« Topics
12345
msim559 posts since 29 Sep 2003
ITV always sell the news channel with having the famous faces, but does anyone specifically watch a channel because the presenter is recognisable? I know that for me, the content of the news is more important than the person who introduces the reports, and anyway, in the vast majority of times, a 'famous face' hardly ever presents - most of the schedule is filled with Chris Rogers, Leyla Deybelge, Owen Thomas etc, who, although we all know who they are, they arent exactly known to the average viewer.
The studio is vile - its too large, empty, sterile and cold looking, and looks crap when a close up shot is used. The graphics of the ticker and slug look like they were designed in 5mins by a small child fond of primary colours.
I also have to agree with the intital point made about the ad breaks. Im sure that on a day to day basis, they have the same number of ad-breaks as Sky, but it doesnt feel like that! Sky seems to just flow into a break, which doesnt seem to last too long, whereas ITV have a long intro into and returning from the break which slows the pace down. Ive often said on here the handling of breaks is poorly managed, and I think it is true that the channel willingly key speeches or events in favour of some ads.
Due to simulcasting of ITV1 bulletins, many events theyve advertised all morning are also missed, which is another problem.
If ITV want to make money from the channel, maybe someone should give them a reality check - no news channel turns over a healthy profit, if at all, and they suck up rescources. If they want to try and cut their losses, the only option they have is to invest more in the channel, and bring its budget up to a significant level where it can compete with its rivals.
Oh, and one other thing, for gods sake hurry up and get the channel back on freeview, its supposed best platform, or pull the plug altogether. Use the new CC slot theyve won, put the channel on there, and delay the launch of ITV4 until the engineering work is done on the news channels old slot. That way, the news channel is there during the election, a vital and important time, and ITV4 will be developed for longer, with the posibility that it may have time to commision decent programmes!
Andrew13,804 posts since 27 Mar 2001
Newsman posted:
ITV News is a commercial channel. To be fair, ITV News Channel is dragging in the ratings behind Sky News and BBC News 24. BUT... ITV NC is almost five years old whilst BBC News is seven years and Sky News is 16 years, .

ITV News Channel is only 2 and half years old. If you counting when the ITN NC started then can we count the start of BBC World as the start of News 24?!

It's quite obvious that this thread is only for anti-ITV people to slag it off, most of what has been said is just opinions "the graphics look cheap and tacky" and to be fair these people would never like it whatever it looked like
msim559 posts since 29 Sep 2003
Andrew posted:
Newsman posted:
ITV News is a commercial channel. To be fair, ITV News Channel is dragging in the ratings behind Sky News and BBC News 24. BUT... ITV NC is almost five years old whilst BBC News is seven years and Sky News is 16 years, .

ITV News Channel is only 2 and half years old. If you counting when the ITN NC started then can we count the start of BBC World as the start of News 24?!

It's quite obvious that this thread is only for anti-ITV people to slag it off, most of what has been said is just opinions "the graphics look cheap and tacky" and to be fair these people would never like it whatever it looked like


Apart from a new studio, name change and some investment, not much has really changed at ITV news; only in the past year have things began to change significantly with the intergration of the regions. The channel still relies heavily on repeating the same reports (and whole bulletins) throughout the day, in the same way the the old ITNNC used too. ITN news channel evolved into ITV news, and you can hardly compare this BBC world service television, as that channel still exists, isnt technically a rolling news station what with its feature programming, and it runs alongside News 24 with a totally different agenda. Also, I dont think this is being anti-ITV, people are pointing out what they think is wrong with the channel, and why they dont want to watch it for any great period of time. As I said in my post, graphics are a problem, but only a small one compared to the overall badness of the channel which ive outlined, and thats the reason I rarely watch.
scottishtv1,760 posts since 6 Nov 2001
Andrew posted:
Newsman posted:
ITV News is a commercial channel. To be fair, ITV News Channel is dragging in the ratings behind Sky News and BBC News 24. BUT... ITV NC is almost five years old whilst BBC News is seven years and Sky News is 16 years, .

ITV News Channel is only 2 and half years old. If you counting when the ITN NC started then can we count the start of BBC World as the start of News 24?!


Maybe we should start counting backwards seeing as a huge number of Freeviewers can't see it? Hopefully it might disappear altogether.

Andrew posted:
It's quite obvious that this thread is only for anti-ITV people to slag it off, most of what has been said is just opinions "the graphics look cheap and tacky"

People would tend to comment on graphics in a TV presentation forum. Most arguments, I thought, were pretty well balanced.
You're not pro-ITV by any chance are you?

Andrew posted:
_________________
Christine and Duncan are together at last
Make a date with new look Calendar - Weekdays at 6 on ITV1 Yorkshire

Put the tape in Bert - The Paul O'Grady Show
Mondays at 5 on ITV1

Oh....

Anyway, I don't see why anyone really takes sides. I used to be of the view that BBC News was best, and still watch it when I want some analysis. But I like Sky as it's pacy and easy to have on in the background. Plus they do break news pretty fast. Keep an open mind. Plus, feel free to change your opinion sometimes. (ie. stop defending the ITV News Channel.)
Jonathan H837 posts since 17 May 2004
msim posted:
Apart from a new studio, name change and some investment, not much has really changed at ITV news; only in the past year have things began to change significantly with the intergration of the regions.


So apart from the new studios, the name change, the investment and the integration of the regions, not much has changed? Doesn't sound like a bad basis for improvement over twelve months, to me. Granted, it's got a hell of a way to go, though.
msim559 posts since 29 Sep 2003
Well, my point was, although they have changed the studio and name, both relativley easy things to do considering they share the studio with ITV1, the content hasnt changed all that much in my view, and thats what i think the reason is why it still languishes in the ratings and in perception. Ignoring the freeview problem, there has to be a reason why the channel trails so dramatically (400k for news 24 and Sky compared to ITVs 50k when the pope died)
Jonathan H837 posts since 17 May 2004
msim posted:
Ignoring the freeview problem, there has to be a reason why the channel trails so dramatically (400k for news 24 and Sky compared to ITVs 50k when the pope died)


You are absolutely right - I agree with you entirely. But beware of those viewing figures. By definition more people turn to news channels when a big story breaks, so figures will be up. And clearly the ITV News Channel is behind in the ratings whether it's a normal news day or the Pope has died. But Sky News averages something like 80,000 viewers at it's peak on a normal run-of-the-mill weekday. That is astonishing given the money poured into it.
Andrew13,804 posts since 27 Mar 2001
msim posted:
Well, my point was, although they have changed the studio and name, both relativley easy things to do considering they share the studio with ITV1, the content hasnt changed all that much in my view, and thats what i think the reason is why it still languishes in the ratings and in perception. Ignoring the freeview problem, there has to be a reason why the channel trails so dramatically (400k for news 24 and Sky compared to ITVs 50k when the pope died)

The fact that it is much newer and that it is way down the EPG on Sky are also two big reasons

Saying that the content hasn't changed since the days of the ITN News Channel is ridiculous. Do you actually remember the ITN News Channel? A single presenter with no guests reading 30 minute news bulletins every half an hour, to compare that with what we have today is nonsense. There can be no comparison even with as recently as prior to last year's relaunch. Ok they've still got areas to improve on but they've come along way in the past 14 months.

Oh and to those people who are complaining that ITV News Channel use a sting before and after the ads, I can imagine that if they didn't then there would be people saying that 'they can't even afford a sting how cheap and tacky'!
Katherine4,494 posts since 4 Aug 2001
scottishtv posted:

Andrew posted:
It's quite obvious that this thread is only for anti-ITV people to slag it off, most of what has been said is just opinions "the graphics look cheap and tacky"

People would tend to comment on graphics in a TV presentation forum. Most arguments, I thought, were pretty well balanced.
You're not pro-ITV by any chance are you?

Andrew posted:
_________________
Christine and Duncan are together at last
Make a date with new look Calendar - Weekdays at 6 on ITV1 Yorkshire

Put the tape in Bert - The Paul O'Grady Show
Mondays at 5 on ITV1

Oh....

Anyway, I don't see why anyone really takes sides.


He is as obscenely pro-ITV and Calendar as I am obscenely (proudly) pro-BBC and Look North.
Andrew13,804 posts since 27 Mar 2001
Katherine posted:

He is as obscenely pro-ITV and Calendar as I am obscenely (proudly) pro-BBC and Look North.

I am not, as unlike you I actually watch the BBC on many occasion, anyway nobody cares about that.
p_c_u_k2,069 posts since 27 Mar 2004
The sting before and after the adverts can break things up - it's an interesting theory. It breaks up the flow of the channel. Certainly I find it a problem with radio stations - stations which crash straight into adverts feel as if they're going to come back much faster than those which play a jingle, seem to crash to a halt and then go into their (seemingly longer) break, like Virgin or XFM. I thought there was a rule in this country though that adverts had to be signposted with things like stings, or 'end of part one', or something like that - was I complete wrong?

It's certainly not the only problem with the ITV News Channel though.