TW
I know - he's never done that. Steve Scott is somebody else who refuses to do so.
I thought Steve does usually he does when he's standing anyway. Wasn't Trevor just reading blatantly off the autocue last night?
Luke posted:
Blob posted:
it's a shame trevor wasn't actually looking at the live-linkup screen.
I know - he's never done that. Steve Scott is somebody else who refuses to do so.
I thought Steve does usually he does when he's standing anyway. Wasn't Trevor just reading blatantly off the autocue last night?
JA
And "coming to a theatre near you"!. Honestly, these US Network trailers seem like they;re advertising big Hollywood bockbusters it's rediculous!
james2001
Founding member
pip posted:
couldn't agree more... i too saw the 'trail' for one of the US network's coverage of the tradegy, voice over sounded like the stereotype deep gravel voiced movie trailer guy... I was actually expecting him to say 'starring' after describing - in monosylables - what had happened.
And "coming to a theatre near you"!. Honestly, these US Network trailers seem like they;re advertising big Hollywood bockbusters it's rediculous!
SJ
I simply cannot share your opinion. So, ITV have "audacity" because they have compared one terrorist attack with another terriorist attack? The difference in the number of deaths between yesterdays events and 9/11 is completely immaterial. Sky, the BBC, Channel 4, and other channels have all made observations about 9/11, therefore saing that ITV were/are the only channel to be making such comparisons is ridiculous.
I notice the BBC's, Sky's, and all the rest of the channels had comparisons to poverty, animal deaths, and physcial abuse yesterday didn't they.... No!
I would love to know what dramatic music has been used by ITV News yesterday, if anything, as pointed out on this forum, it's background music for the ITV News Special was very downbeat - unlike Sky's brash typical start of hour fanfare - which played out as usual.
Trevor said that "we shouldn't allow this attack to change anything" - of course, but jeez, we're talking about British resolve here, not television presentation. If us Brits changed the way we acted after events such as this, the terrorists would be winning - and its important that our lives do not change. TV presentation-wise, I don't think any of the channels did anything out of the ordinary. A few VR sets, background video walkthroughs from both ITV and Sky, good street-map zooming graphics from the BBC etc. I thought that ALL channels dealt with matters extremely well - especially Sky for the first couple of hours of the event.
PS: The desk only changed colour because it reflects the background of the set!
boring_user_name posted:
I strongly disliked and actually felt sickened by ITV's coverage of today's events. Whereas the BBC, CNN, and Euronews covered this as just another (although very important) story, ITV News utterly exaggarated the story; even having the audacity to compare today's attack with 9/11.
ITV news simply lacked perspective.
Just over 50 people died and a few hundred were injured in this attack. Nearly 3,000 died as a result of the attacks on September 11, 2001. Thousands of people die every day because of poverty. Millions of people are sexually, physically and emotionally abused every day. Over 2 million animals are killed every day in the UK alone just so that some people can eat flesh. But ITV News and indeed the media in general don't go into a state of mourning for any of this, do they?
ITV news actually seemed to have the objective of scaring its viewers by using dramatic language and scary music, and changing the set's background to red. Even the desk became red.
Trevor said that we shouldn't allow this attack to change anything, yet the entire ITV News presentation set was altered because of this, in addition to its style of reporting.
Do others share this opinion?
ITV news actually seemed to have the objective of scaring its viewers by using dramatic language and scary music, and changing the set's background to red. Even the desk became red.
Trevor said that we shouldn't allow this attack to change anything, yet the entire ITV News presentation set was altered because of this, in addition to its style of reporting.
Do others share this opinion?
I simply cannot share your opinion. So, ITV have "audacity" because they have compared one terrorist attack with another terriorist attack? The difference in the number of deaths between yesterdays events and 9/11 is completely immaterial. Sky, the BBC, Channel 4, and other channels have all made observations about 9/11, therefore saing that ITV were/are the only channel to be making such comparisons is ridiculous.
I notice the BBC's, Sky's, and all the rest of the channels had comparisons to poverty, animal deaths, and physcial abuse yesterday didn't they.... No!
I would love to know what dramatic music has been used by ITV News yesterday, if anything, as pointed out on this forum, it's background music for the ITV News Special was very downbeat - unlike Sky's brash typical start of hour fanfare - which played out as usual.
Trevor said that "we shouldn't allow this attack to change anything" - of course, but jeez, we're talking about British resolve here, not television presentation. If us Brits changed the way we acted after events such as this, the terrorists would be winning - and its important that our lives do not change. TV presentation-wise, I don't think any of the channels did anything out of the ordinary. A few VR sets, background video walkthroughs from both ITV and Sky, good street-map zooming graphics from the BBC etc. I thought that ALL channels dealt with matters extremely well - especially Sky for the first couple of hours of the event.
PS: The desk only changed colour because it reflects the background of the set!
JV
James Vertigan
Founding member
I thought Breakfast was very good this morning, particularly when Bill was on at exactly 24 hours after each bomb went off. It must've taken a bit of planning, particularly if you weren't sure how long interviews were going to go on for.
MM
I think what was more insensitive of ITV News's coverage throughout the day was their constant demanding of viewers to send in picture messages and video messages of the blasts. Strikes me just a tad as being slightly insensitive to people's feelings of shock! They're supposed to calm us down not make us worry even more!
I certainly share a hatred of the need to add unnecessary subtitles to distressing events.
"TARGET LONDON".
What was that all about? Is it an order, an instruction? Is it even a proper sentence?
I'm not sure the rifle sight and the bright red background helped either.
And (note its the first time I've watched News at (Wh|T)en for ages) I really don't think this circular videowall works when it seems impossible for Trevor to look in the right direction when doing a 2-way.
william posted:
boring_user_name posted:
Do others share this opinion?
I certainly share a hatred of the need to add unnecessary subtitles to distressing events.
"TARGET LONDON".
What was that all about? Is it an order, an instruction? Is it even a proper sentence?
I'm not sure the rifle sight and the bright red background helped either.
And (note its the first time I've watched News at (Wh|T)en for ages) I really don't think this circular videowall works when it seems impossible for Trevor to look in the right direction when doing a 2-way.