"BBC WORLD"

[quote="stephen"]

Indeed. That's the reason it was changed. The channel wants to create a much more integrated feel between it's different elements. That's why the newsreader now introduces the weather and the longer programmes.

[quote="stephen"]

No. At least not for me. I used to watch the whole bulletin and the signing off was a great moment, now I switch off or to another programme before seeing the third reminder of the main news and those Maldives Islands presenting the world weather.

The Maldives tourism bumper is not completely new, there have been times in the past when that has been shown on a regional basis as sponsorship of the news.

Put it this way if you switch off or over before the final reminder of the news to watch something else, what difference will a little 'That's it from the newsroom for now, goodbye' make? Surely the final 5 seconds of the bulletin doesn't make or break the whol broadcast.

But that certainly closes the bulletin well. Its just like watching a drama ending aruptly without knowing the ending.

[quote="stephen"]

Although I don't like the signing off has gone, I have to say the purpose works to me. I used to switch after the signing off more often than today and keep watching programmes like HARDtalk, Reporters, etc. regularly.

Though, the longer stings just HAVE to come back as they give World News a much more authoritive appearance.

Buts its not as if the ending is what you have been watching the news for, to find out who solved the crime or if they fall in love with eachother! This is the news for gods sake, how the presenter says goodbye is one of the least important parts of the broadcast.

I think World should play some sort of sting before they show the weather sting. Also, they should play a vamp while the presenter is recapping the headlines before the weather like they do on the N24 overnight simulcasts.

But you only think that because you imagine it would be nice from a presentation point of view. BBC WORLD does not exist as a showcase for presentation; it is a commercial channel, and the time has come for it to bring in some more cash. The changes made to the structure of the channel may not be popular from a presentation point of view, but these decision make sense commercially, in terms of trying to keep the channel 'rolling' and therefore keep viewers watching between programming.

And before some tedious snot tries to tell me "but this is a forum to discuss TV presentation", I can assure you that I'm well aware of that, but my point is that it gets extremely tiresome reading through "but there should be closing titles" and "they really need to bring back longer stings" over and over again. Your points have been made, but the decisions were made for a commercial reason, not just to spite TV presentation enthusiasts, so can we now try to get over it and move on to something else?

Splendid to see the one and only Alistair Yates Esq on BBC World tonight . Bring him back for more, please.

BBC LDN - That is actually quite an arrogant stance since, yes, the TV Home Forum is headlined as "Discussing television presentation". It seems especially hypocritical to chastise someone for doing just that when you were the member who, a while back, posted a message that began:

"I've often wondered - since I was much younger in fact - why level crossing barriers open up rather than sideways" ... and continued for quite a while without any reference to television and only an indirect reference to news.

So, secure that this *is* a presentation forum and certain that I'm not a "tedious snot" here is my response to your comments...

Presentation style and channel identifaction are obviously important considerations for any commercial broadcaster. Yet some BBC World transitions between breaks and programming now don't even state the channel name... just a graphic with no text. Why is that? We all know how essential is is that viewers are told at every opportunity what they are watching.

Today I saw a commercial end - followed by a break bumper with no visual identification of channel name - followed by a channel ident with no visual indication of channel name - following by presenter starting a story directly (without any "This is BBC News" intro). OK - only someone who thinks about presentation is going to come out and state that... but of course it's a bad policy to leave a junction totally unbranded - *especially* on a commercial channel!

Even worse - quite frequently the end of a report now goes directly to a commercial break without any channel interstitial which means no visible signal that we have moved from programming to a commercial break. Plenty of normal viewers would notice that the programme has stopped without warning and may well change channels. After all the whole point of "do stay with us" and throwing forward to the item which follows the break were always techniques they used to maintain viewers through breaks. If the commercials are more important then ever, it is not a good time to stop doing that!!

Oh God, I'm contributing to one of the long threads. God help me.

The report-to-break thing is pretty common on US news programmes.

And I think LDN's point was valid - it seems you've discussed it to great length, and he's right to say it was most likely taken for a commercial reason. And that reason? To fit more ad time in.

I don't think going back on his posts and quoting something random about level crossings is entirely helpful.

Well Bruce - I think we're all entitled to have our say and if a subject is repeated at length by different people it must only mean that a lot of people feel the same way! I also fail to see the validity of someone telling people to stop talking about a presentation issue on a presentation forum!

I strongly refute the apparent suggestion that decisions made for a commercial reason mean a channel should automatically abandon any intention of maintaining a high standard of presentation. Every station image is created to be a "showcase for presentation" - the new set too.. now that must have cost a bit and you could argue it doesn't "bring in money" yet they considered it worth doing.

I guess most of the World management don't get to see the channel on a regular basis at home and are simply unaware of how the programmes now seem sloppy and lacking in clear identification since the structure changed when watched in your own living room.

I do understand Marcus's explanation about not signing-off, but it does seem odd to see a presenter coming back minutes later just to recap headlines (even Alistair McGowan parodied Huw Edwards doing that on BBC1!). Plus - in this case, the half-past headlines recap sequence does seem very weak compared with the top of hour.

Top of hour now with a smarter introduction, slick timing points and straight in to the top story after the ident. Half-past starts with an ident that doesn't even say BBC World, headlines read dry and sometimes just a fade to another commercial break at the end.. of course it stands out. Normal people *do* notice how well done the top of hour is, I can promise you that!