BBC News Channel/BBC World News Merger - Printable Version

+- Pres Café (https://pres.cafe)
+-- Forum: Pres Café TV and Radio Forums (https://pres.cafe/forumdisplay.php?fid=1)
+--- Forum: News and Sport Presentation (https://pres.cafe/forumdisplay.php?fid=3)
+--- Thread: BBC News Channel/BBC World News Merger (/showthread.php?tid=103)

---

RE: BBC News Channel/BBC World News Merger - Kojak - 25-02-2023

(25-02-2023, 07:21 PM)Stockland Hillman Wrote:  

(25-02-2023, 05:17 PM)CF1 Wrote:  The way things are going, it's like the BBC is a local cable news outfit. Not a national broadcaster. Reduced to absolutely nothing.

£5 billion pounds of income,  £3+billion from UK household taxation.

The BBC hasn't been reduced to absolutely nothing by anybody.  It's CHOSEN to spend money on little used podcasts, identikit online content and lower skill online journalism instead of crafted Broadcasting

I didn't understand why the Beeb made a big deal of bringing back BBC Three, then a couple of months later announced 'hey, we're gonna axe BBC4, CBBC and the News Channel'. What they giveth with one hand, they taketh away with the other. I know, in reality, there's much more to it than that, but it just looked so boneheaded. If I were DG, I'd like to think the News Channel would have stayed, with cuts being made elsewhere. It's an important public service, and if anyone should provide a 24-hour news channel, it should be the BBC. Though I get why things have turned out as they have. The presentational changes (if not necessarily the editorial ones) to the new combined channel mostly sound good, and I am glad that there seems to be some innovation going on (something of a rarity chez Beeb!). Good luck to them - they will need it.

---

harshy - harshy - 25-02-2023

(25-02-2023, 10:19 PM)bbctvtechop Wrote:  Where did I say it would be a different look? If anything the opposite, except it becoming under the Chameleon branding I don't think much else will change. The "watching box" will only appear on the domestic version when there is a news event anticipated and it will only go full screen once the event starts, for example someone starts speaking or the verdict is about to be given. Otherwise the rest of the time you will get full screen core feed with full graphics and tickers (which are also not changing). 

I've been told on good authority that while GALLERY A will be used for the UK opts, it will actually use STUDIO J cameras. So STUDIO A will not be seen under normal circumstances.

<speculation>
I guess in time the technical infrastructure will be changed to have a (maybe virtual/software based - perhaps vMix) GALLERY J which will have full opting ability to avoid the need for a huge gallery to control essentially one camera and microphone plus OSs.
</speculation>

I thought the graphics were changing as someone tweeted there were testing new graphics but having said I can’t remember who said that…

As to the countdown now thst nearly all the personalities are going they can recreate the 2000 countdown but in chameleon style?

---

RE: harshy - MFTJA - 25-02-2023

(25-02-2023, 11:45 PM)harshy Wrote:  As to the countdown now thst nearly all the personalities are going they can recreate the 2000 countdown but in chameleon style?

I'd assume some new footage will debut, as has happened with the many refreshes the countdown has had since 2013. I'd imagine that the new lead presenters will feature more heavily in the new countdown too.

---

RE: BBC News Channel/BBC World News Merger - DTV - 26-02-2023

This is very tangential to the discussions at the minute, but one thing I do hope about the future new 'branded' news programmes that were hinted about in bbctvtechops original post is that none of them include the word 'Live' in their name. I know the BBC love 'x live' programme titles, but I would really like a bit more imagination. Outside Source is a great name for a news programme, even if (as I think I might have previously suggested) it and The Context would be more appropriately titled with each other's names.

I also feel that, if 'branded' programmes are to be used, they should all actually have their own purpose, features and style, which I hasn't always been the case or has become blurred over time (the three 'afternoon' branded programmes have felt a bit indistinct in recent years). The low point of this has to have been Newsroom Live, whose distinctiveness seemed to stretch to the Sport headlines and full Sport segment being swapped around.

GMT I think is really the benchmark of BBC 'branded' news programmes. It's a great name - catchy, stands out and has a bit of depth to it. In terms of graphics and music, it was in the sweet-spot of being distinct enough from BBC News to feel individual, while still being recognisably BBC. Particularly when it started, it was also such a well formatted programme - a good mix of news, analysis, business and sport - as well as a very globally-balanced running order.

---

RE: BBC News Channel/BBC World News Merger - LDN - 26-02-2023

(26-02-2023, 12:14 AM)DTV Wrote:  Outside Source is a great name for a news programme

*record scratch*

Got to stop you right there. Outside Source is a terrible, terrible name for a news programme. It means absolutely nothing to 99% of those who watch it. 

I imagine someone patted themselves on the back quite heartily when they came up with the Outside Source name -- an oh-so-witty play on words, between an OS and the idea of the 'source' of a story. 

But unless they're familiar with the technicalities of what an OS is in broadcasting, most people won't get the reference. They'll likely understand what a 'source' is in the context of newsgathering -- i.e. the person or organisation to which a story, or some element of it, can be attributed. But that leaves 'outside' as slightly baffling in that context to the regular viewer, especially if they then try to reconcile the name with the notion that an 'inside source' surely seems much more desirable and reliable for a major news story. 

If you consider that notion, the idea that having someone 'on the inside' of a news story certainly sounds better than getting information from 'outside sources' who are probably less familiar with the details -- a thought that might well cross viewers' minds if they try to work out what the name actually means -- then surely you can see the problem with calling the programme 'Outside Source'. For those who aren't in on the joke, it's confusing, at best;  at worst, nonsensical.

And just like a joke, if the name has to be explained to be fully understood and appreciated, it can hardly be hailed as an example of good branding. 

That said, it couldn't possibly matter less. I understand the marketing and $$$ reasons for separately branded programmes, on World News especially. But the reality is that, with vanishingly few exceptions, viewers of BBC News and BBC World News -- wherever they may be -- will have switched channels, or turned on the TV, or opened the app, simply because they want to watch the news right now, and they frankly couldn't care less what the programme is called. 

---

RE: BBC News Channel/BBC World News Merger - Radio_man - 26-02-2023

(26-02-2023, 08:29 AM)LDN Wrote:  

(26-02-2023, 12:14 AM)DTV Wrote:  Outside Source is a great name for a news programme

*record scratch*

Got to stop you right there. Outside Source is a terrible, terrible name for a news programme. It means absolutely nothing to 99% of those who watch it. 

I imagine someone patted themselves on the back quite heartily when they came up with the Outside Source name -- an oh-so-witty play on words, between an OS and the idea of the 'source' of a story. 

But unless they're familiar with the technicalities of what an OS is in broadcasting, most people won't get the reference. They'll likely understand what a 'source' is in the context of newsgathering -- i.e. the person or organisation to which a story, or some element of it, can be attributed. But that leaves 'outside' as slightly baffling in that context to the regular viewer, especially if they then try to reconcile the name with the notion that an 'inside source' surely seems much more desirable and reliable for a major news story. 

If you consider that notion, the idea that having someone 'on the inside' of a news story certainly sounds better than getting information from 'outside sources' who are probably less familiar with the details -- a thought that might well cross viewers' minds if they try to work out what the name actually means -- then surely you can see the problem with calling the programme 'Outside Source'. For those who aren't in on the joke, it's confusing, at best;  at worst, nonsensical.

And just like a joke, if the name has to be explained to be fully understood and appreciated, it can hardly be hailed as an example of good branding. 

That said, it couldn't possibly matter less. I understand the marketing and $$$ reasons for separately branded programmes, on World News especially. But the reality is that, with vanishingly few exceptions, viewers of BBC News and BBC World News -- wherever they may be -- will have switched channels, or turned on the TV, or opened the app, simply because they want to watch the news right now, and they frankly couldn't care less what the programme is called. 

The name 'Outside Source' has been even less relevant over the last 3 years, since the original concept for the program of the presenter in front of the touch screen, bringing up the "Outside Source" reports, has become redundant. The program really does need a new name now, since it's just become a fixed camera program from the balcony, or just from the studio most of the time.

---

RE: BBC News Channel/BBC World News Merger - Robinho02 - 26-02-2023

Reading what I have I do wonder how long this channel will last in the UK. Because clearly the main feed is not being designed for UK license fee payers.

If the service was named what it is - ‘BBC World News’ - to differentiate itself from the main services aimed at the UK it might stand a better chance. A UK audience know what to expect from the ‘BBC World Service’ for example. But UK license payers expect ‘BBC News’ to prioritise stories relevant to them and by ignoring/deprioritising these stories it could undermine trust and faith in the BBC and lead to a lot of confusion amongst audiences. It also really plays into the hands of the likes of GB News.

Hence maybe better to have no channel at all in the UK - or if there is one it should really say what it does on the tin and not be mislabelled.

---

RE: BBC News Channel/BBC World News Merger - Stuart - 26-02-2023

(26-02-2023, 11:24 AM)Radio_man Wrote:  The name 'Outside Source' has been even less relevant over the last 3 years, since the original concept for the program of the presenter in front of the touch screen, bringing up the "Outside Source" reports, has become redundant. The program really does need a new name now, since it's just become a fixed camera program from the balcony, or just from the studio most of the time.

The concept of programme pres around smudging your fingerprint across a large touch screen is rather dated anyway.

It may have a role in a GE results programme as the data is fresh and therefore not necessarily available in any sort of pre-arranged sequence.

I don't see a problem with the name.

---

RE: BBC News Channel/BBC World News Merger - Steve in Pudsey - 26-02-2023

I guess the name Outside Source is like calling a radio phone in "TBU" - we get it but most of the audience wouldn't.

---

RE: BBC News Channel/BBC World News Merger - Radio_man - 26-02-2023

(26-02-2023, 12:02 PM)Stuart Wrote:  

(26-02-2023, 11:24 AM)Radio_man Wrote:  The name 'Outside Source' has been even less relevant over the last 3 years, since the original concept for the program of the presenter in front of the touch screen, bringing up the "Outside Source" reports, has become redundant. The program really does need a new name now, since it's just become a fixed camera program from the balcony, or just from the studio most of the time.

The concept of programme pres around smudging your fingerprint across a large touch screen is rather dated anyway.

It may have a role in a GE results programme as the data is fresh and therefore not necessarily available in any sort of pre-arranged sequence.

I don't see a problem with the name.

So if the program as it is now was proposed today, a 90 minute program with a presenter in front of a fixed camera, and that's it, would it be called Outside Source?

---