JF
Probably a better news day...
josh205 posted:
Anyone else think tonights 5pm bulletin had more stories and better analysis than last nights? I think it flowed a lot better.
Probably a better news day...
AN
Does anyone think the umpteen mentions of 'blogs on our website' sounds stupid too. It's trying far too hard to be 21st century.
Maybe they should say 'Coming up lots of features that are not really news, you can read tonight's main news in my blog on the website, we are the only broadcaster that does this'
Andrew
Founding member
dragonhhjh posted:
Is it just me who thinks it sounds very stupid when they say "now on five news time for your news, and we're the only news broadcaster that does this..."?
Does anyone think the umpteen mentions of 'blogs on our website' sounds stupid too. It's trying far too hard to be 21st century.
Maybe they should say 'Coming up lots of features that are not really news, you can read tonight's main news in my blog on the website, we are the only broadcaster that does this'
SN
Yup, especially when the BBC have an entire show on N24 called "Your News" which regularly features on the 6.
But it's not exactly the same is it? Five's is by the people (cue shakey video camera zooms and pans) for the people, the BBC's is a bit of merging web content, news and opinions.
Bail posted:
dragonhhjh posted:
"and we're the only news broadcaster that does this..."?
Yup, especially when the BBC have an entire show on N24 called "Your News" which regularly features on the 6.
But it's not exactly the same is it? Five's is by the people (cue shakey video camera zooms and pans) for the people, the BBC's is a bit of merging web content, news and opinions.
ST
I have to agree with Mizz B, as I feel for Kate Gerbeau. She is one of the few decent UK journalists to present a news programme...what a waste of talent. The best thing for her would be to move to a more credible newsroom...or for some 'news' and not 'pantomine' boss to
recruit her.
The new look 'five news' is anything but an improvement.
recruit her.
The new look 'five news' is anything but an improvement.
BR
Does anyone think the umpteen mentions of 'blogs on our website' sounds stupid too. It's trying far too hard to be 21st century.
They may have the blogs on the website, but they certainly don't have the news.
Surely if Five wanted to base the site around the programme rather than news itself they could at least include some links to the Sky News site for the top stories.
Andrew posted:
dragonhhjh posted:
Is it just me who thinks it sounds very stupid when they say "now on five news time for your news, and we're the only news broadcaster that does this..."?
Does anyone think the umpteen mentions of 'blogs on our website' sounds stupid too. It's trying far too hard to be 21st century.
They may have the blogs on the website, but they certainly don't have the news.
Surely if Five wanted to base the site around the programme rather than news itself they could at least include some links to the Sky News site for the top stories.
CW
Charlie Wells
Moderator
When Five said they were getting rid of gimmicks (& 'noddy shots' etc.) they forgot to tell us that they were also getting rid of 'proper' news.
I can understand why the Five 'News' website is http://www.fivetvonline.tv/ rather than http://www.five.tv/news (though the latter does redirect), as looking on the site it appears to consist mostly of 'your news'. They've not even opted for a lazy option of having a feed from Sky News on the site.
I can understand why the Five 'News' website is http://www.fivetvonline.tv/ rather than http://www.five.tv/news (though the latter does redirect), as looking on the site it appears to consist mostly of 'your news'. They've not even opted for a lazy option of having a feed from Sky News on the site.
NG
I've heard of all of those - and chief writers etc. - and worked on shows where the presenter(s) DOES write, or rewrite, every word they read on-air. Some do, some don't...
Chief writers, chief subs etc. have a very important role - fact checking and grammar checking, and on very busy programmes writing decent scripts. However the best presenters I've worked with re-write so it sounds natural for them to read - using their own "voice".
I am a producer - and write scripts for presenters for a living. You're right - some do tweak and re-write scripts. But an awful lot of them simply read whatever you stick on prompt.
Yep - and on the continuous channels many presenters don't have much time to pre-read the cues before they read them on-air - though the better presenters, even on the rolling services, do tweak (and often correct) as they go.
Equally there are presenters you hope WON'T try to tweak scripts - as they will only make them worse, create legal issues, or just get the story wrong...
One thing that some of the best presenters I've worked with do is read their scripts out loud as they write - and always write in a manner that they would speak in naturally. Often things sound fine in your head - but when you read them out loud you realise they are difficult to say, ambiguous, pompous or just don't sound natural.
noggin
Founding member
ragoflex posted:
noggin posted:
I've heard of all of those - and chief writers etc. - and worked on shows where the presenter(s) DOES write, or rewrite, every word they read on-air. Some do, some don't...
Chief writers, chief subs etc. have a very important role - fact checking and grammar checking, and on very busy programmes writing decent scripts. However the best presenters I've worked with re-write so it sounds natural for them to read - using their own "voice".
I am a producer - and write scripts for presenters for a living. You're right - some do tweak and re-write scripts. But an awful lot of them simply read whatever you stick on prompt.
Yep - and on the continuous channels many presenters don't have much time to pre-read the cues before they read them on-air - though the better presenters, even on the rolling services, do tweak (and often correct) as they go.
Equally there are presenters you hope WON'T try to tweak scripts - as they will only make them worse, create legal issues, or just get the story wrong...
One thing that some of the best presenters I've worked with do is read their scripts out loud as they write - and always write in a manner that they would speak in naturally. Often things sound fine in your head - but when you read them out loud you realise they are difficult to say, ambiguous, pompous or just don't sound natural.