PC
Oh dear - this is a mess on so many levels.
1. It's basically a strange hybrid of the weather graphics for Sky News, RI:SE and Scottish TV. But especially the first one. This isn't necessarily a bad idea as I find Sky's graphics the clearest and hence most accurate forecast, but it's been really badly done. How can one cloud give you the weather for half of Scotland, for example? But because it's not top down it's not as clear where is being 'rained on', so to speak, and from the normal view it's impossible to tell for Scotland. It's just not as clear. And people expect more information from the BBC - while just telling us whether it's going to rain is fine for Sky, tedious weather watchers demand all sorts of information from the BBC. Are they going to get this from these vague graphics? I doubt it.
2. People don't like change, and especially in this country. You've already heard people harping back to the globe and harping back to weather symbols. While the majority of the country won't care too much, a certain majority are going to be up in arms about this. (They'll have to extend Points of View, for example) Add this to the BBC's inability to ignore criticism (see this morning's Breakfast, where they cringingly read out every complaint - very fair, but very damaging), and I wonder whether they'll have done a reversal by the end of the month.
Oh, and someone asked what we thought of SMG's weather graphics. New and original when they first turned up, but now extremely tedious and time-filling - when you've already had the weather, and get a 3D flythrough through a part of the country you don't live in, it instantly makes you turn over. That and the horrendous sub ITV nightscreen/elevator music you're subjected to throughout, then the Talking Scotland tedium afterwards, and you wonder how many viewers are lost after Scotland Today. It's obviously a blatant attempt to fill time because they don't have a dedicated weather presenter any more.
1. It's basically a strange hybrid of the weather graphics for Sky News, RI:SE and Scottish TV. But especially the first one. This isn't necessarily a bad idea as I find Sky's graphics the clearest and hence most accurate forecast, but it's been really badly done. How can one cloud give you the weather for half of Scotland, for example? But because it's not top down it's not as clear where is being 'rained on', so to speak, and from the normal view it's impossible to tell for Scotland. It's just not as clear. And people expect more information from the BBC - while just telling us whether it's going to rain is fine for Sky, tedious weather watchers demand all sorts of information from the BBC. Are they going to get this from these vague graphics? I doubt it.
2. People don't like change, and especially in this country. You've already heard people harping back to the globe and harping back to weather symbols. While the majority of the country won't care too much, a certain majority are going to be up in arms about this. (They'll have to extend Points of View, for example) Add this to the BBC's inability to ignore criticism (see this morning's Breakfast, where they cringingly read out every complaint - very fair, but very damaging), and I wonder whether they'll have done a reversal by the end of the month.
Oh, and someone asked what we thought of SMG's weather graphics. New and original when they first turned up, but now extremely tedious and time-filling - when you've already had the weather, and get a 3D flythrough through a part of the country you don't live in, it instantly makes you turn over. That and the horrendous sub ITV nightscreen/elevator music you're subjected to throughout, then the Talking Scotland tedium afterwards, and you wonder how many viewers are lost after Scotland Today. It's obviously a blatant attempt to fill time because they don't have a dedicated weather presenter any more.
SE
Indeed, here is the article :
Square Eyes
Founding member
marksi posted:
I'll give you sense of perspective - the top of the front page of tomorrow's Times. Huge pic of Helen Young with the new graphics and the headline "Murk Dampness and Storms for the BBC".
Indeed, here is the article :
Quote:
THE outlook appeared cloudy for the BBC yesterday as it rode into a storm of viewer complaints about its new, graphics-charged weather bulletin.
Long-familiar sun and rain symbols disappeared, replaced by computer-generated animations of the elements in a £1 million revolution that the corporation said would provide a much clearer picture but succeeded only in annoying people.
Despite an early warning in Saturday’s edition of The Times, viewers were aghast by the change.
“My daughter, who is eight, watched the weather with me this morning and she asked what was wrong with the TV?” began one complaint, typical of hundreds posted on the BBC website. The “zooming” underneath the clouds, which the BBC is particularly proud of, induced “mild motion sickness” in one viewer.
“I had no idea rain was on its way and this was because the symbols had gone,” fumed a drenched Neil McLean, who declared the new graphics “horrible and complicated”. “Puddles and grey smudges on a brown map are very confusing,” Emma Brady wrote.
Others complained that the new three-dimensional representation of Britain was out of proportion, discriminating against Scotland and the North. Owen Smith wrote: “The oblique view of the country massively distorts the overall picture. Are people in the North going to be offered a reduction in their licence fee for this poorer service?
“Do we really want a generation of children growing up with an incorrect idea of the shape of the UK and relative sizes of different parts of the country?”
Metereological observers complained about the removal of pressure charts, isobars and fronts, accusing the BBC of “dumbing down” the bulletin.
One viewer asked why England’s “green and pleasant land” had turned brown. Black-and-white TV viewers were left in the dark, others argued.
The BBC was unbowed, saying that viewers had demanded the changes in the first place. A less-than-conciliatory statement on the BBC Weather website read: “Today’s media industry is like a shark. Either you keep moving forward or you are dead in the water.
“The new graphics are clearer and engaging. Based on your feedback we have created clearer, more involving images of weather conditions without sacrificing the science behind those forecasts.”
Colin Tregear, the project director of the BBC Weather Centre, said: “It’s a revolution followed by evolution. There could be a battle for hearts and minds but people very quickly get used to things and we will explain all the changes. The first reaction might be, ‘They’ve changed the weather’, but then I hope people say, ‘That’s innovative, it’s ambitious’ and it will show more clearly where you live what the weather is going to be like.”
Audience research found that the old BBC weather forecast was trusted but “boring” and presented by “men in suits”. The fluffy cloud symbols had not been updated for 30 years. The new graphics use a software package from New Zealand and the latest information from the Met Office to show the progression of weather through a period of time, such as cloud melting away to be replaced by shafts of sunlight.
There are supporters of the makeover. Roy Button wrote: “I like the new graphics, and in particular will find the ‘Nowcast’, where you can view the rainfall forecast hour-by-hour for the rest of the day, very useful for tennis, golf or cycling.
“Unfortunately, I think they have put Luton about 40km east of its actual position.”
Long-familiar sun and rain symbols disappeared, replaced by computer-generated animations of the elements in a £1 million revolution that the corporation said would provide a much clearer picture but succeeded only in annoying people.
Despite an early warning in Saturday’s edition of The Times, viewers were aghast by the change.
“My daughter, who is eight, watched the weather with me this morning and she asked what was wrong with the TV?” began one complaint, typical of hundreds posted on the BBC website. The “zooming” underneath the clouds, which the BBC is particularly proud of, induced “mild motion sickness” in one viewer.
“I had no idea rain was on its way and this was because the symbols had gone,” fumed a drenched Neil McLean, who declared the new graphics “horrible and complicated”. “Puddles and grey smudges on a brown map are very confusing,” Emma Brady wrote.
Others complained that the new three-dimensional representation of Britain was out of proportion, discriminating against Scotland and the North. Owen Smith wrote: “The oblique view of the country massively distorts the overall picture. Are people in the North going to be offered a reduction in their licence fee for this poorer service?
“Do we really want a generation of children growing up with an incorrect idea of the shape of the UK and relative sizes of different parts of the country?”
Metereological observers complained about the removal of pressure charts, isobars and fronts, accusing the BBC of “dumbing down” the bulletin.
One viewer asked why England’s “green and pleasant land” had turned brown. Black-and-white TV viewers were left in the dark, others argued.
The BBC was unbowed, saying that viewers had demanded the changes in the first place. A less-than-conciliatory statement on the BBC Weather website read: “Today’s media industry is like a shark. Either you keep moving forward or you are dead in the water.
“The new graphics are clearer and engaging. Based on your feedback we have created clearer, more involving images of weather conditions without sacrificing the science behind those forecasts.”
Colin Tregear, the project director of the BBC Weather Centre, said: “It’s a revolution followed by evolution. There could be a battle for hearts and minds but people very quickly get used to things and we will explain all the changes. The first reaction might be, ‘They’ve changed the weather’, but then I hope people say, ‘That’s innovative, it’s ambitious’ and it will show more clearly where you live what the weather is going to be like.”
Audience research found that the old BBC weather forecast was trusted but “boring” and presented by “men in suits”. The fluffy cloud symbols had not been updated for 30 years. The new graphics use a software package from New Zealand and the latest information from the Met Office to show the progression of weather through a period of time, such as cloud melting away to be replaced by shafts of sunlight.
There are supporters of the makeover. Roy Button wrote: “I like the new graphics, and in particular will find the ‘Nowcast’, where you can view the rainfall forecast hour-by-hour for the rest of the day, very useful for tennis, golf or cycling.
“Unfortunately, I think they have put Luton about 40km east of its actual position.”
SP
Sput
Leave it to The Times! That bastion of editorial independence and loony left-ism.
BR
Like Celebrity Love Island without Celebs...
Juicy Joe posted:
The BBC graphics are a disgrace!
A weather forecast without symbols is:-
Like a main road without signs...
Like a driving lesson without an instructor...
Like a road map without symbols...
Like a new product without instructions...
A weather forecast without symbols is:-
Like a main road without signs...
Like a driving lesson without an instructor...
Like a road map without symbols...
Like a new product without instructions...
Like Celebrity Love Island without Celebs...
DU
Well before the graphics relaunch I proposed what criteria I thought should be used to judge them:
The basic test for the new graphics are two fold:
(1) Deliver the forcast with equal or better clarity.
(2) Deliver the same amount of information in equal or less time.
Failure on either of these accounts will indicate a step back for BBC Weather.
Time will tell.
On point (1) they've failed- and regressed.
On point (2) they've failed- and regressed, delivering less information in more time....a quite extraordinary achievement.
How the head of BBC Weather can justify the £1m pricetag I just don't know.
How the head of BBC Weather could have seen the trial forecasts (that have been going for MONTHS) and given this the green-light....again I just don't know.
As I predicted- I don't think the forecasts will last in their current form for very long....in fact I reckon there will be people burning the midnight oil tonight making possible changes- changes that would have been flagged by testing within minutes (so presumably they didn't audience test it).
If someone who's never seen BBC Weather before were presented with the old graphics and the new set, I reckon the vast majority would term the old set the more modern, probably the replacement for the new set.
They're so old-fashioned, and I have to say it again- whoever's in charge of BBC Weather appears to be impressed by 3D for the sake of 3D rather than content.
England's landmarks are Plymouth, Norwich and Newcastle. Marvellous.
You could have shown the map to a 10 year old and they would have told you Scotland is not properly represented.
Scarcely has a more amateurish and frankly childish cock-up been made by the BBC, never mind the amount of money has been thrown down the drain.
The basic test for the new graphics are two fold:
(1) Deliver the forcast with equal or better clarity.
(2) Deliver the same amount of information in equal or less time.
Failure on either of these accounts will indicate a step back for BBC Weather.
Time will tell.
On point (1) they've failed- and regressed.
On point (2) they've failed- and regressed, delivering less information in more time....a quite extraordinary achievement.
How the head of BBC Weather can justify the £1m pricetag I just don't know.
How the head of BBC Weather could have seen the trial forecasts (that have been going for MONTHS) and given this the green-light....again I just don't know.
As I predicted- I don't think the forecasts will last in their current form for very long....in fact I reckon there will be people burning the midnight oil tonight making possible changes- changes that would have been flagged by testing within minutes (so presumably they didn't audience test it).
If someone who's never seen BBC Weather before were presented with the old graphics and the new set, I reckon the vast majority would term the old set the more modern, probably the replacement for the new set.
They're so old-fashioned, and I have to say it again- whoever's in charge of BBC Weather appears to be impressed by 3D for the sake of 3D rather than content.
England's landmarks are Plymouth, Norwich and Newcastle. Marvellous.
You could have shown the map to a 10 year old and they would have told you Scotland is not properly represented.
Scarcely has a more amateurish and frankly childish cock-up been made by the BBC, never mind the amount of money has been thrown down the drain.
JJ
Like Celebrity Love Island without Celebs...
Ha ha ha!!! You can see what I'm getting at though? Not trying to overreact - just merely providing an analogy.
Juicy Joe
Founding member
Brekkie Boy posted:
Juicy Joe posted:
The BBC graphics are a disgrace!
A weather forecast without symbols is:-
Like a main road without signs...
Like a driving lesson without an instructor...
Like a road map without symbols...
Like a new product without instructions...
A weather forecast without symbols is:-
Like a main road without signs...
Like a driving lesson without an instructor...
Like a road map without symbols...
Like a new product without instructions...
Like Celebrity Love Island without Celebs...
Ha ha ha!!!
You can see what I'm getting at though? Not trying to overreact - just merely providing an analogy.
AD
"...and now lets see the whole of the UK."
http://www.bbc.co.uk/weather/images/promos/hp_promos/hp_ukchart.jpg
http://www.bbc.co.uk/weather/images/promos/hp_promos/hp_ukchart.jpg