Nick Pollard: ‘Sky News is more inventive and energetic'

For a start I think the use of the word 'stale' is out of place in this thread, given it either means "no longer able to perform well or creatively because of having done something for too long." or "no longer new and interesting or exciting." and I don't think that the BBC News is no longer interesting or no longer performing well, BBC World News is an example of coming up with creative new ideas such as Outside Source, Newsnight's new Editor has sort of moved the programme in a new more creative direction and New Broadcasting House is well New so to say that it is stale is very harsh.

People moaning about the graphics being simple and stale is also nonsensical - Astons should not be simple, they shouldn't be mega flashy because that detracts from the content. The BBC News set is quite good and their music is by far my, and many's, favourite. Unlike Sky News which is just one long example of how the Television News Media used The Day Today more or less as a Blue Print - in fact if it was made now I would expect it to have a set, graphics package and OTT theme tune all similar to Sky's. News is about content and not about how often you completely change the presentation style of your News Output.

And finally, the BBC doesn't have the luxury of like ITV being able to rebrand every other year or like Sky semi-rebuild their News Set every third. Not because of money (although the BBC does have more, and more crucial, operations than the others) but because of the Anti-BBC Cabal in the media, The Times, The Sun and especially the Mail, who hound the Beeb down at every opportunity - if the BBC changed their News Set, Graphics, Music every few months or tried to do anything vaguely flashy the Mail would have a field trip - and what would happen then - the same members who are arguing it is stale would be posting links to MailOnline going 'Should the BBC stop changing its presentation?'

Nick Pollard says that Sky News is more inventive and energetic?

Couldn't be further from the truth. In the last decade, it's become far more safe and conservative than any of the other news channels and programmes. Whilst the quality of the reporting remains higher than ever, the channel itself has definitely lost the energy it once had.

Here's a thought of how to jazz up a bulletin... literally....



...only kidding

Completely agree.

The move to NBH really was a missed opportunity - they could really have freshend things up but in almost every regard just went for a rehash of what had come before.

At the end of the day, this conversation doesn't matter. BBC gets the higher audience and that says it all. If it starts to slide then they may make changes to address it but until then, why really bother? It's as easy as that

That's a recipe for stagnation, though. You need to keep up with the times, both technologically and visually. BBC News hasn't really changed much in 15 years now. Eventually it will get like ITN was in the late 80s - lots of 70s presentation that wasn't suitable for the time. They eventually adopted computer graphics in 1987/88 and updated their branding. I think that's what needs to happen to BBC News soon. I always hoped that the move to Broadcasting House would herald a new era of BBC News branding; they had the perfect opportunity to start from scratch but instead went for more of the same. You may say it still works, which is fine, but I have to be honest that I'm getting a bit fed up of David Lowe music, globes, ribbons and place names now.

Yep, have to agree with this. Back in the 1990s, it was a really fresh and modern look. Nowadays, not so much.

2 problems can happen when you've got the higher ratings - you can become complacent (which is what I think is happening to BBC News in terms of presentation - not content), or you can become smug and try wholly irrelevant ideas like Sky News did a few years ago.

There needs to be a happy medium between the two, and I don't think that either the BBC or Sky are achieving that at the moment.

I'd like a refresh to the music and globe, but apart from that too big of a departure from what has made 'BBC News' identifiable to the audience would be hugely detrimental. A news organisation doesn't spend 15 years building a brand before dumping it for something completely different... unless the brand is broken, which clearly isn't the case when they're number one.


Perhaps they should move the News at One, Six and Ten into the studios that BBC World News uses for Impact and GMT. Those studios are far better than studio A.

Exactly. This is the strongest the BBC News brand has ever been - why on Earth would they change it because TV Forumers like new presentation?

The move to NBH was exactly the wrong time to change all the graphics and music etc. People don't like change - with quite a significant move to new sets and some new styles of presentation (not to mention the logistical nightmare of moving the whole news operation to a new building), changing everything else would have been neither desirable nor logical.

As I have said previously if some people here had their way Coca Cola would be advised to drop the red and the IOC would be told the Olympic Rings " looked stale". The idea that the BBC should drop such successful branding and presentation is beyond laughable in the real world.

If the BBC had had this attitude 15 years ago you'd have never seen the "strongest BBC News brand there has ever been". Had this conversation many times over the years but it evolved nicely at first and ultimately into something new with the ribbons, then went backwards with the next relaunch which was just a nicer version of the 1999 branding. That in itself has been around quite some time now.

I don't think there is much wrong with the News branding itself. Just the on-screen furniture is stale, and there is room to improve the way stories are presented.

My previous comments about the BBC concern all the output, especially BBC One and BBC Two, who's branding and playout are stale.