Is it just me or do they keep using the same countdown every hour? When BBC WN moved to NBH they had 6 different countdowns, but now they just use 3. Also the scenes in these new countdowns aren't that interesting either, at least compared to the original 6.
There were 4 to begin with. And they are so short it doesn't really matter anyway.
BBCWN's back-up DOG/ticker graphic (which i guess is Red Bee-generated) is having some issues, because there's nothing on the ticker... it looks like a placeholder, just like those BBC National newscasts.
I'm just watching Sally Bundock, Naga Munchetty and a random guy billed as a strategist with a firm called Mint bumbling their way through the paper review (again) and was just wondering what is it that qualifies these City of London financiers to be commenting on international news. It's really quite myopic. This morning's 'expert' is having trouble with words like 'Islamist' in the context of the Egyptian coup and is offering a very simplistic analysis, one that my kids could easily have concocted.
So I turn over to Sky and find a package by Andrew Wilson - dispatched to Cairo - offering a succint and sophisticated analysis of the situation, kind of all you need to know in 4 minutes. And by the way if you want to see a really classy paper review, then tune in to Anna Botting with some proper Fleet Street journalists and editors on her weeknight show. Knocks BBC World News into the proverbial cocked hat.
BBCWN's back-up DOG/ticker graphic (which i guess is Red Bee-generated) is having some issues, because there's nothing on the ticker... it looks like a placeholder, just like those BBC National newscasts.
Not sure what time this cap is from, but issues on NC for about twenty minutes yesterday occured when the lower third graphics froze. It was corrected for the Six.
I'm just watching Sally Bundock, Naga Munchetty and a random guy billed as a strategist with a firm called Mint bumbling their way through the paper review (again) and was just wondering what is it that qualifies these City of London financiers to be commenting on international news. It's really quite myopic. This morning's 'expert' is having trouble with words like 'Islamist' in the context of the Egyptian coup and is offering a very simplistic analysis, one that my kids could easily have concocted.
So I turn over to Sky and find a package by Andrew Wilson - dispatched to Cairo - offering a succint and sophisticated analysis of the situation, kind of all you need to know in 4 minutes. And by the way if you want to see a really classy paper review, then tune in to Anna Botting with some proper Fleet Street journalists and editors on her weeknight show. Knocks BBC World News into the proverbial cocked hat.
What an idiotic post Why don't you compare Jeremy Bowen's report with Eamon Holmes newspaper review with minor celebs at 6.30. Shockingly the paper review on the world Business programme has a business bias from a Business personality.
And by the way if you want to see a really classy
paper review, then tune in to Anna Botting with some proper Fleet Street journalists and editors on her weeknight show
. Knocks BBC World News into the proverbial cocked hat.
As does the BBC NC but I doubt BBC World viewers care too much about the contents of the Daily Mail present company excepted of course.
BBCWN's back-up DOG/ticker graphic (which i guess is Red Bee-generated) is having some issues, because there's nothing on the ticker... it looks like a placeholder, just like those BBC National newscasts.
Not sure what time this cap is from, but issues on NC for about twenty minutes yesterday occured when the lower third graphics froze. It was corrected for the Six.
This was during the first edition of World News Today, simulcast on BBC Four... where the main BBCWN DOG is being overlapped by the secondary DOG (which is used during Sport Today and Weekend BoTH programs).
I'm just watching Sally Bundock, Naga Munchetty and a random guy billed as a strategist with a firm called Mint bumbling their way through the paper review (again) and was just wondering what is it that qualifies these City of London financiers to be commenting on international news. It's really quite myopic. This morning's 'expert' is having trouble with words like 'Islamist' in the context of the Egyptian coup and is offering a very simplistic analysis, one that my kids could easily have concocted.
So I turn over to Sky and find a package by Andrew Wilson - dispatched to Cairo - offering a succint and sophisticated analysis of the situation, kind of all you need to know in 4 minutes. And by the way if you want to see a really classy paper review, then tune in to Anna Botting with some proper Fleet Street journalists and editors on her weeknight show. Knocks BBC World News into the proverbial cocked hat.
What an idiotic post Why don't you compare Jeremy Bowen's report with Eamon Holmes newspaper review with minor celebs at 6.30. Shockingly the paper review on the world Business programme has a business bias from a Business personality.
And by the way if you want to see a really classy
paper review, then tune in to Anna Botting with some proper Fleet Street journalists and editors on her weeknight show
. Knocks BBC World News into the proverbial cocked hat.
As does the BBC NC but I doubt BBC World viewers care too much about the contents of the Daily Mail present company excepted of course.
I think it's indicative of the decline in standards in this forum over the past few years that 'Cando' should call me 'idiotic'. Having reviewed my post again, I can't find anything idiotic about it. It is expressing a view about a particular segment on BBC World News that I found ineffective, and poorly produced and presented. I hazard to guess that Cando did not actually see the segment. What have we come to when people who don't agree with a particular view resort to abuse and then go on to cite an irrelevant, apples and oranges comparison, that of Jeremy Bowen with Eamonn Holmes. By the way, Cando, your furhter reference to the Daily Mail is meaningless in the context in which you used it.
So, Cando, did you see the segment that aired in the UK on the NC at probably 0545 on Thursday morning? I was watching at 0845 in my own time zone on BBC World News.
I'm just watching Sally Bundock, Naga Munchetty and a random guy billed as a strategist with a firm called Mint bumbling their way through the paper review (again) and was just wondering what is it that qualifies these City of London financiers to be commenting on international news. It's really quite myopic. This morning's 'expert' is having trouble with words like 'Islamist' in the context of the Egyptian coup and is offering a very simplistic analysis, one that my kids could easily have concocted.
So I turn over to Sky and find a package by Andrew Wilson - dispatched to Cairo - offering a succint and sophisticated analysis of the situation, kind of all you need to know in 4 minutes. And by the way if you want to see a really classy paper review, then tune in to Anna Botting with some proper Fleet Street journalists and editors on her weeknight show. Knocks BBC World News into the proverbial cocked hat.
What an idiotic post Why don't you compare Jeremy Bowen's report with Eamon Holmes newspaper review with minor celebs at 6.30. Shockingly the paper review on the world Business programme has a business bias from a Business personality.
And by the way if you want to see a really classy
paper review, then tune in to Anna Botting with some proper Fleet Street journalists and editors on her weeknight show
. Knocks BBC World News into the proverbial cocked hat.
As does the BBC NC but I doubt BBC World viewers care too much about the contents of the Daily Mail present company excepted of course.
I think it's indicative of the decline in standards in this forum over the past few years that 'Cando' should call me 'idiotic'. Having reviewed my post again, I can't find anything idiotic about it. It is expressing a view about a particular segment on BBC World News that I found ineffective, and poorly produced and presented. I hazard to guess that Cando did not actually see the segment. What have we come to when people who don't agree with a particular view resort to abuse and then go on to cite an irrelevant, apples and oranges comparison, that of Jeremy Bowen with Eamonn Holmes. By the way, Cando, your furhter reference to the Daily Mail is meaningless in the context in which you used it.
So, Cando, did you see the segment that aired in the UK on the NC at probably 0545 on Thursday morning? I was watching at 0845 in my own time zone on BBC World News.
Wow, that is some attitude on you. Maybe tone it down a bit?
I'm just watching Sally Bundock, Naga Munchetty and a random guy billed as a strategist with a firm called Mint bumbling their way through the paper review (again) and was just wondering what is it that qualifies these City of London financiers to be commenting on international news. It's really quite myopic. This morning's 'expert' is having trouble with words like 'Islamist' in the context of the Egyptian coup and is offering a very simplistic analysis, one that my kids could easily have concocted.
So I turn over to Sky and find a package by Andrew Wilson - dispatched to Cairo - offering a succint and sophisticated analysis of the situation, kind of all you need to know in 4 minutes. And by the way if you want to see a really classy paper review, then tune in to Anna Botting with some proper Fleet Street journalists and editors on her weeknight show. Knocks BBC World News into the proverbial cocked hat.
What an idiotic post Why don't you compare Jeremy Bowen's report with Eamon Holmes newspaper review with minor celebs at 6.30. Shockingly the paper review on the world Business programme has a business bias from a Business personality.
And by the way if you want to see a really classy
paper review, then tune in to Anna Botting with some proper Fleet Street journalists and editors on her weeknight show
. Knocks BBC World News into the proverbial cocked hat.
As does the BBC NC but I doubt BBC World viewers care too much about the contents of the Daily Mail present company excepted of course.
I think it's indicative of the decline in standards in this forum over the past few years that 'Cando' should call me 'idiotic'. Having reviewed my post again, I can't find anything idiotic about it. It is expressing a view about a particular segment on BBC World News that I found ineffective, and poorly produced and presented. I hazard to guess that Cando did not actually see the segment. What have we come to when people who don't agree with a particular view resort to abuse and then go on to cite an irrelevant, apples and oranges comparison, that of Jeremy Bowen with Eamonn Holmes. By the way, Cando, your furhter reference to the Daily Mail is meaningless in the context in which you used it.
So, Cando, did you see the segment that aired in the UK on the NC at probably 0545 on Thursday morning? I was watching at 0845 in my own time zone on BBC World News.
I saw said segment, and I can confirm that you clearly didn't understand that a business-heavy hour, with 15 minutes of business news, has a newspaper review with a focus on business with a business presenter and a commentator from the world of business. I wouldn't expect expert business analysis from Yasmin Alibhai-Brown, but I don't doubt she will still provide some analysis if there is a story; I wouldn't expect expert North African politics analysis from a business leader, but I don't think it should be ignored in a business-led hour.
Cando pointed out rather well that you were comparing apples with oranges. The
Press Preview
on Sky should be compared with the BBC News Channel's
The Papers
.
I believe the Daily Mail comment is down to the focus that Sky places on certain papers or stories.
