of its bulletins from BBC News at __ to BBC __ O'Clock News or BBC News at __ O'Clock? It seems like a fuss over nothing, what next "Sorry ITV you can't call ITV2, ITV Two as we at the BBC invented the use of sentence case words after a three letter brand name."


Please try reading other members' posts more carefully - the issue is with the BBC using the 'News at Ten' phrase without a 'BBC' prefix, examples of which are given in my earlier post.


I have read others post carefully and my point still stands with or without the BBC prefix. If it's referred to as the News at Ten on the BBC then viewers presumably know they are watching the BBC. If viewers hear the phrase 'News at Ten' on ITV then hopefully they know they are watching ITV. If they don't know what News at Ten they are watching then it probably doesn't bother them if they are watching BBC or ITV and thus any rebranding is unlikely to affect them. Changing the style from 'News at Ten' to 'Ten O'Clock News' wouldn't have any discernible difference to most viewers and would make no difference to whether they watched the BBC or ITV . The group of 'floating viewers' are unlikely to make a shift from ITV to BBC or vice versa based purely on a name that is uttered maybe once or twice in a bulletin. Also don't be so presumptuous in assuming that other members are lazy and don't read other members posts.


Hmm. The reasoning they gave for the 2008 rebrand was that all news output could be unified under one cohesive 'BBC News' brand. And that resulted in onscreen references to 'The News Channel' and 'The News at...'. That went very well then.

BIB: with all due respect, that's a very dangerous 'Joe Public never clocks a damn thing' attitude. They might as well turn out the lights in the newsroom behind Huw or stick him in the canteen because, after all, the viewers won't notice anything other than the news he's reading. Laughing
DT
DTV
Nicky posted:
DTV posted:
Nicky posted:

Please try reading other members' posts more carefully - the issue is with the BBC using the 'News at Ten' phrase without a 'BBC' prefix, examples of which are given in my earlier post.


I have read others post carefully and my point still stands with or without the BBC prefix. If it's referred to as the News at Ten on the BBC then viewers presumably know they are watching the BBC. If viewers hear the phrase 'News at Ten' on ITV then hopefully they know they are watching ITV. If they don't know what News at Ten they are watching then it probably doesn't bother them if they are watching BBC or ITV and thus any rebranding is unlikely to affect them. Changing the style from 'News at Ten' to 'Ten O'Clock News' wouldn't have any discernible difference to most viewers and would make no difference to whether they watched the BBC or ITV . The group of 'floating viewers' are unlikely to make a shift from ITV to BBC or vice versa based purely on a name that is uttered maybe once or twice in a bulletin. Also don't be so presumptuous in assuming that other members are lazy and don't read other members posts.


Hmm. The reasoning they gave for the 2008 rebrand was that all news output could be unified under one cohesive 'BBC News' brand. And that resulted in onscreen references to 'The News Channel' and 'The News at...'. That went very well then.

BIB: with all due respect, that's a very dangerous 'Joe Public never clocks a damn thing' attitude. They might as well turn out the lights in the newsroom behind Huw or stick him in the canteen because, after all, the viewers won't notice anything other than the news he's reading. Laughing


There's a huge difference between set and studio and something trivial like a name. Viewers would of course notice if you stuck him in the BBC canteen and some would notice if you changed the name - what I was trying to say was that for something that makes so little difference and has so little effect on the content of the news bulletin it isn't really something that is, ironic given this argument, worth bickering over. I was trying to say that in terms of the wider argument over the two News at Tens it isn't really worth debating over every minutia such as the order of words in the title of the programme. It is largely insignificant to the content of the news bulletin and I was trying to highlight that it would be unlikely that a large swathe of viewers would be lost by either side with a simple little name change. I was not commenting on the logic of the BBC's choice of rebranding the name of the bulletins and news channel which again is also an irrelevance to most viewers.
CI
cityprod
DTV posted:
noggin posted:
Jay Lee posted:
http://www.standard.co.uk/lifestyle/london-life/tom-bradby-revamped-itv-news-at-ten-will-be-distinctive-more-human-and-funnier-than-the-bbc-a3154351.html

The article is typical Bradby boasting and arrogance. So he thinks BBC News is boring and he'd rather shoot himself than work for BBC News?

Yep - another bit of self-important puffery... Not quite as bitter as some previous interviews - but still...

Quote:

That's why itv have just gone "to the ends of the earth" for Robert Peston and Allegra Strattin then.


Quite...


'funnier than the BBC' - I'm sorry but should the news be funny in any sense of the word?


Believe it or not, there can be a place for humour in news, often when the story itself has some unintentional humour about, like Nigel Farage talking about unhelpful nationalist sentiment in Wales. That story sent my irony metre to 11. Would I put humour thought into a flagship newscast though? Probably only for the "And Finally..." story and nowhere else.

Newer posts