BBC WORLD NEWS HD (2013)

it's been a while since some stuff was posted on here from yours truly.
but since BBC World News FINALLY had a refresh (btw, the studio is EPIC), the new graphics look pretty underwhelming and a bit disjointed, with Helvetica clashing the BBC logo's Gill Sans and all that.
so i've decided to take what I did in 2009 and bring it to 2013, taking with it bits of 1999 and 2003(!).

it's kinda cool how this style still looks remarkably fresh, even more so now with the BBC moving to NBH. some will say it's boring and looks the same as 2009, but like the original iPod or the VW Golf, it stands the test of time. it ain't broke much, so not much needs to be fixed.

the countdown is immense, and I have absolutely no right to muck around with it.

simplicity and consistency are the keys to this theme. anything unnecessary is binned. it's like Steve Jobs, but with TV graphics

oh, and sorry the shots have black bars, i've had to screenshot as the export tool is somehow broken

before everyone here lets loose, some notes. read before hitting the spoiler!

1 | Gill Sans MT lives on!
2 | Red lives on! used as the prominent colour for stories. for live bulletins white text on red is used, for recorded programmes (eg. Middle East Business Report, fasttrack) black text on white is used
3 | tickers are horrific and very last decade. yes it's useful in a breakfiller for a quick catchup but in the age of abundant accessible information, people watch the news on TV to watch a bulletin, not to get lost in fancy graphics or read some stories off the bottom of the screen. that's what smartphones are used for. it's gone
4 | i've left two options on showing the presenter's name. personally i prefer option 2
5 | i've tentatively left the DOG with a red background, instead of not having one. I wanted to give it the 1999 look, but wanted to make it look neater and more prominent when stories are displayed. but the website is back, it gives a left/right balance with the dog
6 | the graphics are 16:9 safe. yes i've checked
7 | in programs like Newsday and Impact, the box is intended to be animated, a la World News Today and GMT from 2010, and is meant to be in such a way that the white text on top is visible at all times. yes i'd love to be able to create the animation, but i don't have time and i'm crap at it
8 | Karin Giannone is back. she's pretty, and what?!
9 | don't complain about the watermark
10 | the breakfiller is STILL in progress. it'll come. probably

that's all for now folks. there's probably some more stuff that i've forgotten to say on here, but allow.
now let rip!

Interesting you link us back to your 2009 mocks which bar the odd font and screensize look to be exactly the same.

Not a fan I'm afraid - I've been quite critical of BBC News not adopting a fresh new look with the move to Broadcasting House and you're not doing anything here to counter my argument that any further evolution of the 1999 package will still look dated and just rather dull to be frank - and I just don't agree that your update of your 2009 mocks look "remarkably fresh" or "stand the text of time".

Dated, hmm. Dull, it's subjective. But with the greatest of respect, you're missing the point.

I don't know about you, but I probably stand with the vast majority of people in that when I tune into BBC World News, I don't just stare and admire all the shiny graphics all day (dare I say it, like quite a few of people on here), I want to watch a bulletin and catch up with the latest news and current affairs, and once it's finished, I do something else, knowing that I am up to date.

Now if anything, the more attractive the graphics look, the more it detracts from learning what is happening in the world. Sure, you may find it interesting how the story text wipes in or how the astons are aligned, but to be honest, everyone will say 'who cares?', they just want to find out what's going on. That's the point of my graphics. Show just what is needed, nothing more, nothing less.

To give an example in real life, there's the Tube Map. It's boring. But it does the job. It's simple. And people can understand it. And people go 'that's London'. And it's lasted 80 years. That's what makes it legendary. Sure, I can make the lines curved and make them look shiny, but that makes it worse in every way. That's why it stands the test of time.

I can turn your point around and apply this to graphics. Look at ITV News for example. Sure, when a refresh comes, you can look at it and go 'that's cool'. But it comes at the expense of ITV's identity. I hope I get proven wrong, but I know this time in 5 years or less, something totally new will come up, and people will go 'what does ITV stand for?'

But in the same way a tourist looks that all those squiggles and can in the blink of an eye, go 'that's a London Tube Map', any mere mortal (licence-payer) can tune in to BBC News, hear the beeps, look at the red, and the Gill Sans, and go 'that's the BBC', know it's a brand they can trust, and just watch the news. That is the point.

So, going back to what you said. Dull, maybe. Dated? Not at all.

Not true. I'd say ugly graphics detract from the story. This can either be in the form of outdated, boring graphics, or in the form of whizz-bang 3D graphics, like some of Sky News's looks. Your graphics are not only dull, but poorly designed.

It stands the test of time because it was excellently designed. Not only does it not look ugly, but it is an excellent schematic representation of an underground rail system that displays only the information a user needs to see.

What are you on about? Why does a rebranded ITV News, that happens to match ITV as a channel, lose its identity? Surely it's linked to the channel's identity?

You're contradicting yourself. You say that people don't pay attention to the graphics, but you then say that people tune in, recognise the font, and think to themselves "that's the BBC"? Do you think if they tuned in, saw Helvetica, and a different graphics package, but with the BBC logo, they would go "Impostors!", or go "I can't trust this any more", or say "What's this?" - really?

The mock itself is pretty poor. You seem to have ditched the ticker, which would be incredibly stupid - you would instantly lose the swathes of viewers watching in offices with the TV on mute, as the only story they would be able to see would be the one playing out. You seem to want rid of it simply because you don't like it. Not everyone has a smartphone; not every smartphone has a decent data plan; not every 3G connection is fast; not all areas have a 3G connection.

You've included a useless image of the globe to the graphics, which makes the grahpics look cluttered. It also throws the space advantages of widescreen away for no good reason.

You've decided that urgency is best expressed through a small grey box with "BREAKING NEWS" inside - again, a poor decision. It's especially bad seeing as it's the same as the "COMING UP" box.

The shadows you've decided to use look like bad compression at the size you've posted them at - about the size of the online stream. They look cack.

There is technical ability evident, but the design itself is an awful mish-mash. I'd say it's a 2.5/5.

Yeah, my views on BBC News presentation aside a mock should look to improve what is actually on screen, and as much as I hate what is on screen I don't think these improve on it. The other aspect of your mock is updating a set you've previously designed - but apart from the switch to widescreen and a couple of font changes the difference is barely noticeable - certainly doesn't refresh them for 2013.

And whether plained or over-exagerated 3D nonsense, bad graphics are bad graphics. I'm no fan of the current Sky News set either, and it isn't about them detracting from the content of the channel itself, it's about them giving it that all important finishing touch.

The quality of this mock and the older one are the same... the only differences are a few elements have been moved around... there is no improvement in any case.

2.5/5 - Execution is good. More creativity required.

Brekkie, however much you may hate the current BBC look, a total rebrand of BBC News (including Domestic, World, Arabic, Persian et al) is unecessary and most likely counter productive when the BBC is seeking to strengthen its identity. An entirely new brand across all of the BBC's output is likely more expensive than can be afforded at this point in time. Especially as there are more pressing needs... such as the move to Broadcasting House and HD, and a much needed new Singpore Bureau which seems to run on technology that predates the 1999 rebrand.