I'm glad LN are involved - and also a tad excited!!
Woah easy tiger. You can't say LN is involved going on one post. From what I've heard, it's remaining in house. But if I'm wrong and LN are indeed working on this, I will be very happy.
You are wrong - it is Lambie Nairn. Since he created the BBC News 1999 look I must say I'm rather optimistic.
This is indeed interesting and hopeful news, partially in relation to their re-appointment - at which I'm reservedly optimistic - but perhaps even moreso at how this is quite promising, re: the BBC / L-N working relationship.
Going back a while, I was under the impression their 'connection' with the BBC from the days of the main channels' branding had been all but completely severed - what with L-N for a time being completely absent from the agency roster when major new looks or projects came up. So that they are evidently working together again in this capacity is positive news in itself.
I'm curious as to why everyone seems to think this is a positive step.
In an age wher the BBC is short of cash and cutting swathes thru departments, to spend this amount on a rebrand so recently after the last refresh seems a little slack.
As I understand it, the rebrand is 'News-wide", so online, active, print and broadcast, so it makes sense to employ someone, who is a 'brand guru'. However, work on this must have been going on for some time, so why spend the money on the last refresh?
One of the reason, the BBC brand has been perceived to have dilluted over the years, is undoubtedly the fact that, when changing things internally, you a) Spend far less... b) have less time and c) dillute editorially, as no body from a branding background is in contol.
The fact remains, that every time LN have delivered in the past, the internal resources have then had to make it work for implementation - THEY are the ones who actually make these grand concepts work on air and their input in terms of fixing things which simply don't work, is vastly underrated.
Someboby PLEASE tell me that's going to get better and it only looks like that beacuse
a) All the bulbs blew in the N6 b) You just bought a job lot of Charisma's
c) You want to demonstrate how the latest round of cuts have affected the graphics operation
Why have such a forward thinking idea presented in such a backward fashion?
At the very least, keep the sting, animate full frame and pres the rest as an OOV.
But, quantity is not always a measure of quality. The
content
of BBC World has never dipped below excellent in all the years I have been watching. Editorially, it is top class. That's why you get 76 million viewers a week. However,
presentationally
the channel is being ruined. Here's a few pointers:
1) No thought goes into the quality of idents, titles and stings. Compare the current set to the 2000-2003 ones. The level of detail in those titles was incredibly, right down to tiny place names rotating on the cream background and radio waves pulsating all over the place. What do we have now? A strange red thing on a plain black background.
2) Stings being removed altogether or butchered beyond recognition. Why did the business/sport stings go? They were handy tools to signify sections of the bulletins. Where's the closing music gone? Yes, I know that bulletin closes were supposedly reducing viewer numbers, but why then, do they still use them for TWT, WNT and programmes like WBR, Sport Today and Asia Today? Surely people switch off after those, too? How about the weather ident? A once imaginative set of titles (2000-2005) has been reduced to nothing more than a slide with a horrendous edit of the music.
3) Dodgy logos. Admittedly, things are generally OK now, but what about the horrendous logos on the last titles that were not corrected for over 2 years? That screams no attention to detail.
4) A cheap and tacky set. Whoever came up with bright white and red plexiglass needs to be shot. The previous set/newsroom was far less distracting and had a more formal feel. Even better than that was the flags era set. If you look at the current set for too long, it begins to hurt your eyes because it is so bright!
There's four points to mull over, and there are probably more. As I said earlier, this is not about BBC World's content. That's excellent, and always has been. The problem is, the channel looks a mess.
I totally disagree.
I think that the current look is far superior to the orange/red/pink mess we had from 2004-2007.
Then we had orange channel idents, and orange breakfiller, red news titles and a pink/white set.
At least now it all matches and looks unified!
I think the cureent look is very modern and professional. The music has more power than the wishy-woshy stuff on CNN Int. and nicer then the tacky AJE stuff. The set is ok- atleast we see a real newsroom. And the titles are smart.
Its good. And I don't agree that content has always been brilliant. Before they changed the format of the bullitins earlier this year they were a pretty boring affair. At least now there is a bit of pace.
Ok rant over.
Whilst I will always respect Robs opinion, and here he has some very valid points, I can't help but feel he has missed the main one here, namely WHY BBC World idents et al are the way they are now. Answer: consistency. World now sits strongly within a better designed, implemented and conceptualised brand strategy, where all of the BBC's output now screams, this is BBC News. Yes there are drops in production value, but is this always a bad thing? There is such a thing as style over substance, and in actual fact, more investment, time and diversity went into Worlds brand than any of the others. Perhaps it's this very consistency married with the editorial strengths which have led to the increased ad take-up and viewership. Oh and...that 'strange red thing'? It's the globe, I'm sure you recognise it...you live on it...sometimes
There's actually something quite intriguing about these. No, news channels don't tend to use serif, and no, it doesn't tend to work well on TV, largely due to the light nature of the serif itsself. However, broadcast technology is progressing at a rate where it soon could work, as is the viewers end of the equation, with LCD uptake.
What your designs do illustrate, is the way in which this could reflect the brand values of an organisation. What some would see as dated and stiff, others would view as authoritative and serious.
Continue. Open the debate. If it is ultimately desirable, designers will be charged with creating a serif font which DOES work.
Don't believe all you read...
