And anyone in a position to agree or disagree with the assertion the new corporate logo does not suit News and Factual programming and will be difficult to incorporate into pres with any kind of authority.
Solution to that would be to go back to the old ITN branding
And anyone in a position to agree or disagree with the assertion the new corporate logo does not suit News and Factual programming and will be difficult to incorporate into pres with any kind of authority.
Solution to that would be to go back to the old ITN branding
I can't see that ever happening. It wouldn't really make much sense either - unless ITV manages to fulfil its goal of obtaining 100% of ITN. It would make much more sense for it to be ITN-branded under that situation, for ITN would be the name of ITV's dedicated news division rather than a "separate" organisation supplying the news. (It makes sense it my head. )
Even so, I do believe the "ITV News" brand is here to stay, there's no reason why it would be dropped. The only problem is the connotation - ITN as a brand has so much more authority, whereas ITV is the home of Take Me Out, Coronation Street, BGT, X Factor... so on.
Even so, I do believe the "ITV News" brand is here to stay, there's no reason why it would be dropped. The only problem is the connotation - ITN as a brand has so much more authority, whereas ITV is the home of Take Me Out, Coronation Street, BGT, X Factor... so on.
You can say that about BBC, Channel 4, Channel 5 and Sky. An extreme example being Channel 4 News- but the connotations of Big Brother being on Channel 4 for 11 years didn't have an effect, and that was the trashiest show on TV on the same channel as the most high brow commercial news.
Even so, I do believe the "ITV News" brand is here to stay, there's no reason why it would be dropped. The only problem is the connotation - ITN as a brand has so much more authority, whereas ITV is the home of Take Me Out, Coronation Street, BGT, X Factor... so on.
You can say that about BBC, Channel 4, Channel 5 and Sky. An extreme example being Channel 4 News- but the connotations of Big Brother being on Channel 4 for 11 years didn't have an effect, and that was the trashiest show on TV on the same channel as the most high brow commercial news.
Interesting... I've never thought of it in those terms before. It seems Channel 4 News has managed to stay high brow at a time when the channel it's on has become less so. Meanwhile ITV News hasn't managed to retain the reputation it once had on a channel that has also become more dumbed down. And even more strangely, ITN has a hand in both of them.
I suspect the only answer is that editorially ITV News has chosen to become more low brow like its parent channel, whereas Channel 4 News has actively fought against such a shift. Maybe it's not such a case of the broader channel affecting the perception of its news programme; rather an intentional editorial decision as to the direction of the news brand?
Even so, I do believe the "ITV News" brand is here to stay, there's no reason why it would be dropped. The only problem is the connotation - ITN as a brand has so much more authority, whereas ITV is the home of Take Me Out, Coronation Street, BGT, X Factor... so on.
You can say that about BBC, Channel 4, Channel 5 and Sky. An extreme example being Channel 4 News- but the connotations of Big Brother being on Channel 4 for 11 years didn't have an effect, and that was the trashiest show on TV on the same channel as the most high brow commercial news.
Interesting... I've never thought of it in those terms before. It seems Channel 4 News has managed to stay high brow at a time when the channel it's on has become less so. Meanwhile ITV News hasn't managed to retain the reputation it once had on a channel that has also become more dumbed down. And even more strangely, ITN has a hand in both of them.
I suspect the only answer is that editorially ITV News has chosen to become more low brow like its parent channel, whereas Channel 4 News has actively fought against such a shift. Maybe it's not such a case of the broader channel affecting the perception of its news programme; rather an intentional editorial decision as to the direction of the news brand?
I suspect that with ITV it is amplified because they used to have the ITN branding. There was a period towards the end of the noughties where they did change the editorial slant. I wouldn't say it became more high brow but definitely better than it was. It seems to have shifted too far back towards human interest and is very tabloid at the moment, but my overall point in this post is that I feel the programme itself commands the reputation, the channel it's on becomes irrelevant.
The issue that ITV could face with returning to the ITN branding is that it already appears to be a lightweight channel, so if they don't appear to have their 'own' news it can just look lazy and as though they can't be bothered.
I don't think the news on any channel is particularly defined by the other shows that channel shows - ITV have been showing low-brow populist stuff similar to Take Me Out etc. for decades. I don't particularly think even the ITV News brand has lowered the general wider public perception in comparison to ITN - it's more the change in editorial style over the last decade or so which has hurt it most, while all the News at Ten fiasco, axing the News Channel and cuts to regional news probably hasn't helped either. It's worth noting too that according to a recent Reuters survey that ITV News is still a major player in delivering the news to the nation, only behind BBC News (TV/Radio) and the BBC website.
That's really interesting, and backs up a similar survey done by Populus, which showed ITV News and Channel 4 News just behind BBC News in terms of media trustworthiness.
Anyone heard anything about the upcoming News revamp in January? Do we know anything about the set or colours?
And anyone in a position to agree or disagree with the assertion the new corporate logo does not suit News and Factual programming and will be difficult to incorporate into pres with any kind of authority.
Going back to the original question has anyone heard anything abou the upcoming revamp?
Thanks for that Brekkie - very interesting indeed.
I do have to point out that I didn't completely mean the shift from "ITN" to "ITV News" lowered the reputation of the news service in the eyes of the public... rather I meant that the numerous issues ITV News has been through over the last decade and a bit (NAT fiasco, regional cutbacks, apparent changes in editorial direction etc) are the things that have hit the service the most. The thing is that it coincides almost exactly with the change of the brand name in 1999. I do remember reading about ITV News journalists unhappy with plans to reduce the amount of political/serious coverage and increase the amount of "populist" stories - this was around 2001/2002 or so. Anyone know which article I'm talking about?? I can't for the life of me remember which paper it was from.
A name really isn't everything - had the structure and timings of ITV bulletins remained the same before March 1999, with only the name changing to "ITV News", I'm pretty sure the viewing figures and public perception wouldn't have been hit as hard as they have. The study Brekkie linked to indicates that ITV News hasn't had its reputation hurt that badly, but the BBC still manages to attract 5-6m viewers regularly, ITV considerably less at around 2-3m. In the past the gap was much narrower, and for a time during the '80s and '90s ITN news on ITV used to rate higher than BBC. I'm pretty sure it's not just down to the changes in bulletin timings...
)