But that certainly closes the bulletin well. Its just like watching a drama ending aruptly without knowing the ending.
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.
It IS a very important part of the broadcast, during the signing off the presenter speaks freely and somehow creates a sort of connection between him/herself and the people watching.
A connection? This is the world news, do you need someone there to hold your hand whilst you watch it?
If it is so important then why have it at the bottom of the broadcast? Would you prefer it if the presenter were to sit on a floral sofa, chat about how their day has been so far, sip some tea and then when they feel they and the viewers based across the globe have developed a good connection - you know the sort, as if they are almost friends - then the newsreader will finally begin the bulletin? What an excellent way of conveying the hard hitting news in an utterly professional manner.
I think you're way off the mark. Signing off has been a feature of news bulletins since they began in the 1950s. It is only since the creation of 24-hour news channels that the sign-off has diminished. If BBC World thought it wasn't necessary, they wouldn't have done it for 13 years, would they? The only reason they've got rid of it is commercial, and I agree with cortomaltese in saying that something is now 'missing'. A news bulletin ending without a proper close and sign-off, in my opinion, gives an air of arrogance. After all, it's only courtesy to say goodbye to somebody - you wouldn't just walk away from someone when you're talking to them, would you?
On the other hand, News 24, the ITV News Channel and Sky News all work well without signoffs, as they are proper 24-hour news channels. It just doesn't feel right with BBC World, as it isn't a 24-hour news channel in the general meaning of the phrase - it has other, often non-news related, programmes during every back half-hour.
The only way they could improve it presentationally is to:
a) get rid of those annoying network stings, and replace them with proper coming up sequences and full break stings once again, but still keep 3 breaks per bulletin if that's what they really want.
b) re-instate the news wrap and signoff with closing titles at *.25, but instead of completely closing the bulletin, inform the viewer to stay tuned for a news summary. I fail to see how less than 10 seconds of music can force a viewer to change channels, even if they've been told what's coming up. With the new system, the presenters waste the same amount of time just sitting there staring at the camera, as none of them can hit the weather forecast on time.
I'm not sure I see the link between ITV1's branding requirements and BBC World's. Everybody already knows ITV1 is channel 3 on their TV in the UK, or they have selected it on a digital platform - they can go for subtlety!
But wouldn't it be fair to say that many people are watching BBC World via one of the many distribution methods that carries no channel name display, or in a hotel room where it's just a channel number, or in public place in passing - and therefore it's a good idea to put the name of the channel on a junction to/from an ad break?!
I'm interested in the view that the logo would be considered well-known enough considering it has been in use for a fairly short time. Also I think the box on-screen is fine if you actively look to see what channel you are watching - but there's so much text on screen these days it's just not the same as splashing the name in/out of breaks.
On a different note, I'm surprised nobody has mentioned the shot of the studio with no presenter - just an empty chair - yesterday morning. It cut to an ident - and then about 3" later the presenter was in place.. so I assume either it was a different studio, or headlines were pre-recorded.
I'm not sure I see the link between ITV1's branding requirements and BBC World's.
I didn't imply a link, I drew a comparison which is clear to anyone who actually read what I wrote. In the same way that ITV displays branding devices without explicit mention of the name, BBC WORLD can display the ribbons or the fan+globe device without the actual text of the logo, in order to embed the look into the minds of its audience.
I'm sorry if you don't understand this, but as I say it is a fairly obvious marketing tool, and I have given you other examples to support this fact.
drew posted:
Everybody already knows ITV1 is channel 3 on their TV in the UK, or they have selected it on a digital platform - they can go for subtlety!
But wouldn't it be fair to say that many people are watching BBC World via one of the many distribution methods that carries no channel name display, or in a hotel room where it's just a channel number, or in public place in passing - and therefore it's a good idea to put the name of the channel on a junction to/from an ad break?!
The channel name is on screen at every other time though. It's on a large red box during news bulletins, and it's shown as a translucent DOG during regional programming. News bulletins also start with the likes of "you're watching BBC NEWS from BBC WORLD", and the dynamic junction features the BBC WORLD logo at the top left, and much mention of the channel's name in text promoting the e-newsletter or bbcworld.com.
So with the channel name either on screen or being mentioned for around 50 minutes out of every hour, I fail to understand the implication that someone - even someone only watching in passing - wouldn't know what channel they were watching.
drew posted:
I'm interested in the view that the logo would be considered well-known enough considering it has been in use for a fairly short time.
It's been in use for a year now. The fan+world and ribbons devices are shown on screen up to a dozen times an hour, including opening titles, stings, and backgrounds to story information slides, and that's not including the bumpers between slides on the dynamic junction (which show the ribbons along with the BBC WORLD logo beneath). It would be hard not to recognise the devices as identifiers of BBC WORLD with that kind of exposure.
drew posted:
Also I think the box on-screen is fine if you actively look to see what channel you are watching - but there's so much text on screen these days it's just not the same as splashing the name in/out of breaks.
For a lot of the time, the only graphic on screen is the Tower logo box, or the translucent logo graphic. You'd have to be blind or have the whole bottom left section of the screen obscured not to be able to notice the logo.
The only way they could improve it presentationally is to:
a) get rid of those annoying network stings, and replace them with proper coming up sequences and full break stings once again, but still keep 3 breaks per bulletin if that's what they really want.
b) re-instate the news wrap and signoff with closing titles at *.25, but instead of completely closing the bulletin, inform the viewer to stay tuned for a news summary. I fail to see how less than 10 seconds of music can force a viewer to change channels, even if they've been told what's coming up. With the new system, the presenters waste the same amount of time just sitting there staring at the camera, as none of them can hit the weather forecast on time.
Yes I really feel the last bit really does let the whole thing now, and BBC World now have a fantastic(well okish N24 style) studio, but there is nothing ground breaking with the presentation, they could have had a area with a projector showing analysis, presenter standing up for the headlines next to a projector screen or something, you know what I mean, just something to liven and improve the overall quality of the BBC World bulletin, now the stings have gone, I hate the slides they use on the plasma, the headlines music is undramatic compared to before, and to be honest the BBC World when I first saw it in 2000 was heaps better!
I also think they should bring back the closing titles at 25 past each hour. And you can see that this works quite well every morning on TWT as they have full closing titles at 0525 GMT, then weather forecast and ad-break. And on TWT they even play the full opening titles again at 0530 GMT. So I think there is no reason why they couldn't do this on the other BBC World bulletins.
They also have only one ad-break on TWT in the first half hour which I like every morning when watching as the news isn't interrupted after every second story. But I think this is only because it is simulcasted with News 24.
On a different note, I'm surprised nobody has mentioned the shot of the studio with no presenter - just an empty chair - yesterday morning. It cut to an ident - and then about 3" later the presenter was in place.. so I assume either it was a different studio, or headlines were pre-recorded.
On a different note, I'm surprised nobody has mentioned the shot of the studio with no presenter - just an empty chair - yesterday morning. It cut to an ident - and then about 3" later the presenter was in place.. so I assume either it was a different studio, or headlines were pre-recorded.
Wish I had seen it... who was the presenter?
This wasn't at a weekend - during a joint weekend period - was it? Could be that they cut to the wrong studio - as at least two studios were providing bulletins. It may be they initially cut to the BBC One studio, when the bulletin was actually being provided by News 24? (They make the two studios look quite similar I think)
Saw Mike Embley's bulletin on World. I dont give him enough credit, but he welcomed viewers to the programme and reminded them at the end of the bulletin to stay tune for the headlines if they could - atleast the bulletin ended gracefully.
On a another note, 2 PBS stations have even shown the breakfiller, one which has done that for the past several weeks since streaming began.