CH
I can’t find the post you’re referring to at the beginning but I am interested in examples where the media has focused too much on personalities and entertaining coverage and not analysis? I assume we’re talking about TV media? I think the balance is broadly right for this age - you can’t continue having news coverage that wouldn’t look out of place in the 1980s, in the same way the title sequence is no longer flying fish fingers.
ITN have a problem with election studios, and the problem is space. They simply do not have the size of studios the BBC has, and so no doubt Studio 1 at ITN will be converted into their green screen election studio like before.
I thought ITV while very minimalist in their presentation did very well (from what I remember) on election night. They had all the analysts needed and results called before the rest.
It’s been a conscious decision in the last few elections to be minimalist. The gimmicks are for the past - it is odd really that it’s the BBC have now gone that way, with the giant screens and massive map outside BH.
And you’re right - ITV called the referendum result way before the other broadcasters and in 2017, the election prediction proved accurate and Osborne-Balls were a great combination of pundits.
AIUI now that ITN don't own their building in Grays Inn Road use of the Atrium is much more tricky (and requires a lot of notice, possibly too much notice to be practical).
Not really an issue - the atrium was used in 2017 for the snap election, and whilst we haven’t got a date, there’s still preparations going on now.
To pick up on the point made about the media failing to get to the root of this problem, I agree entirely and it is partly what led us to the outcome of the 2016 referendum. The modern media are far too concerned with creating entertaining news coverage whereby personalities are central to their coverage. They seem to think that a string of politicians and Westminster village types being paraded in front of the camera is enough.
I would argue that they really should be providing a great deal more contextual and analytical information. Although such reporting would probably be quite dull, it is vital to create an informed public. And in turn, an informed public leads to more responsible voting. Although the politicians are hugely to blame for their conduct over the past decade or so, probably from the expenses scandal onward, I don't think the media is entirely blameless in creating an uninformed and polarised populace.
I would argue that they really should be providing a great deal more contextual and analytical information. Although such reporting would probably be quite dull, it is vital to create an informed public. And in turn, an informed public leads to more responsible voting. Although the politicians are hugely to blame for their conduct over the past decade or so, probably from the expenses scandal onward, I don't think the media is entirely blameless in creating an uninformed and polarised populace.
I can’t find the post you’re referring to at the beginning but I am interested in examples where the media has focused too much on personalities and entertaining coverage and not analysis? I assume we’re talking about TV media? I think the balance is broadly right for this age - you can’t continue having news coverage that wouldn’t look out of place in the 1980s, in the same way the title sequence is no longer flying fish fingers.
I wonder if ITV will use the standard studio with Tom Bradby or similar at the centre of "election central"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=URqL_5KzrJQ
7.22 onwards
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=URqL_5KzrJQ
7.22 onwards
ITN have a problem with election studios, and the problem is space. They simply do not have the size of studios the BBC has, and so no doubt Studio 1 at ITN will be converted into their green screen election studio like before.
I thought ITV while very minimalist in their presentation did very well (from what I remember) on election night. They had all the analysts needed and results called before the rest.
It’s been a conscious decision in the last few elections to be minimalist. The gimmicks are for the past - it is odd really that it’s the BBC have now gone that way, with the giant screens and massive map outside BH.
And you’re right - ITV called the referendum result way before the other broadcasters and in 2017, the election prediction proved accurate and Osborne-Balls were a great combination of pundits.
They should go back into the atrium like they did in 1997 and 2001.
AIUI now that ITN don't own their building in Grays Inn Road use of the Atrium is much more tricky (and requires a lot of notice, possibly too much notice to be practical).
Not really an issue - the atrium was used in 2017 for the snap election, and whilst we haven’t got a date, there’s still preparations going on now.
Last edited by chris on 7 September 2019 10:13am
SP
Does the election really need a huge studio these days? In the past they used TC 1 because they needed to accommodate temporary office space for those dealing with getting results in and analysed, which is no longer so manual a process and no longer has to occur in the same place.
If a big studio wasn't available, it could be quite possible to distribute things, main presentation at Millbank, VR in Studio A and even the big screen stuff using the balcony at BH used for Outside Source.
When recent Local and European Election coverage came from a studio in New Broadcasting House, and didn't use Elstree Studio D for presentation, the Elstree Election Hub was still used to co-ordinate and route outside sources.
Does the election really need a huge studio these days? In the past they used TC 1 because they needed to accommodate temporary office space for those dealing with getting results in and analysed, which is no longer so manual a process and no longer has to occur in the same place.
If a big studio wasn't available, it could be quite possible to distribute things, main presentation at Millbank, VR in Studio A and even the big screen stuff using the balcony at BH used for Outside Source.
JC
Does the election really need a huge studio these days?
Not for the 3rd General Election in as many years, no. When they happen once every 5 years or so you can understand the pomp. When it becomes an annual affair the theatrics just aren't needed.
When recent Local and European Election coverage came from a studio in New Broadcasting House, and didn't use Elstree Studio D for presentation, the Elstree Election Hub was still used to co-ordinate and route outside sources.
Does the election really need a huge studio these days?
Not for the 3rd General Election in as many years, no. When they happen once every 5 years or so you can understand the pomp. When it becomes an annual affair the theatrics just aren't needed.
JW
BBC World News Studio B (also home to Panorama and VD) is ample. Aircraft hangars are no longer necessary.
BA
The BBC declared at 4:39am; ITV declared at 4:35am - four minutes before the BBC. Hardly "way before".
And you’re right - ITV called the referendum result way before the other broadcasters and in 2017, the election prediction proved accurate and Osborne-Balls were a great combination of pundits.
The BBC declared at 4:39am; ITV declared at 4:35am - four minutes before the BBC. Hardly "way before".
NG
Does the election really need a huge studio these days?
Not for the 3rd General Election in as many years, no. When they happen once every 5 years or so you can understand the pomp. When it becomes an annual affair the theatrics just aren't needed.
I don't think the main interview area needs to be huge - but you probably need a reasonable amount of space to accommodate a secondary 'drill down' analysis position (Reeta's touch screen) and a big picture presentation area (Jeremy Vine's VR) - though you could compromise and use three, separate, smaller spaces I guess (Jeremy's VR space can be relatively compact).
Plus you need a reasonable amount of available desk and office space (with decent talkback and A/V + IT connectivity to house all the people in the back of shot in the Election studio who are actually working. One of the benefits of the big studio is that it is also a relatively big office...)
noggin
Founding member
When recent Local and European Election coverage came from a studio in New Broadcasting House, and didn't use Elstree Studio D for presentation, the Elstree Election Hub was still used to co-ordinate and route outside sources.
Does the election really need a huge studio these days?
Not for the 3rd General Election in as many years, no. When they happen once every 5 years or so you can understand the pomp. When it becomes an annual affair the theatrics just aren't needed.
I don't think the main interview area needs to be huge - but you probably need a reasonable amount of space to accommodate a secondary 'drill down' analysis position (Reeta's touch screen) and a big picture presentation area (Jeremy Vine's VR) - though you could compromise and use three, separate, smaller spaces I guess (Jeremy's VR space can be relatively compact).
Plus you need a reasonable amount of available desk and office space (with decent talkback and A/V + IT connectivity to house all the people in the back of shot in the Election studio who are actually working. One of the benefits of the big studio is that it is also a relatively big office...)
BR
Does the election really need a huge studio these days?
A gazebo on college green would probably do the job.
When recent Local and European Election coverage came from a studio in New Broadcasting House, and didn't use Elstree Studio D for presentation, the Elstree Election Hub was still used to co-ordinate and route outside sources.
Does the election really need a huge studio these days?
A gazebo on college green would probably do the job.
PE
peterrocket
Founding member
Given the fact that the EU elections probably weren’t budgeted for, as we were to leave by March, i’d say the same is likely for any upcoming GE.
I don’t think when budgets were drawn up for 19/20 they were expecting two elections to crop up, so I wouldn’t be surprised if they were in NBH with a set up similar to the Euros.
Studio time isn’t free and lighting, technology and staff aren’t cheap.
I don’t think when budgets were drawn up for 19/20 they were expecting two elections to crop up, so I wouldn’t be surprised if they were in NBH with a set up similar to the Euros.
Studio time isn’t free and lighting, technology and staff aren’t cheap.
NL
I can’t find the post you’re referring to at the beginning but I am interested in examples where the media has focused too much on personalities and entertaining coverage and not analysis? I assume we’re talking about TV media? I think the balance is broadly right for this age - you can’t continue having news coverage that wouldn’t look out of place in the 1980s, in the same way the title sequence is no longer flying fish fingers.
I thought ITV while very minimalist in their presentation did very well (from what I remember) on election night. They had all the analysts needed and results called before the rest.
It’s been a conscious decision in the last few elections to be minimalist. The gimmicks are for the past - it is odd really that it’s the BBC have now gone that way, with the giant screens and massive map outside BH.
And you’re right - ITV called the referendum result way before the other broadcasters and in 2017, the election prediction proved accurate and Osborne-Balls were a great combination of pundits.
AIUI now that ITN don't own their building in Grays Inn Road use of the Atrium is much more tricky (and requires a lot of notice, possibly too much notice to be practical).
Not really an issue - the atrium was used in 2017 for the snap election, and whilst we haven’t got a date, there’s still preparations going on now.
There's an very interesting article from the Guardian which brings the constitution into focus (yep I know its off topic but it covers the areas that I believe TV should cover)
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/sep/06/boris-johnson-britain-constitution-reform
To pick up on the point made about the media failing to get to the root of this problem, I agree entirely and it is partly what led us to the outcome of the 2016 referendum. The modern media are far too concerned with creating entertaining news coverage whereby personalities are central to their coverage. They seem to think that a string of politicians and Westminster village types being paraded in front of the camera is enough.
I would argue that they really should be providing a great deal more contextual and analytical information. Although such reporting would probably be quite dull, it is vital to create an informed public. And in turn, an informed public leads to more responsible voting. Although the politicians are hugely to blame for their conduct over the past decade or so, probably from the expenses scandal onward, I don't think the media is entirely blameless in creating an uninformed and polarised populace.
I would argue that they really should be providing a great deal more contextual and analytical information. Although such reporting would probably be quite dull, it is vital to create an informed public. And in turn, an informed public leads to more responsible voting. Although the politicians are hugely to blame for their conduct over the past decade or so, probably from the expenses scandal onward, I don't think the media is entirely blameless in creating an uninformed and polarised populace.
I can’t find the post you’re referring to at the beginning but I am interested in examples where the media has focused too much on personalities and entertaining coverage and not analysis? I assume we’re talking about TV media? I think the balance is broadly right for this age - you can’t continue having news coverage that wouldn’t look out of place in the 1980s, in the same way the title sequence is no longer flying fish fingers.
ITN have a problem with election studios, and the problem is space. They simply do not have the size of studios the BBC has, and so no doubt Studio 1 at ITN will be converted into their green screen election studio like before.
I thought ITV while very minimalist in their presentation did very well (from what I remember) on election night. They had all the analysts needed and results called before the rest.
It’s been a conscious decision in the last few elections to be minimalist. The gimmicks are for the past - it is odd really that it’s the BBC have now gone that way, with the giant screens and massive map outside BH.
And you’re right - ITV called the referendum result way before the other broadcasters and in 2017, the election prediction proved accurate and Osborne-Balls were a great combination of pundits.
They should go back into the atrium like they did in 1997 and 2001.
AIUI now that ITN don't own their building in Grays Inn Road use of the Atrium is much more tricky (and requires a lot of notice, possibly too much notice to be practical).
Not really an issue - the atrium was used in 2017 for the snap election, and whilst we haven’t got a date, there’s still preparations going on now.
There's an very interesting article from the Guardian which brings the constitution into focus (yep I know its off topic but it covers the areas that I believe TV should cover)
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/sep/06/boris-johnson-britain-constitution-reform
HC
A gazebo on college green would probably do the job.
As long as it is totally soundproofed to stop the idiot protestors shouting to leave /remain ect ect..
A gazebo on college green would probably do the job.
As long as it is totally soundproofed to stop the idiot protestors shouting to leave /remain ect ect..