IT
itsrobert
Founding member
I don't think the change of branding from ITN to ITV News had much impact. ITN was still referred to in the bulletins as late as 2002 and the endcap remains until the present day. Only an idiot would not know that ITN produce ITV News.
However, I think the problems began with switching bulletin times (admittedly, this did coincide with the brand change, but they weren't necessarily connected). First of all, they moved the evening bulletin to 6.30pm and the late news to 11pm. Granted, they've stuck with the former ever since. However, the change of the late news from 10pm to 11pm to 10pm to 10.30pm and back to 10pm again, all in the space of less than a decade, has dented ITV's credibility. Similarly, the Lunchtime News was tampered with during the mid-2000s - it had been at 12.30pm for most of the 1990s but they felt the need to lengthen it to include some inane drivel in the form of The Pulse and then move it back to 1.30pm - a ridiculous time for a lunchtime news bulletin, in my opinion. I know I've pretty much stopped watching it as a result. If I want news at that time, I usually always choose the BBC.
During that decade of ITV changing its bulletin times, the BBC have stuck rigidly to their time slots - 1pm, 6pm and 10pm. In my opinion, that's why the BBC continues to win the ratings - continuity. While ITV have been faffing about, the BBC has gained more viewers and consolidated them. Let's just hope that ITV have the sense to firstly move the Lunchtime News back to 12.30pm and then stick to those times - 12.30pm, 6.30pm and 10pm - rigidly for a LONG time. In my view, that is the only way they'll come out of this mess with any shred of dignity.
However, I think the problems began with switching bulletin times (admittedly, this did coincide with the brand change, but they weren't necessarily connected). First of all, they moved the evening bulletin to 6.30pm and the late news to 11pm. Granted, they've stuck with the former ever since. However, the change of the late news from 10pm to 11pm to 10pm to 10.30pm and back to 10pm again, all in the space of less than a decade, has dented ITV's credibility. Similarly, the Lunchtime News was tampered with during the mid-2000s - it had been at 12.30pm for most of the 1990s but they felt the need to lengthen it to include some inane drivel in the form of The Pulse and then move it back to 1.30pm - a ridiculous time for a lunchtime news bulletin, in my opinion. I know I've pretty much stopped watching it as a result. If I want news at that time, I usually always choose the BBC.
During that decade of ITV changing its bulletin times, the BBC have stuck rigidly to their time slots - 1pm, 6pm and 10pm. In my opinion, that's why the BBC continues to win the ratings - continuity. While ITV have been faffing about, the BBC has gained more viewers and consolidated them. Let's just hope that ITV have the sense to firstly move the Lunchtime News back to 12.30pm and then stick to those times - 12.30pm, 6.30pm and 10pm - rigidly for a LONG time. In my view, that is the only way they'll come out of this mess with any shred of dignity.
TO
But I don't think it's just the letter that matters. The logo was pretty iconic and was used everywhere on graphics and on the opening and closing titles from the 70's up until around 2000 as they still kept the ITN logo on the graphics when they first rebranded as ITV News.
That's why I think the ITN brand was so strong.
I do agree that it was a stronger brand and recognisable brand but in that overlap period (with the ITN logo whilst called ITV), people would have just got used to it with time.
IMO the average viewer watches the news for the content, not the name or the graphics. Not everyone is like us on here
RDJ posted:
Tom0 posted:
I don't think changing from ITN News to ITV News was a disastrous move. Casual viewers wouldn't notice the difference 'except one letter' and would still continue to watch regardless of the name.
But I don't think it's just the letter that matters. The logo was pretty iconic and was used everywhere on graphics and on the opening and closing titles from the 70's up until around 2000 as they still kept the ITN logo on the graphics when they first rebranded as ITV News.
That's why I think the ITN brand was so strong.
I do agree that it was a stronger brand and recognisable brand but in that overlap period (with the ITN logo whilst called ITV), people would have just got used to it with time.
IMO the average viewer watches the news for the content, not the name or the graphics. Not everyone is like us on here
TO
I know, but what I'm trying to say is that to the average viewer it doesn't matter if it is branded ITN or ITV News. ITN is the established brand, but ITV is the channel it is on so again to the average viewer it wouldn't really matter. Its not completely alienated; the set, presenters and journalistic style initially remained the same. In fact everything stayed the same except for the name.
JO
But it does - it's all about what they associate each one with.
Tom0 posted:
I know, but what I'm trying to say is that to the average viewer it doesn't matter if it is branded ITN or ITV News. ITN is the established brand, but ITV is the channel it is on so again to the average viewer it wouldn't really matter. Its not completely alienated; the set, presenters and journalistic style initially remained the same. In fact everything stayed the same except for the name.
But it does - it's all about what they associate each one with.
BR
Spot on itsrobert. That and sorting out their weekend timings too would be half the problem solved. Unfortunately though Michael Grade is only interested in headlines - and believes if he sticks News at Ten on four nights a week people won't notice where ITV News is seriously lacking in other areas.
Talking of weakening the ITV News brand though, it hasn't been helped as a whole by News at Ten looking so damn good. Both the "ITV News" graphics and studio look even more dated since the flashy News at Ten package was unveiled.
itsrobert posted:
During that decade of ITV changing its bulletin times, the BBC have stuck rigidly to their time slots - 1pm, 6pm and 10pm. In my opinion, that's why the BBC continues to win the ratings - continuity. While ITV have been faffing about, the BBC has gained more viewers and consolidated them. Let's just hope that ITV have the sense to firstly move the Lunchtime News back to 12.30pm and then stick to those times - 12.30pm, 6.30pm and 10pm - rigidly for a LONG time. In my view, that is the only way they'll come out of this mess with any shred of dignity.
Spot on itsrobert. That and sorting out their weekend timings too would be half the problem solved. Unfortunately though Michael Grade is only interested in headlines - and believes if he sticks News at Ten on four nights a week people won't notice where ITV News is seriously lacking in other areas.
Talking of weakening the ITV News brand though, it hasn't been helped as a whole by News at Ten looking so damn good. Both the "ITV News" graphics and studio look even more dated since the flashy News at Ten package was unveiled.
TO
The News at Ten package shows what ITN are capable of, but clearly aren't doing. It doesn't mean something on the same scale should be produced but there has to be some slicker graphics and a nicer virtual studio unveiled for the rest of the brand.
I actually disagree with ITV Lunchtime News at 12.30pm, give it time to bed in at 1.30pm and leave it. Having it at 12.30pm would be directly doing what you are all saying they should avoid. The ITV Daytime schedule is currently very strong and much of Loose Women has a lead in from This Morning. Breaking the shows up with the news could prove fatal. However, they should definitely consider a 5 minute bulletin at 9.25am, with no adverts afterwards and ITV1 programming starting at a rounder time of 9.30am.
I actually disagree with ITV Lunchtime News at 12.30pm, give it time to bed in at 1.30pm and leave it. Having it at 12.30pm would be directly doing what you are all saying they should avoid. The ITV Daytime schedule is currently very strong and much of Loose Women has a lead in from This Morning. Breaking the shows up with the news could prove fatal. However, they should definitely consider a 5 minute bulletin at 9.25am, with no adverts afterwards and ITV1 programming starting at a rounder time of 9.30am.
IT
Talking of weakening the ITV News brand though, it hasn't been helped as a whole by News at Ten looking so damn good. Both the "ITV News" graphics and studio look even more dated since the flashy News at Ten package was unveiled.
That's true. The ITV News bulletins are in dire need of a complete overhaul - new look, music, the lot. The theme was tweaked to add a bit more punch in 2006 but has essentially remained the same since 2004. I have to say that it is not my favourite incarnation of the ITV News theme; the preceding orchestral version was much better, as is News at Ten's. The graphics are also very dated now; again, having not changed dramatically since 2004. A lick of paint might help in the short-term to re-invigorate ITV News but I still think the timing is the biggest factor.
itsrobert
Founding member
Brekkie posted:
itsrobert posted:
During that decade of ITV changing its bulletin times, the BBC have stuck rigidly to their time slots - 1pm, 6pm and 10pm. In my opinion, that's why the BBC continues to win the ratings - continuity. While ITV have been faffing about, the BBC has gained more viewers and consolidated them. Let's just hope that ITV have the sense to firstly move the Lunchtime News back to 12.30pm and then stick to those times - 12.30pm, 6.30pm and 10pm - rigidly for a LONG time. In my view, that is the only way they'll come out of this mess with any shred of dignity.
Talking of weakening the ITV News brand though, it hasn't been helped as a whole by News at Ten looking so damn good. Both the "ITV News" graphics and studio look even more dated since the flashy News at Ten package was unveiled.
That's true. The ITV News bulletins are in dire need of a complete overhaul - new look, music, the lot. The theme was tweaked to add a bit more punch in 2006 but has essentially remained the same since 2004. I have to say that it is not my favourite incarnation of the ITV News theme; the preceding orchestral version was much better, as is News at Ten's. The graphics are also very dated now; again, having not changed dramatically since 2004. A lick of paint might help in the short-term to re-invigorate ITV News but I still think the timing is the biggest factor.
IT
Reb Bee did the last ITV News look didn't they? Wheras News at Ten was in house at ITN (I think). Hmmm.
I don't think NAT was all in-house. I seem to remember a video clip prior to launch which showed one of the directors visiting an agency to discuss the titles. However, the graphics may have been done in-house.
itsrobert
Founding member
Jugalug posted:
Quote:
The News at Ten package shows what ITN are capable of, but clearly aren't doing.
Reb Bee did the last ITV News look didn't they? Wheras News at Ten was in house at ITN (I think). Hmmm.
I don't think NAT was all in-house. I seem to remember a video clip prior to launch which showed one of the directors visiting an agency to discuss the titles. However, the graphics may have been done in-house.
BR
I'm not sure that's the case to be honest - though This Morning and Jeremy Kyle may be considered the hits of daytime TV, the truth is the crap served up by BBC1 in the morning usually beats ITV1 quite comfortably.
As I said, I don't know how ratings have changed since the move to 1.30pm, but you'd think ITV News would have a better chance of an increase audience by getting in before the BBC. People watched the 12.30pm bulletin because it was there first - and I suspect now people watch the One o'clock News because it's there first.
Similarly with Loose Women, surely there is a healthy audience around at 1pm who don't want to watch the news, and having Loose Women (or in the past, Des and Mel) capitalises on that and potentially brings in some BBC1 viewers too.
And surely now with ITV1's afternoon schedule being more important than it was a few years ago it makes sense to get them in at 1pm in the hope they stay with ITV1 through to 4pm, 5pm or 6pm. I suspect having a news bulletin at 1.30pm doesn't really help do that. At least at 12.30pm if people go channel hopping and find themselves with BBC1 they're likely to return at 1pm when once again those viewers try to avoid the news.
Tom0 posted:
I actually disagree with ITV Lunchtime News at 12.30pm, give it time to bed in at 1.30pm and leave it. Having it at 12.30pm would be directly doing what you are all saying they should avoid. The ITV Daytime schedule is currently very strong and much of Loose Women has a lead in from This Morning. Breaking the shows up with the news could prove fatal.
I'm not sure that's the case to be honest - though This Morning and Jeremy Kyle may be considered the hits of daytime TV, the truth is the crap served up by BBC1 in the morning usually beats ITV1 quite comfortably.
As I said, I don't know how ratings have changed since the move to 1.30pm, but you'd think ITV News would have a better chance of an increase audience by getting in before the BBC. People watched the 12.30pm bulletin because it was there first - and I suspect now people watch the One o'clock News because it's there first.
Similarly with Loose Women, surely there is a healthy audience around at 1pm who don't want to watch the news, and having Loose Women (or in the past, Des and Mel) capitalises on that and potentially brings in some BBC1 viewers too.
And surely now with ITV1's afternoon schedule being more important than it was a few years ago it makes sense to get them in at 1pm in the hope they stay with ITV1 through to 4pm, 5pm or 6pm. I suspect having a news bulletin at 1.30pm doesn't really help do that. At least at 12.30pm if people go channel hopping and find themselves with BBC1 they're likely to return at 1pm when once again those viewers try to avoid the news.