BBC News Channel: Presentation

The LSE graphics have been a bit different the past few weeks, I don't expect it's anything to do with the BBC.

Most likely as a result of branding updates within the LSE itself; some may have noticed, for example, that the LSE logo itself has received a modest refresh, which has been popping up every now and then in recent weeks.

Sir Terry steps down from Eurovision. They are doing a report on it now, but they used the old Radio 2 logo on their graphics when speaking to Terry, how can the NC do this? someone must realise this when they put the graphics together?

Someone call the press


So what if they accidentally used the wrong font? I'm sorry this isn't a personal attack, but the minor details that are regularly criticised on TVF at the moment are frankly starting to become ridiculous!

LOGO not font. im commenting not critising on it because i want to and am interested how things are done and made, if you arent interested in the topic then dont reply. Its people like you who make stupid and harsh comments on this forum that make people feel like not posting. so how about you take out your anger elsewhere

well there we go. that makes all the difference doesn't it.

Yeah, it does. It's a presentation forum FFS - it's a place for people to make observations on these little details, and to share them with others that have the same interest.

I can't help but notice that a sizeable chunk of your absurdly high post count seems to have been racked up with p!ssy, useless comments like the one you made above. 'Contributions' like that make TV Forum a much less welcoming and enjoyable place.

Chud may not share your bizarre and tedious obsession with the word 'fab', but at least he/she doesn't spend his/her days swanning around the Forum being a bitchy queen and trying to pick fights with those having relevant discussions and making legitimate observations.

Eugh, Christ, I'm so bored of your bitchiness - can it be that you're so predictable and one-dimensional in reality, or is it just an online persona that you've created so that you can make lots of MSN friends and maintain a self-delusion that you're somehow important?

Whatever the tragic story behind it all, please can you just put a bloody sock in it already - the majority of us come here to discuss TV presentation; if we want bitchy putdowns, we can watch Alan Carr.

I'm sorry if I seemed at all harsh or rude - and I'm sorry about writing font not logo! As a personal opinion, I don't see the particular relevance of someone in a production unit we already know is probably quite pushed and rushed, using an old logo for Radio 2 - isn't it better to have an old logo than no logo? Maybe if they played an old intro into the news then that would be a point, but not that.


Anyway it wasn't a specific accusation or assault directed towards you or your point, just the sorts of things that seem to be mentioned on TV Forum these days!


EDIT:




I completely agree - it just strikes me that so much of TV forum isn't about presentation any more, and the number of fights people seem to have over it. And the place that, in my mind, TV Forum really fits in is less about the minor, graphical problems or mistakes (which clearly using a previous logo is) and more about the actual presentation of the tv programs or channels.

And the number of pointless remarks, especially made by one particular poster, about how many mistakes the BBC make. This has nothing to do with presentation, and after it's been mentioned a few times what is the point - it's not as if the BBC is going to see this forum and think 'golly, we really need to get our act together'. I would imagine the majority of people making these comments would struggle with even the basics running a news channel, let alone using the wrong logo or having a stuttering ticker.

thanks to the wonders of tabbed browsing, I managed to get mixed up and only post half of what i meant to, here, for your consideration, is what *SHOULD* have been posted.
___________________________________

well there we go. that makes all the difference doesn't it. you tell him he's ruining the forum and no doubt he'll back down.

course you could have suggested to him that infact an organisation getting their own internal logo mixed up when its probably everywhere around the building and should be known to the staffer is just very careless and should have been spotted at some point down the line and this shows the decline in standards on the new channel.

but no, why not be a not very good fake-mod instead and by doing so make yourself look like a foolish and thus him - who is known moron - look slightly correct.

__________

whether that affects your opinion of me andy is another thing, but at least I have what I wanted to write on the board now.



oh and how i wish this place had pipped to the post...


are you referring to worzel with this? in which case i very much agree.

I wasn't suggesting he was ruining the forum - just that some of the topics, such as that, seems to feature too regularly imo. This is solely my opinion and everyone is welcomed to theirs.

I wasn't even being specific about Chud's post, just using it as an example.



Because of course the most important thing for a somebody in charge of the pictures and graphics etc. is to be able to quickly and efficiently locate the latest version of a Radio 2 logo frankly 95% of viewers didn't even notice. I for one didn't notice it was the old logo - so does that really mean the quality of the channel is deteriorating?



I don't know who you're calling who here - I'm guessing Chud as 'fake-mod' and me as the moron - there is no need to be rude or piss taking here! I regularly go to numerous forums on a range of topics and one thing that strikes me everytime is how aggressive, harsh and tense the discussions and some members on here are. There is no need.
__________

[quote="Hymagumba"
whether that affects your opinion of me andy is another thing, but at least I have what I wanted to write on the board now.[/quote]

Thank you for rewriting your post - I didn't really understand your first one but now understand why that was.

I don't see any benefit of naming names here, but it does seem rather pointless in certain members (one in particular) just making the same observation each week, then going to the sky forum and commenting on how wonderful sky is! We get your point. Now please stop!

actually that was aimed at chud, not you.




aside from say the fact it would highlight who you are referring to.

Urgh. Shut up all of you.

Please, let's get back to discussing the minutia of presentation that no one else cares about!