BBC World [soon to be BBC World News]

Every news program closes properly that I can think of apart from BBC World... I think its crap what they do now, yes they want viewers to stick around but all I was saying is that the peice of music they used isn't suited for the purpose of what the sting is there for.

Well, it doesn't look very good, but still better than nothing.

This notion of a closing sequence to World News encouraging people to switch off is ridiculous and frankly, I've never bought it. archiveTV, explain to me how having a closing sequence on WBR, Asia Today, Sport Today, Reporters, This Week and many more is deemed acceptable but after the news it is not.

I used to watch BBC World every day but I hardly tune in at all now. It feels so disjointed and uncomfortable to watch that I'd rather get my news elsewhere. Presentationally, it used to be an outstanding channel - easily the best BBC channel there was. Now, it is rock bottom (and don't trot out your usual excuse of ratings - I'm talking about presentation).

I'm sorry but BBC World's prime function is to get as many people watching it as possible. It's how it survives, The present management is doing that magnificently well. Why would they change anything to please a few presentation obsessives?

I'm sorry you don't like it Robert, but you are not a typical viewer. Latest figures for Europe show CNN and sky are losing viewers while BBC World are gaining them.

I can see them up at Woodlands now.

"Look guys we are up across the whole of Europe with incredibly high appreciation figures, but the bad news is we have lost ISrobert. "

"Christ, ditch everything, bring back the flags, turn the clock back to 1999"

So is it safe to assume that the current management are only bothered about quantity of viewers rather than quality? The current BBC World looks pathetic compared to its former self. Whilst presentation fans many not be the typical viewer (incidentally, if you're calling the presentation fans here 'obsessives', why exactly are you a member? ) the BBC and broadcasters in general must have some reason to invest in presentation or why else would channels be getting rebrands every five minutes? Presentation is obviously important to BBC World's management - the channel has had 4 rebrands in just 7 years, after all. There must be some point to it.

By the way, you didn't answer my question about WBR/Asia Today etc. Why are they allowed to have closing sequences but the news is not? What's the difference?

I hate their closings, they are so stupid with presenters making those strange pauses and then continuing. Whoever came up with that should be sacked. It always feels like the presenter is lost and doesn't know what to say, very amateurish.
They used to have great closings, butr now it's ridiculous.

What if people watch for the news and don't actually want to watch the next programme? Do they seriously think that cutting the close is going to make people watch? The BBC has a reputation for its news programmes so why change a formula that works? I can't help but feel the news is being downgraded. Look at the national news where entertainment is increasingly encroaching upon important stories and I don't think I need to say anything about the snow and sleigh on the Christmas broadcasts. Give the news its dignity back before we all switch off!

Except the viewers aren't switching off. BBC News bulletins on BBC One are some of the highest rating shows, other than soaps, in primetime... News 24 is hammering Sky, and World is building audience in Europe.

Being a public service shouldn't the BBC be worried about its content more than its ratings? -I'm referring to BBCOne and N24, BBCWorld is a different thing

But ratings are a good measure of content. If more people are tuning in to the BBC's content rather than other broadcasters, surely that indicates that they are either happy with it, or prefer it to the other options.

The BBC has a duty to be relevant and watched by every single person who funds it by paying their licence fee. To do otherwise is to consider one person more or less important than another.

Public service is a very difficult concept to define (and often people define it quite narrowly) - and reaching as wide an audience as possible can be deemed just as much a public service as doing difficult and in-depth coverage that will only appeal to a small audience. The key to public service is to balance the two - doing both not neither.

People are also confusing content with presentation. The journalistic content of BBC News (on any platform) is second to none. BBC World's content is just as excellent as any other BBC platform. However, the presentation of the channel has declined over recent years which started with the streaming idea. That was when they ditched closing sequences, proper breaks etc. That's where I, and seemingly others, feel BBC World is not as good as it was. It can feel uncomfortable to watch at times (i.e. with all the pausing and sharp cuts to stings brought about by the streaming). archiveTV made out as though we presentation fans are 'obsessives' who don't matter to BBC management. But, as noggin said, the BBC must appeal to all - and that includes us. As I said yesterday, obviously presentation is important to the BBC otherwise it wouldn't invest thousands of pounds in idents, music, sets and graphics every few years. In BBC World's case, it is clearly inferior in terms of presentation to how it was a few years ago. I suspect the improved ratings can be explained through journalistic content and improved reach - presentation seems to have been lost along the way somewhere. It's a shame as BBC World was a very watchable channel before this streaming lark came along. It now lacks structure (intrestingly, News 24 - which World is obviously trying to copy by getting rid of closing sequences - flows well and has structure at the same time).