ITV News "Brand realignment"

You see, now you've put those two images together, I'd have to say the new look studio is better.
This was of course before the News at Ten-isation of the old studio. I'd hate to think I'm warming to this new look as much of it is still poor.

Think I'd prefer the female voice of god, but netiher are authoritative enough.

Agreed. Personally, I'd like Trevor to record them. That would provide some continuity with the past and Trevor is synonymous with the ITV News brand. The CBS Evening News got Walter Cronkite to record their voiceovers in 2006 and they still use his voice. It works like a charm.

Agreed, I cannot blame ITV for wanting to replicate the BBC's success.

It was merely the suggestion that "great confusion" would be caused.

Whether there are three channels broadcasting news or one hundred and three, to suggest that, if faced with different colours and shapes, people will be so dreadfully upset and confused, is doing the majority out there a disservice.

As I say, I LIKE the idea of corporate looks, of one cohesive brand - but my argument was that people aren't that stupid either. God knows, back in the day, the various ITV/ITN bulletins had announcements at the start (as has just been REintroduced) and the shows may have looked totally different, but people could still cope with the concept that they were all ITN/ITV.

In summary, cohesive look = good. Suggestions that people are stupid enough to become dreadfully confused at anything else = a tad patronising for my liking.

End

I'd probably go along with that. Either that or Brian Blessed. Imagine that.

Personally, I think this will be part of the problem.

In the previous look, there was virtually no mention of ITV in the titles or the programme. Hence, I believe that the general public thought of News at Ten as an ITN production (rather than an ITV production) which I would argue has much more authority in the public eye. Now, they've plastered ITV all over it, which I think is considered by many as an inferior news service.

Technically I know ITN run all bulletins the same, but the News at Ten previous look rang more ITN than ITV. That's why I think this move is a mistake.

Take what you want from this as it's just my opinion.

They could easilly have 'realigned' News at Ten by renaming it ITV News at Ten, brought in a bit of extra yellow and a voiceover etc, but still kept the separate look.

The reaction would be much more positive if they'd just changed the other bulletins, as nobody really wanted to keep the teal clock face much longer.

The fact that the brand is cohesive is by the by. One thing they have really missed a trick with is retaining the bulletins growing darker as the day goes on.

That was one of the best things.

They do get darker as the day progresses. Compare all the screen captures. The caps of the 11:25 summary and the ITV News at 1:30 are a lot brighter/lighter than the ITV News at 6:30 and Ten.

We have a winner. News at Ten felt different precisely because of the lack of ITV. Now that NAT is plain crappy old ITV News, it has lost what made it special.

Also, with regard to the previous posts about uniformness of brand, will these TV companies / marketing types give viewers some credit. Persil change the soap powder packets every 3 months, but people still seem to find it. ITV News does not have to be uniform at all. Heck, Sky even has two Sky logos, and that has never caused them any trouble.

The other thing ITV execs should bear in mind is that "ITV" does not have the brand credibility of "BBC". Indeed, ITV is often seen as rather trashy of late, and seems to not be something to be proud of. The fact that NAT did not say ITV was in its favour. It is sad that ITN was replaced by ITV, but, give the direction the bulletins have gone, perhaps execs at ITN are happy about that.

Whether the programme name includes ITV or not is irrelevant. The lack of "ITV" may make some people think they're getting a better product, but at the end of the day it's still produced by exactly the same people and organisation that produce the ITV News bulletins. Any perceived differences are all in your head, not reality.

Yes, I don't buy this argument anymore, it's not about the name. It seems perfectly reasonable that the broadcaster should put their name in the title of their own news programmes.

I mean you don't get Five calling their bulletins Sky News or C4 calling it ITN News for that matter do you ? The ITN credit at the end of the bulletin is sufficient.

I agree with pretty much everything you've said in this thread so far, but I don't think we can dismiss so easily the way bulletins and news providers are perceived by the audience, especially at a time when ITV is trying to create a brand around ITV News. Viewer perception is central to this.

Look at Sky News - a lot of people hold it in high regard, but that isn't necessarily transfered to Five News even though Sky is Five's news provider. Image, branding, set design, grahpics etc - all play a role in how viewers perceive the news, and I still think it was a mistake to lose the NAT stand-alone identity. As somebody else has already suggested on here, they should have just tweaked it a bit by adding the yellow ITV News logo. Now it's just another generic TV news bulletin that happens to be broadcast at 10pm.

SN.