MC
I’m
Not even sure why Cameron is talking haha
Boulton actually on-point today!
Top bantz from Adam Boulton. pic.twitter.com/l5ISTDS9Os
— Ben (@Jamin2g) December 13, 2019
I’m
Not even sure why Cameron is talking haha
TR
My thoughts for the next one, should we still have a BBC then:
- I like the VR set extension but it needs redoing properly, it looked so cheap
- the whole thing was very dark and gloomy - brighten up the newsroom (it's probably due a lick of paint anyway?)
- drop some of the gimmicks - the map outside would be the first thing I'd chop. we don't need the same results presented from four different locations. Maybe make the map part of the green screen section - and definitely get those graphics updated a bit because they look so budget!
- I like the VR set extension but it needs redoing properly, it looked so cheap
- the whole thing was very dark and gloomy - brighten up the newsroom (it's probably due a lick of paint anyway?)
- drop some of the gimmicks - the map outside would be the first thing I'd chop. we don't need the same results presented from four different locations. Maybe make the map part of the green screen section - and definitely get those graphics updated a bit because they look so budget!
AN
Sophie Raworth's bit was near pointless, all what seemed to be taken from it, was that there used to be a load of red here, and now there isn't. It was a gimmick that was basically irrelevant.
Its also debatable how much we get from Vine's stuff these days, the whole 'flag stones to number 10' business where there is often so much info, you can barely see it.
Andrew
Founding member
Huw Edwards was fine presenting and Dimbleby was right to be pensioned off. To me it felt the BBC didn't know what exactly it was doing and just threw together a confused mess. I said it last night but there has been for about four elections now with a ridiculous duplication of resources with -last night - Vine, Chakrabati and Rayworth having virtually pointless bit part roles but all doing basically the same thing. Probably each of them had about 15-20 mins of contribution over the course of the entire night.
Sophie Raworth's bit was near pointless, all what seemed to be taken from it, was that there used to be a load of red here, and now there isn't. It was a gimmick that was basically irrelevant.
Its also debatable how much we get from Vine's stuff these days, the whole 'flag stones to number 10' business where there is often so much info, you can barely see it.
MR
This was my first thought when I looked at the BBC. It felt like it was being presented in a cave with dim lighting.
Sky felt and looked light and breezy, with a ton of space, scale and depth.
Also agree with comments on the duplication of content. Having three people present the same data in slightly different ways is a waste of talent. The VR graphics didn't provide clarity with the information they were presenting.
My thoughts for the next one, should we still have a BBC then:
- the whole thing was very dark and gloomy - brighten up the newsroom (it's probably due a lick of paint anyway?)
- the whole thing was very dark and gloomy - brighten up the newsroom (it's probably due a lick of paint anyway?)
This was my first thought when I looked at the BBC. It felt like it was being presented in a cave with dim lighting.
Sky felt and looked light and breezy, with a ton of space, scale and depth.
Also agree with comments on the duplication of content. Having three people present the same data in slightly different ways is a waste of talent. The VR graphics didn't provide clarity with the information they were presenting.
NE
Sophie Raworth's bit was near pointless, all what seemed to be taken from it, was that there used to be a load of red here, and now there isn't. It was a gimmick that was basically irrelevant.
Its also debatable how much we get from Vine's stuff these days, the whole 'flag stones to number 10' business where there is often so much info, you can barely see it.
Sophie clearly agreed to it, but I agree with you - Utterly pointless, especially for the BBC's #3 star news presenter. Anyone could have done that role, not one of it's lead presenters.
Huw Edwards was fine presenting and Dimbleby was right to be pensioned off. To me it felt the BBC didn't know what exactly it was doing and just threw together a confused mess. I said it last night but there has been for about four elections now with a ridiculous duplication of resources with -last night - Vine, Chakrabati and Rayworth having virtually pointless bit part roles but all doing basically the same thing. Probably each of them had about 15-20 mins of contribution over the course of the entire night.
Sophie Raworth's bit was near pointless, all what seemed to be taken from it, was that there used to be a load of red here, and now there isn't. It was a gimmick that was basically irrelevant.
Its also debatable how much we get from Vine's stuff these days, the whole 'flag stones to number 10' business where there is often so much info, you can barely see it.
Sophie clearly agreed to it, but I agree with you - Utterly pointless, especially for the BBC's #3 star news presenter. Anyone could have done that role, not one of it's lead presenters.
MA
Sophie Raworth's bit was near pointless, all what seemed to be taken from it, was that there used to be a load of red here, and now there isn't. It was a gimmick that was basically irrelevant.
Its also debatable how much we get from Vine's stuff these days, the whole 'flag stones to number 10' business where there is often so much info, you can barely see it.
You certainly didn't need both of the gimmicks last night. Difficult to tell which one was the cheaper!?
Huw Edwards was fine presenting and Dimbleby was right to be pensioned off. To me it felt the BBC didn't know what exactly it was doing and just threw together a confused mess. I said it last night but there has been for about four elections now with a ridiculous duplication of resources with -last night - Vine, Chakrabati and Rayworth having virtually pointless bit part roles but all doing basically the same thing. Probably each of them had about 15-20 mins of contribution over the course of the entire night.
Sophie Raworth's bit was near pointless, all what seemed to be taken from it, was that there used to be a load of red here, and now there isn't. It was a gimmick that was basically irrelevant.
Its also debatable how much we get from Vine's stuff these days, the whole 'flag stones to number 10' business where there is often so much info, you can barely see it.
You certainly didn't need both of the gimmicks last night. Difficult to tell which one was the cheaper!?
BR
Surprised Channel 4 managed 240k. I watched a bit and it wasn't funny and it wasn't particularly informative either so switched back between mainly BBC and ITV.
Didn't C4 beat ITV last time, though with a much better show.
They need to decide if it is a C4 broadcast or a C4 News broadcast.
It seems as through no matter how much we say the BBC's coverage was rubbish, the ratings seems to say otherwise.
#GE2019 TV ratings are in:
— Jake Kanter (@Jake_Kanter) December 13, 2019
BBC: 4.3m
ITV: 1.4m
Channel 4: 240k
Sky News: 45,700
Surprised Channel 4 managed 240k. I watched a bit and it wasn't funny and it wasn't particularly informative either so switched back between mainly BBC and ITV.
Didn't C4 beat ITV last time, though with a much better show.
They need to decide if it is a C4 broadcast or a C4 News broadcast.