I've just been doing a little thinking about the current BBC One identity.
Unlike many on here, I don't despise the idents. It's the go-to hilarious* punchline on TV Forum, but I think there's some potential in here and
with a few changes could actually be rather a nice campaign
, thoughts that I have shared before.
I actually really like the work of Martin Parr. If you're not familiar with his stuff, go and have a look – he's very good at what he does. It perhaps isn't to your taste, but he's well-regarded and certainly one of the greats.
I got to comparing his efforts to
the ITV Creates campaign
, one which – though maybe not popular in every execution – certainly seems to have gone down well here in terms of concept and scope. I kind of wondered if one of the biggest downfalls of the current BBC One idents is that they don't actually play on Martin Parr's name at all. I don't even know if he's really been mentioned outside of press releases and, maybe, the One Show. It's a bit like getting Leonardo Da Vinci to paint you a business card and only mentioning it one day as an afterthought. True, good work should be good work regardless of who has done it, but what's the harm in shouting about it? People might just get it a little more.
Indeed, the concept of capturing everyday life in the UK is a good one I reckon. For all the jibes about 'couldn't they get him a tripod' – and though I think the idea of editing shots from other angles has some merit – that isn't the style of Martin Parr. Which got me thinking, what would the campaign look like if other photographers/videographers had been involved? Alongside on-screen text saying 'bingo players in Cornwall', how would the campaign play out with 'captured by Martin Parr' or something, and other names, on screen?
Just a few thoughts.
*usually anything but funny
Why do channel idents have to be