Not sure who the reporter was doing the evening news live from Warwickshire tonight. But there was a problem with the final VT so quickly signed off for the end of the programme - but committed the
mortal sin
of saying:
"goodbye from the Weekend Team at ITN"
I thought they were never supposed to mention ITN on ITV News!
I picked up on that, too. I must say it was rather nice hearing ITN mentioned again. As has been discussed recently with NAT returning, the ITN brand is far more authoritative than ITV News.
By the way, was there really any need for Steve Scott to be at the scene of the warehouse fire which happened
two
days ago? The delay in itself is bad enough, but what made it worse was that it was pitch dark and you couldn't see anything. The only thing Steve did was interview the director of the company concerned, which he could quite easily have done from the studio. On top of all that, they had to pay for Lucy Meacock to fill in for Steve in the studio. So, a lot of effort and expenditure with little gained?
By the way, was there really any need for Steve Scott to be at the scene of the warehouse fire which happened
two
days ago? The delay in itself is bad enough, but what made it worse was that it was pitch dark and you couldn't see anything. The only thing Steve did was interview the director of the company concerned, which he could quite easily have done from the studio. On top of all that, they had to pay for Lucy Meacock to fill in for Steve in the studio. So, a lot of effort and expenditure with little gained?
There was probably very little point in him doing a live co-presentational role from the scene of the fire. There was little or no chance of any developing news, and that poor spokesman from the company has been dragged out for comment hour after hour by BBC and Sky.
I suspect Lucy was already booked for the shift anyway from the studio, as she seems to be appearing regularly in that slot now.
I do question the pointless live reports from locations. It's not necessary to have a political correspondent stood in Downing Street at 10pm on a Sunday night (no one else is there), or a report about the BBC to come from the car park outside. They don't serve any purpose or enhance the validity of the report.
By the way, was there really any need for Steve Scott to be at the scene of the warehouse fire which happened
two
days ago? The delay in itself is bad enough, but what made it worse was that it was pitch dark and you couldn't see anything. The only thing Steve did was interview the director of the company concerned, which he could quite easily have done from the studio. On top of all that, they had to pay for Lucy Meacock to fill in for Steve in the studio. So, a lot of effort and expenditure with little gained?
There was probably very little point in him doing a live co-presentational role from the scene of the fire. There was little or no chance of any developing news, and that poor spokesman from the company has been dragged out for comment hour after hour by BBC and Sky.
I suspect Lucy was already booked for the shift anyway from the studio, as she seems to be appearing regularly in that slot now.
I do question the pointless live reports from locations. It's not necessary to have a political correspondent stood in Downing Street at 10pm on a Sunday night (no one else is there), or a report about the BBC to come from the car park outside. They don't serve any purpose or enhance the validity of the report.
That is a good point, why do they do the live reports like this? You can understand reports from places where there is a story happening, but when there's nothing there it does seem a bit pointless, but saying that, what do they do, have the reporter in the studio or do they just air the report from that reporter instead of crossing over to them aswell?
By the way, was there really any need for Steve Scott to be at the scene of the warehouse fire which happened
two
days ago? The delay in itself is bad enough, but what made it worse was that it was pitch dark and you couldn't see anything. The only thing Steve did was interview the director of the company concerned, which he could quite easily have done from the studio. On top of all that, they had to pay for Lucy Meacock to fill in for Steve in the studio. So, a lot of effort and expenditure with little gained?
There was probably very little point in him doing a live co-presentational role from the scene of the fire. There was little or no chance of any developing news, and that poor spokesman from the company has been dragged out for comment hour after hour by BBC and Sky.
I suspect Lucy was already booked for the shift anyway from the studio, as she seems to be appearing regularly in that slot now.
I do question the pointless live reports from locations. It's not necessary to have a political correspondent stood in Downing Street at 10pm on a Sunday night (no one else is there), or a report about the BBC to come from the car park outside. They don't serve any purpose or enhance the validity of the report.
That is a good point, why do they do the live reports like this? You can understand reports from places where there is a story happening, but when there's nothing there it does seem a bit pointless, but saying that, what do they do, have the reporter in the studio or
do they just air the report from that reporter instead of crossing over to them aswell
?
Yes! That's what they always used to do. The newsreader (on both ITV and the BBC) would almost always be in the studio. They would link into the various packages and only interview a correspondent when any extra background and/or analysis was needed, as well, of course, as interviewing guests. However, the correspondents were nearly always in a studio - not stood in the middle of nowhere. There really is no need for a correspondent to be in Downing Street every night. We know where the PM lives. They could quite easily be in a warm studio and nothing would be lost.
I can accept the studio presenter going out on location when there is something
major
(and by that I mean on the scale of a terrorist attack). However, ITV were stupid tonight to have Steve Scott in the middle of a field in the pitch dark
two
days after the event took place. Ridiculous.
And, by the way, I don't think Lucy was originally down for this weekend. In the Radio Times it has Steve down as doing both Saturday and Sunday.
In a similar way to what sky news have done, would it be better if instead of having floating images, the headline images appeared within the atrium main window behind them, using that as if it's a screen in the distance. Same with the side windows, should use be used for the live link up screens instead of the floating squares that they use at the moment?
