Absolutely gorgeous! The new look is amazing - colourful, modern, hi-tech and fun. Easily the best set design I've ever seen, and I like what they've done with the graphics too.
Yeah it totally fits with the NBC look of colour colour and more colour. After all NBC was the world first all-colour tv network. Hence the use of the Peacock. I think NBC and its in-house design firm hit the ball outta the park on this one. The whole look from top to bottom is ace. I dont think it looks "downmarket" in the least. Its just different. The sombre look it tired and needs to be retired. This is fresh modern and lively and it fit perfectly with the hyper active flash sets. The new music I think for SquBox is Ace. I still think they need to hype the signature NBC chimes. Agreeed?[URL=http://www.billyfinlay.com/cnbc ]The Latest Pics[/URL]
I think it's nice, and yes they've spent lots of money on it... but hmm. I can't help but think that - at least from some of the camera shots - it screams "wow, this is a nice looking local news programme".
I don't know, I have only seen it from the pictures so it's probably not entirely fair, but it does look a bit unstructured. As if they've said to themselves "plasmas are great, let's put them everywhere" and "I wonder how many broadly similar studio designs we can fit in one building?"
Sorry, but as flashy and expensive as it does look, I don't think there is any real flare there... it's like everything everyone else has already done, put together in one place.
"it's like everything everyone else has already done put together in one place"...
will probably be an understatement.
By the time we actually get the News 24 update done, "everyone else" will have moved on to new things and the BBC will have a fresh News channel that's entirely dated.
I call this "bureaucratic foresight."
But seriously, the CNBC building has been under construction for 3 years...3 years ago these concepts would have been quite innovative. And they'll probably work well going forward.
Furthermore, regarding "flare"...it's a business channel, not an art show. And the outcome of this project is probably a good analogy for how the BBC Broadcasting House project will turn out......expensive and ultimately unimpressive -- unless you happen to be one of the people who gets a nice, new office.
I noticed that Business Center is now from their new HQ rather than the NYSE, I assume this is for the long term. Is there any reason for CNBC not staying on the floor of the New York Stock Exchange?
Yes the Wake-up call and Business Centre was based out of the new HQ. As far as some comments from people that have only seen images...The problem with most 24hr information channels is the fact they have a tendency to look boring. That is reason CNBC has built a set that is extremely impressive. And its nothing that has been seen before on television certainly nothing like it ever in the UK. I think that each show on CNBC is worthy of having its own dedicated set just like they have their on look, instead of a rolling channel similar look. CNBC has the the money to improve their on-air. Sadly most UK broadcasters dont have the resources,imagination, money or space that US broadcasters have at their disposal. I dont think thats a reason to say that its not necessary or impressive. The use of plasma screens keeps the set looking fresh BECAUSE THEY CAN BE CHANGED. Hence the fresh and constant motion that a breaking news infomation channel need. Not some boring dry looking desk and a boring locked down shot with a single camera. A big set says to me... "Look we have the money and resources to cover every story from every angle everywhere." With some UK broadcasters I'd rather watch paint dry. No I'm not saying size is everything, but things are flashier these days. . The fact remains that young people are the next generation of news viewers and they grew up on MTV and the like. I think news viewership will drop off as the pensioners die. Youth must be captured as they grow up. Why must news be stuck in a time warp. Even the new FIVE news set was seen on a Canadian newsmagazine in the 80s. CBS Sunday Morning has a similar set and they've been using it since the 70's. The ITV news set looks like 80s local news rubbish. I just hope the revamped BBC News channel is nice because so far we are playing catch-up. This is 2003. Time for something different and fresh and new. Well done on CNBC.
Well at least Business Centre has changed for the better, that rather overdramatic, millitaristic march they used as their theme music, and the melodramatic voiceover ("From the Financial Capital of the Globe"!!!!) at the start of the show has gone. (It still has a voiceover unlike Closing Bell, its just not half as bad as it was before).
I still think all this lowercase (and yellow!) is not good... the logos and titles are rather tasteless. (Please CNBC Europe and CNBC Asia, think carefully before atttempting to change to this graphics set!) This is meant to be a serious business news channel! But again, the set is very impressive...
That is reason CNBC has built a set that is extremely impressive. And its nothing that has been seen before on television certainly nothing like it ever in the UK..
Yes, but this really is the point... it has been seen and done before, all of it.
Not all in one place, but individually on different channels at different times.
It's nice, it's flashy, it's expensive and expansive... but it's not a revolution.
I don't care how much the US networks spend on their studios; at the end of the day I'd rather they spent a bit more on newsgathering rather than systematically closing down their international bureaux. The British NEWS networks have the news, the American networks have the money.
CNBC did not want a revolution. I gotta keep saying this but this new complex was started 3 years ago....
i.e., in 2000.
The whole point was to have a facility that rivalled CNN's huge complex....which is really the point. It's very hard for a cable news channel to justify hiring several hundred more staff when their existing facilities can barely contain the staff they have.
Furthermore, NBC just merged with Vivendi Universal...which means that MSNBC and CNBC are in a good position to rival CNN and Fox News. At the very least you know that NBC-Vivendi (probably will be called NBC Universal) will want to maintain a portfolio of media operations, including news channels. So dont worry about CNBC or MSNBC...they money will come.
Any by the way...the British news networks are B-O-R-I-N-G compared to their American counterparts. You Brits are too worried about reading the news impartially and being objective "and all that." Liven it up a little bit...you can have objective news casts, but you need commentary, you need to interview people with opposing viewpoints (nobody wants to watch a stuffed shirt express his opinion by himself a la BBC World). The only good news programmes that the BBC has are Newsnight, Hardtalk, Panorama and BBC World's The World Today. The rest is complete, outdated tripe.
It's nice, it's flashy, it's expensive and expansive... but it's not a revolution.
I don't care how much the US networks spend on their studios; at the end of the day I'd rather they spent a bit more on newsgathering rather than systematically closing down their international bureaux. The British NEWS networks have the news, the American networks have the money.
CNBC is not a NEWS channel. Its a business channel. There is a massive difference between news in the conventional sense. And as far as newsgathering, CNBC is the innovator and creator of televised business news. CNBC is the worlds biggest business channel. They operate newschannels in EU and Asia in many languages. So I dont really understand your point. Furthermore this forum is about "PRESENTATION"....say it with me....PRESENTATION. Not about news content. That is debatable. Furthermore 24 News channels is an American invention. So dont start griping about what we do better than them. It we did it better the BBC would be seen their on its own dedicated news channel instead of CNN globally. Remember...who followed who? Next please.
at the end of the day I'd rather they spent a bit more on newsgathering the American networks have the money.
Well who invented/started the use of LIVE Satellite Phones for live reporting from anywhere on the globe? The Americans. Who were the the first to use/invent vehicles that can broadcast live pictures as they are moving? The Americans. The BBC or even the spunky Sky News didnt have live pictures from the moving vehicles in the deserts of Iraq. NBC had the "Bloommobile". Invent by the deceased NBC reporter David Bloom. They were the first and clearest pictures ever broadcast anywhere LIVE. First and Live. You can't beat LIVE. Pictures are what makes television television. A starched stuff shirt sitting in London doenst have the same impact as live pictures as the Americans. The abililty to see things. Content aside, the Americans do more for broadcasting and presentation, news production, and newsgathering than we have. Give them that mate.
Oh Americans produce vastly more news than the British.
I imagine this has something to do with the size of the country, however, and not the deep sense of attachment that US TV networks have to covering international events.
You do of course fail to mention that not one of the US TV networks had a correspondent in Baghdad for the duration of the war - either because they withdrew them early (ABC, CBS), got kicked out (CNN, FOX), or pandered to political pressure back at home (NBC).
Covering it from every angle, did you say?
CNBC, in fairness, is actually very good at what it does and has managed to avoid the Fox News intrusion into cable news, but CNN, Fox and MSNBC are absolutely disgraceful.
I just find it very ironic that NBC/ABC/CBS/CNN say they cannot justify the cost of maintaining some of their overseas bureaux and yet somehow seem capable of justifying the expense of producing whopping great studios.