Sky News is terrible - if you are watching on Sky everything seems to have no alignment - the red button (that I have on auto timeout), the logo, the LIVE bug, the Red strap, the LIVE bug used on the splitscreen (which is centered, for some reason).
At least the BBC News attempt has alignment and simplicity. The ticker is quite polished, but the rest isn't as good. They should have used a smaller desk to have, or at least appear to have, more room.
Why do people give CNN International so much praise - it isn't that brilliant. The flipper is rubbish, and the whole lot is a bit lacking.
Although the BBC's straps may now be a little basic they are better than Sky's powerpoint looking, american-style rubbish that they've relaunched with. Esspecially when you take into account the titles and studio the Beeb are far superior.
Although the BBC's straps may now be a little basic they are better than Sky's powerpoint looking, american-style rubbish that they've relaunched with. Esspecially when you take into account the titles and studio the Beeb are far superior.
Naturally BBC News' titles would be superior to Sky's....as Sky don't have titles....
Ok, I admit my bias. I never watched sky news, except for competitor analysis, but since I started, it's become as addictive as Coke (either sort).
Hey; everyone's going to have their opinion and to a certain extent, the presentation and journalism will suggest this. What I don't get, is the complaint that Sky News' graphics are glitzy and tabloid...the channel is glitzy and tabloid, so they're bang on brief!
Not sure about this whole alignment argument either. The logo lines up with the red story slug, which lines up with the black bar to the left of the clock. All the text on the straps is left aligned, and the stagger between the red bar and white story info just emphasizes the use of 3D, or at least, gives it some justification. The live lines up with the logo, and, whilst a little large in my opinion, there is clearly journalistic intent here.
The 'Dynamic Junctions' at the top of the hour are vastly improved on the previous set, being as they play on a true environment.
As for the'powerpoint' animations, maybe try seeing it as a whole package; when you see the way 3D is used, you can't deny it makes sense.
I like the BBC's titles; they are well executed, stylish, on brand and look expensive. But that's as far as they go. They are a poor relation to the '99 brand; the same idea sold twice by L.N. as others have said, there is Zero correlation with the set and even less with the on screen furniture. I do like the way they're going with the content graphics though; it looks to me like the Viz templates are slowly filtering through and a vast improvement on the last set they are too ( though I know the desire to do this was there earlier).
On the whole it comes down to this:
The BBC is still clean and stylish.
Sky is still brash and tabloid.
...and I'm sure neither channel would have it any other way.
[Not sure about this whole alignment argument either. The logo lines up with the red story slug, which lines up with the black bar to the left of the clock. All the text on the straps is left aligned, and the stagger between the red bar and white story info just emphasizes the use of 3D, or at least, gives it some justification. The live lines up with the logo, and, whilst a little large in my opinion, there is clearly journalistic intent here.
The main problem is that the infomation is splattered all over the screen - you have to look everywhere to glean all of the information. It doesn't need to be all over - it looks untidy.
Sky News can't be compared with American news graphics - at least they are quite polished. Sky's are naff and poorly designed - they haven't thought them out properly: and the worst thing is that every time they relaunch their graphics, hardly anything is left alone, adding to the confusion.
every time they relaunch their graphics, hardly anything is left alone, adding to the confusion.
Isn't that kind of the point of a relaunch?
The brand colours are the same, the glassy look is brought in line with the rest of the Sky brand.
I agree that the architecture is now spread around the screen, but, for me at least, this has the effect of negating the barrier that traditional lower thirds create. There has been a move in recent years on news channels to a 'on size fits all' solution. Well, I'm sorry but it doesn't; not for me. This is disparate information which requires its' own emphasis.
Percentage-wise with this treatment, you actually see more vt, more of the time than you do on N24 (as was).
As an addition, sport is, in my opinion, fantastic. Far more dynamic than any other news output.
every time they relaunch their graphics, hardly anything is left alone, adding to the confusion.
Isn't that kind of the point of a relaunch?
The brand colours are the same, the glassy look is brought in line with the rest of the Sky brand.
I agree that the architecture is now spread around the screen, but, for me at least, this has the effect of negating the barrier that traditional lower thirds create. There has been a move in recent years on news channels to a 'on size fits all' solution. Well, I'm sorry but it doesn't; not for me. This is disparate information which requires its' own emphasis.
Percentage-wise with this treatment, you actually see more vt, more of the time than you do on N24 (as was).
As an addition, sport is, in my opinion, fantastic. Far more dynamic than any other news output.
Not really - if nearly everything is changed every time the brand is somewhat lost. If the rebrands were further apart, fine. People should be able to get used to graphics - but not so that it becomes stale.
Fair enough, you may get to see more of the VT - but if things are slapped all over the screen, you tend to focus on the middle - not on the edges where you may be able to spot an extra tree, or a picture frame.
every time they relaunch their graphics, hardly anything is left alone, adding to the confusion.
Isn't that kind of the point of a relaunch?
The brand colours are the same, the glassy look is brought in line with the rest of the Sky brand.
I agree that the architecture is now spread around the screen, but, for me at least, this has the effect of negating the barrier that traditional lower thirds create. There has been a move in recent years on news channels to a 'on size fits all' solution. Well, I'm sorry but it doesn't; not for me. This is disparate information which requires its' own emphasis.
Percentage-wise with this treatment, you actually see more vt, more of the time than you do on N24 (as was).
As an addition, sport is, in my opinion, fantastic. Far more dynamic than any other news output.
Not really - if nearly everything is changed every time the brand is somewhat lost. If the rebrands were further apart, fine. People should be able to get used to graphics - but not so that it becomes stale.
Fair enough, you may get to see more of the VT - but if things are slapped all over the screen, you tend to focus on the middle - not on the edges where you may be able to spot an extra tree, or a picture frame.
Fair points B.A. I agree in particular, that all NewsChannels relaunch too often, dilluting the brand.
I think it comes down to ensuring you retain the strong elements of brand, and these transcend graphics. Editorial presentation, focus and style; audio (ITN and the Bongs - the strongest brand recognition on UK News); set and graphics all have a significant part to play.
In terms of the graphics you should always retain the strongest brand elements and this is where the confusion lies in REBRAND vs REFRESH. I don't beieve that either the BBC or Sky have REBRANDED on this occasion, as both have retained core elements of all the key components. Sky retained Red White and Blue in terms of graphical presentation, their font; and developed or evolved from other key areas (use of 3D, glass, gloss, depth), but they did change the way in which these elements were used (animation, layout, emphasis)
The BBC retained the globe albeit in a different form (a return to an older style) and their core brand colours, although these were developed.
I see your point of the scatter effect of graphics across the screen...each to their own
if the choice is between BBC News Channel and Sky News its defenitely BBC News. i just dont like that windows-colourful-plastic look of sky.
but the studio(s) of al jazeera english are just breathtaking, everytime you see that crane shot of the doha studio at the TOTH, its brilliant!
(but still: german "news channels" (as they call themselves) have lousy studios...and the "news" are just horrible... fortunately the primary public broadcaster ARD now has a kind of news channel on their digital channel EinsExtra)
For me, definitely BBC News. Okay occasionally I will watch Sky an interesting feature or presenter but overall:
Presenter, reporters, presentation and impartiality are far more impressive on the BBC. less of the standing about and better presenters, and not appointment to view watching for big names as much as sky.
I feel that it is more professional and the sensationalism is not as evident with sky leading every hour with the one stabbing when they happen everyday and the BBC but a more representative news agenda all the time.
