The Newsroom

BBC News Channel: Presentation

Move to Broadcasting House and new look today (April 2008)

This site closed in March 2021 and is now a read-only archive
MO
Moz
Markymark posted:
Davidjb posted:
I can see both sides of the music argument. Sometimes the beds do seem to play out louder than other times but i guess this ultimately depends on who is controlling the playout and how much experience they have and if they are actually paying full attention to what they are doing, But, news channels with no music at all to accompany them would be dull dull dull. .


Where does this notion come from that music can make the news more exciting ?
Dull news is dull for two main reasons:-

1: It's simply a dull story
2: The quality of journalism and the script writing is poor.

Consistantly dull news equals a dull news channel or programme.

Radio 4's news programmes have no music (except for a jingle on 'PM'')
Are you telling me they're dull ?

News stories can be, and often are compelling. Some presenters/reporters past and present were/are good at making a story interesting. Alistair Cooke, Micheal Brunson, John Simpson, Andrew Marr

If you follow your argument that music is not needed, and that it's just the news itself that matters, then they should get rid of the 'distracting' set and just have a grey curtain behind the presenters.

In truth I think you'll find that most people like the design elements that are added to news such as stings, graphics and hi-tech sets.
EY
the eye
No no, grey curtains is too much.
RO
roo
Everyone knows grey curtains are the line.
PE
Pete Founding member
well with grey curtains at least you couldn't SEE THE GAPS BETWEEN THE SCREENS!!!!!!111!!!!!!ONE!!!!!
</worzel>
RO
roo
Hymagumba posted:
well with grey curtains at least you couldn't SEE THE GAPS BETWEEN THE SCREENS!!!!!!111!!!!!!ONE!!!!!
</worzel>

And let's not even get started on the possibility of a poorly defined pleat. Crivens!
MA
Markymark
Moz posted:

If you follow your argument that music is not needed, and that it's just the news itself that matters, then they should get rid of the 'distracting' set and just have a grey curtain behind the presenters.


I'd have no poblem with that Cool

Moz posted:

In truth I think you'll find that most people like the design elements that are added to news such as stings, graphics and hi-tech sets.


No, what you'll find is most viewers, those with a reasonable attention span, and normal full, active, and busy lives, are perfectly capable of absorbing information without the need for visual and aural distractions and embellishments.

HTH
WO
Worzel
Hymagumba posted:
well with grey curtains at least you couldn't SEE THE GAPS BETWEEN THE SCREENS!!!!!!111!!!!!!ONE!!!!!
</worzel>


But they were still mismatched in Brightness and Contrast Levels. Wink
MQ
Mr Q
Markymark posted:
No, what you'll find is most viewers, those with a reasonable attention span, and normal full, active, and busy lives, are perfectly capable of absorbing information without the need for visual and aural distractions and embellishments.

If that were what the majority of viewers wanted, I suspect somebody would have catered to that audience by presenting TV news in precisely that way. But since they haven't, your claim that most viewers would settle for a grey screen seems to be without substance.

Obviously the most important thing in any news programme is (hopefully) the content. But to suggest that the "visual and aural embellishments" are entirely pointless is rather extreme. This is television. The presentation matters, helping to complement both the story and the story telling process.
DV
DVB Cornwall
Ahh the Scottish One now being presented on the NC.
WO
Worzel
Is it fate, but whenever Emily Mathis is on a cover shift, the newsroom backdrop on the screens crashes and freezes/locks up as it has done now!
DO
dosxuk
By any chance Worzel, do you sit in front of your TV hours 16 ½ hours a day, watching the news channel, just so you can post every tiny little niggle with the screens on this site? Do you actually watch the programmes, or just the background with the sound off?
MA
Markymark
Mr Q posted:
Markymark posted:
No, what you'll find is most viewers, those with a reasonable attention span, and normal full, active, and busy lives, are perfectly capable of absorbing information without the need for visual and aural distractions and embellishments.

If that were what the majority of viewers wanted, I suspect somebody would have catered to that audience by presenting TV news in precisely that way. But since they haven't, your claim that most viewers would settle for a grey screen seems to be without substance.


You're mixing up 'want' and 'need'. By the same logic you would be saying that viewers actually WANT the end credits of programmes messed up with ECPs, and voiceovers ? 30 years ago TV news was delivered with just a plain background. I'm certainly not suggesting that we should return to Letraset and cardboard for graphics, but in the last 15-20 years the presentation of news has become far too skewed towards presentational gimmicks. I take it you're familiar with Chris Morris's satirical work in the early 1990s, which has more or less turned out to be a correct prediction ?

Newer posts