EE
Back to white background again on the big screen.
Back to white background again on the big screen.
Last edited by EastEngland on 17 January 2018 3:08pm
SC
And the other day it was 'they're changing too much and ruining it!'
The never ending war between the neophiles and the neophobics rages on
I rarely comment or wade into a debate - as long-time members of the Forum will know. That said, I'm usually of the Neophobic disposition - if ain't broke, don't screw it up. I'm at a loss as to why broadcasters feel a constant pressure to change or tinker with things in the misplaced belief that they are improving the viewer experience.
On this occasion, however, I'm firmly in the Neophile camp - and it's precisely because there has been too much change or tinkering over the years. As I said earlier in the thread, the Sky News of the 1990s and early 2000s was excellent when it came to having a strong, market-leading brand. There was graphical and presentational consistency. It all worked.
I had a look at TV Live: from 1989 to 2005, Sky News underwent five wholesale graphical and presentational changes. That's five in sixteen years. From 2005 up to (and including) this refresh, Sky have moved building twice and changed the graphics, presentation and branding on ten separate occasions. That's ten in twelve years.
I'm not suggesting that your ordinary man or woman in the street will really care (or notice) but bit by bit it has broken down any level of consistency in terms of graphics and presentation. you only have to look at how many times fellow members of the Forum have commented on the backgrounds used from on DTLs from Westminster. And from an editorial/presentation perspective, what is 'Breaking News' and how long does it break for? There have been times when the ticker has been nothing but yellow and it's done trailed the Press Preview or PMQs. Do PMQs really warrant a Breaking News strap?
It's small things like this, changes here, changes there, a TOTH refresh or whatever that have really broken down the coherence of Sky News as a brand. A full-scale overhaul - new colour palette, new presentational elements, new programming strands, new music - would have been a great way to complement two new studios and a new newsroom.
Now... Does anybody want to have a little wager on how soon there's another refresh or set of presentational changes to Sky News?
Nothing's drastically new! Burn it to the ground!
And the other day it was 'they're changing too much and ruining it!'
The never ending war between the neophiles and the neophobics rages on
I rarely comment or wade into a debate - as long-time members of the Forum will know. That said, I'm usually of the Neophobic disposition - if ain't broke, don't screw it up. I'm at a loss as to why broadcasters feel a constant pressure to change or tinker with things in the misplaced belief that they are improving the viewer experience.
On this occasion, however, I'm firmly in the Neophile camp - and it's precisely because there has been too much change or tinkering over the years. As I said earlier in the thread, the Sky News of the 1990s and early 2000s was excellent when it came to having a strong, market-leading brand. There was graphical and presentational consistency. It all worked.
I had a look at TV Live: from 1989 to 2005, Sky News underwent five wholesale graphical and presentational changes. That's five in sixteen years. From 2005 up to (and including) this refresh, Sky have moved building twice and changed the graphics, presentation and branding on ten separate occasions. That's ten in twelve years.
I'm not suggesting that your ordinary man or woman in the street will really care (or notice) but bit by bit it has broken down any level of consistency in terms of graphics and presentation. you only have to look at how many times fellow members of the Forum have commented on the backgrounds used from on DTLs from Westminster. And from an editorial/presentation perspective, what is 'Breaking News' and how long does it break for? There have been times when the ticker has been nothing but yellow and it's done trailed the Press Preview or PMQs. Do PMQs really warrant a Breaking News strap?
It's small things like this, changes here, changes there, a TOTH refresh or whatever that have really broken down the coherence of Sky News as a brand. A full-scale overhaul - new colour palette, new presentational elements, new programming strands, new music - would have been a great way to complement two new studios and a new newsroom.
Now... Does anybody want to have a little wager on how soon there's another refresh or set of presentational changes to Sky News?
IT
In the new studio, I think the real part of it (desk, barcos) are good, but the greenscreen area just looks absolutely horrible.
Soz not soz but it’s all awful, all of it. One big ocd nightmare
In the new studio, I think the real part of it (desk, barcos) are good, but the greenscreen area just looks absolutely horrible.
IT
Imagine if somebody broke the glass by accident...
Sound in that box still ain't great.
Listening at work with headphones on, it still sounds line they're in... well, a glass box.
Listening at work with headphones on, it still sounds line they're in... well, a glass box.
Imagine if somebody broke the glass by accident...
EE
In the new studio, I think the real part of it (desk, barcos) are good, but the greenscreen area just looks absolutely horrible.
My issue is with the newsroom part of it - it doesn't look anything like a real newsroom and looks like something out of a video game and very very virtual. The rest of it isn't too bad
Soz not soz but it’s all awful, all of it. One big ocd nightmare
In the new studio, I think the real part of it (desk, barcos) are good, but the greenscreen area just looks absolutely horrible.
My issue is with the newsroom part of it - it doesn't look anything like a real newsroom and looks like something out of a video game and very very virtual. The rest of it isn't too bad
IT
ahh N9, the studio that was killed too early
ahh N9, the studio that was killed too early
IT
In the new studio, I think the real part of it (desk, barcos) are good, but the greenscreen area just looks absolutely horrible.
My issue is with the newsroom part of it - it doesn't look anything like a real newsroom and looks like something out of a video game and very very virtual. The rest of it isn't too bad
Looks worse than BBC News N6's old backdrop. I actually liked the N6 backdrop, so you can tell how much I don't like sky's virtual newsroom. Atleast on the barcos they use a cool sky news logo background with alot of coloured stripes
Soz not soz but it’s all awful, all of it. One big ocd nightmare
In the new studio, I think the real part of it (desk, barcos) are good, but the greenscreen area just looks absolutely horrible.
My issue is with the newsroom part of it - it doesn't look anything like a real newsroom and looks like something out of a video game and very very virtual. The rest of it isn't too bad
Looks worse than BBC News N6's old backdrop. I actually liked the N6 backdrop, so you can tell how much I don't like sky's virtual newsroom. Atleast on the barcos they use a cool sky news logo background with alot of coloured stripes
GI
Glass box looks lovely with the new lights, warmer and more cosy. Still a shame they insist on only using the boring hallway as a background while the grand building view is ignored.
Really don't like the new set. Thankfully it's only used for overnights and Sunrise. It's such a letdown.
Overall sad that newsroom view is now part of Sky News history and is not likely to return in the future. Plus their ''new'' newsroom is such a downgrade.
Really don't like the new set. Thankfully it's only used for overnights and Sunrise. It's such a letdown.
Overall sad that newsroom view is now part of Sky News history and is not likely to return in the future. Plus their ''new'' newsroom is such a downgrade.