MT
But what I don't understand is why can't they get it to a point where it is reasonably good before putting it on air? I mean, sending it out live when it's half-baked really looks tacky. Especially with the wrong fonts and no transparency.
Come on BBC ... get it together.
http://homepage.mac.com/robertpalmer/tvforum/sig.gif
snarfu posted:
I think the style is not so bad. At least it does not have the worst elements that Sky News has. ie more screen clutter or the horrid 'whooshing' noises. At the moment it is a work in progress and over time they will tweak it.
But what I don't understand is why can't they get it to a point where it is reasonably good before putting it on air? I mean, sending it out live when it's half-baked really looks tacky. Especially with the wrong fonts and no transparency.
Come on BBC ... get it together.
http://homepage.mac.com/robertpalmer/tvforum/sig.gif
NE
An entire industry... again, is this the one you're going to use again?
I don't care what the industry thinks of News 24, it's not as if Sky is getting 10 times as many viewers as News 24, I watch it, others watch it, but you just can't accept that. My argument is closed, goodnight.
Returns to plotting downfall of mankind
c@t posted:
As I have said before, there's an entire industry out there going against you.
An entire industry... again, is this the one you're going to use again?
I don't care what the industry thinks of News 24, it's not as if Sky is getting 10 times as many viewers as News 24, I watch it, others watch it, but you just can't accept that. My argument is closed, goodnight.
Returns to plotting downfall of mankind
MA
Yes, I really hope that it's not meant to be totally solid. It might look ok if it was more transparent but right now it just looks cheap. It seems that solid graphics are becoming more and more common, which I think looks dreadful - some of the worst graphics in tv news would actually be a lot better if they just used a bit of transparency on them.
mark
Founding member
MrTomServo posted:
But what I don't understand is why can't they get it to a point where it is reasonably good before putting it on air? I mean, sending it out live when it's half-baked really looks tacky. Especially with the wrong fonts and no transparency.
Yes, I really hope that it's not meant to be totally solid. It might look ok if it was more transparent but right now it just looks cheap. It seems that solid graphics are becoming more and more common, which I think looks dreadful - some of the worst graphics in tv news would actually be a lot better if they just used a bit of transparency on them.
CA
An entire industry... again, is this the one you're going to use again?
I don't care what the industry thinks of News 24, it's not as if Sky is getting 10 times as many viewers as News 24, I watch it, others watch it, but you just can't accept that. My argument is closed, goodnight.
Returns to plotting downfall of mankind
Well, heh, it is getting rather more viewers, I think you'll find. It was getting about twice as many, nay more, during the war in Iraq, in Afghanistan, the fuel crisis, the election...
I can accept that you watch it, it would be a pretty illogical stance for me to claim that you didn't. I can't quite see why you and a few thousand others bother, but I see that you do.
Sky is getting many, many times more viewers than News 24 in total - 80 million viewers, 40 countries... remember?
Noelfirl posted:
c@t posted:
As I have said before, there's an entire industry out there going against you.
An entire industry... again, is this the one you're going to use again?
I don't care what the industry thinks of News 24, it's not as if Sky is getting 10 times as many viewers as News 24, I watch it, others watch it, but you just can't accept that. My argument is closed, goodnight.
Returns to plotting downfall of mankind
Well, heh, it is getting rather more viewers, I think you'll find. It was getting about twice as many, nay more, during the war in Iraq, in Afghanistan, the fuel crisis, the election...
I can accept that you watch it, it would be a pretty illogical stance for me to claim that you didn't. I can't quite see why you and a few thousand others bother, but I see that you do.
Sky is getting many, many times more viewers than News 24 in total - 80 million viewers, 40 countries... remember?
JA
jay
Founding member
c@t and Martin are right in my opinion.
If News 24 wishes to gain viewers and be the first News Channel turned to when a major story breaks, they seriously need to buck their ideas up.
They need a lovely, bright studio. They need cheery newsreaders (with a pinch of banter). They need novel ideas like the Newswall and the SkyCopter (Obviously to get a newswall now would be blatent copying).
All I see News 24 as at the minute is a boring news channel, with miserable presenters and a stuffy studio.
Oh, and by the way - i like the Sky Graphics and the whoosh sound - they make you take note of the news, which is what they should do.
Just my opinion!
If News 24 wishes to gain viewers and be the first News Channel turned to when a major story breaks, they seriously need to buck their ideas up.
They need a lovely, bright studio. They need cheery newsreaders (with a pinch of banter). They need novel ideas like the Newswall and the SkyCopter (Obviously to get a newswall now would be blatent copying).
All I see News 24 as at the minute is a boring news channel, with miserable presenters and a stuffy studio.
Oh, and by the way - i like the Sky Graphics and the whoosh sound - they make you take note of the news, which is what they should do.
Just my opinion!
MA
An entire industry... again, is this the one you're going to use again?
I don't care what the industry thinks of News 24, it's not as if Sky is getting 10 times as many viewers as News 24, I watch it, others watch it, but you just can't accept that. My argument is closed, goodnight.
Returns to plotting downfall of mankind
Well, heh, it is getting rather more viewers, I think you'll find. It was getting about twice as many, nay more, during the war in Iraq, in Afghanistan, the fuel crisis, the election...
I can accept that you watch it, it would be a pretty illogical stance for me to claim that you didn't. I can't quite see why you and a few thousand others bother, but I see that you do.
Sky is getting many, many times more viewers than News 24 in total - 80 million viewers, 40 countries... remember?
This is hilarious. You really think 80 million people watch Sky News! Don't forget News24 has far far more viewers than Sky, because it has the advantage of being put on BBC1 in this country and BBC World around the Globe.
During the war up to 10 Million were watching the News24 specials in this country alone.
And don't forget the global; reach of BBC World Service radio, and the BBC News website
Marcus
Founding member
c@t posted:
Noelfirl posted:
c@t posted:
As I have said before, there's an entire industry out there going against you.
An entire industry... again, is this the one you're going to use again?
I don't care what the industry thinks of News 24, it's not as if Sky is getting 10 times as many viewers as News 24, I watch it, others watch it, but you just can't accept that. My argument is closed, goodnight.
Returns to plotting downfall of mankind
Well, heh, it is getting rather more viewers, I think you'll find. It was getting about twice as many, nay more, during the war in Iraq, in Afghanistan, the fuel crisis, the election...
I can accept that you watch it, it would be a pretty illogical stance for me to claim that you didn't. I can't quite see why you and a few thousand others bother, but I see that you do.
Sky is getting many, many times more viewers than News 24 in total - 80 million viewers, 40 countries... remember?
This is hilarious. You really think 80 million people watch Sky News! Don't forget News24 has far far more viewers than Sky, because it has the advantage of being put on BBC1 in this country and BBC World around the Globe.
During the war up to 10 Million were watching the News24 specials in this country alone.
And don't forget the global; reach of BBC World Service radio, and the BBC News website
SP
Hang on a minute, how about the millions of peope in god knows how many countries watch and respect the BBC as a premier news source?!
Kicks Sky News into touch..
Stu
c@t posted:
Sky is getting many, many times more viewers than News 24 in total - 80 million viewers, 40 countries... remember?
Hang on a minute, how about the millions of peope in god knows how many countries watch and respect the BBC as a premier news source?!
Kicks Sky News into touch..
Stu
:-(
A former member
News 24 is simply the UK arm of BBC World, although it itself is fully finanically independent of World.
Personally Sky News is getting boring. Almost predictable.
You can bet your bottom dollar that when World launch in the U.S. that Fox will slate it constantly. Of course, all publicity is good publicity.
Personally Sky News is getting boring. Almost predictable.
You can bet your bottom dollar that when World launch in the U.S. that Fox will slate it constantly. Of course, all publicity is good publicity.
SN
BBC News produces news for both BBC News 24 and BBC World. News 24 is not the UK arm of BBC World. BBC World is a channel owned by BBC Worldwide. BBC News is simply a supplier to that channel. Likewise BBC News is a supplier to BBC News 24 and is a provider of news bullitens to BBC 1/2 (In theory, although unthinkable, the BBC could look to other providers for their news service).
James posted:
News 24 is simply the UK arm of BBC World, although it itself is fully finanically independent of World.
Personally Sky News is getting boring. Almost predictable.
You can bet your bottom dollar that when World launch in the U.S. that Fox will slate it constantly. Of course, all publicity is good publicity.
Personally Sky News is getting boring. Almost predictable.
You can bet your bottom dollar that when World launch in the U.S. that Fox will slate it constantly. Of course, all publicity is good publicity.
BBC News produces news for both BBC News 24 and BBC World. News 24 is not the UK arm of BBC World. BBC World is a channel owned by BBC Worldwide. BBC News is simply a supplier to that channel. Likewise BBC News is a supplier to BBC News 24 and is a provider of news bullitens to BBC 1/2 (In theory, although unthinkable, the BBC could look to other providers for their news service).
MA
BBC News produces news for both BBC News 24 and BBC World. News 24 is not the UK arm of BBC World. BBC World is a channel owned by BBC Worldwide. BBC News is simply a supplier to that channel. Likewise BBC News is a supplier to BBC News 24 and is a provider of news bullitens to BBC 1/2 (In theory, although unthinkable, the BBC could look to other providers for their news service).
Actually News24 is one of two channels actually run by BBC News rather than by BBC Broadcast. This is why it has no presentation suite.
Marcus
Founding member
snarfu posted:
James posted:
News 24 is simply the UK arm of BBC World, although it itself is fully finanically independent of World.
Personally Sky News is getting boring. Almost predictable.
You can bet your bottom dollar that when World launch in the U.S. that Fox will slate it constantly. Of course, all publicity is good publicity.
Personally Sky News is getting boring. Almost predictable.
You can bet your bottom dollar that when World launch in the U.S. that Fox will slate it constantly. Of course, all publicity is good publicity.
BBC News produces news for both BBC News 24 and BBC World. News 24 is not the UK arm of BBC World. BBC World is a channel owned by BBC Worldwide. BBC News is simply a supplier to that channel. Likewise BBC News is a supplier to BBC News 24 and is a provider of news bullitens to BBC 1/2 (In theory, although unthinkable, the BBC could look to other providers for their news service).
Actually News24 is one of two channels actually run by BBC News rather than by BBC Broadcast. This is why it has no presentation suite.