[Kojak]

US networks have a habit of piling in a lot of headlines at the start, but the US networks nearly always have very short intro titles, usually no more than 10 seconds long, and a run time of around 22 to 23 minutes to get their evening news done and dusted, so it does come across as a much faster pace.

American sequences are certainly pacier, but not really in a good way. Whenever I've caught any of the US network bulletins, it always comes across like a young child storytelling 'and then x, and then y' - with the presenter seeming almost breathless. It's too much information coming too quickly, and really not helped by the overdramatic beds that are faded up too high.

I think the general forum consensus of the balance being right around the turn-of-the-century is correct - particularly with the BBC's pre-timed five-second beds. That meant that, not just were the timings always dead on and you were into the news in 40 seconds or so, but having to hit the thunderclaps meant that the newsreaders had to really think and be disciplined about how they summarised each story - giving the headlines a real punch. I know insiders say the longer sequences are supposed to be in effect a news summary - which wouldn't be the worst thing - but then they should be structured more as per the old news summaries.

Last night's CBS Evening News is a perfect example:

www.youtube.com 

It combines all the worst aspects of our sequences (rambling on, SO many SOTS) with all the worst aspects of American news (really, REALLY in your face, just a relentless flow of words and pictures. I mean, what's with the constant cuts and zooms? Ridiculous). And the presenter (Norah O'Donnell) is so flowery. If ever there were a personification of 'gilding the lily', she would be it.