RI
It makes no sense to refer to “ITN” these days. UTV only did it so they didn’t have to refer to ITV News which was at odds with their brand. But “ITV News” is the brand now. Why give the company which makes it so much prominence? ITV only owns 40% of ITN.
I think ITN is a special case, not just another indie production company. Its former (?) status as nominated news provider means that it has a heritage and reputation for quality journalism associated with the name.
Maybe when the time comes to turn NaT back to a serious news programme they'll go back to the legacy brand to give it more gravitas.
In the mid 00's, had Charles Allen managed to take over ITN entirely, he said he would have revived the brand on screen instead of using ITV News.
I think Channel 4 said that if ITV bought a controlling stake in ITN they would go elsewhere for their news.
It makes no sense to refer to “ITN” these days. UTV only did it so they didn’t have to refer to ITV News which was at odds with their brand. But “ITV News” is the brand now. Why give the company which makes it so much prominence? ITV only owns 40% of ITN.
I think ITN is a special case, not just another indie production company. Its former (?) status as nominated news provider means that it has a heritage and reputation for quality journalism associated with the name.
Maybe when the time comes to turn NaT back to a serious news programme they'll go back to the legacy brand to give it more gravitas.
In the mid 00's, had Charles Allen managed to take over ITN entirely, he said he would have revived the brand on screen instead of using ITV News.
I think Channel 4 said that if ITV bought a controlling stake in ITN they would go elsewhere for their news.