RT
If Mr LDN wishes to continue the discussion I am happy to do it privately via the PM system. I have taken on-board that some of my posts may be 'vague' and 'shaky' - I also understand that the journalist in all everyone will want to know who somebody's sources are, but I'm not revealing who they are. Not that I believe if I do he/she will commit suicide and a lengthy enquiry will be opened, but that it would be unfair on him/her.
What is your opinion on the presenters MrTom? Should we have a change...
rts
Founding member
MrTomServo posted:
RTS and BBC LDN -- I know you've had your differences in the past, so move the discussion to PM. RTS has described in a rather lengthy "Report This Post" that he does indeed have high sources at the BBC, and on the news set as well. Regardless, RTS, you have to realise that without dropping names, and this being a questionably-credible internet forum, that the journalist in all of us will want to get to the bottom of who you say your sources are. Moreover, the manner in which you present your evidence is vague and shaky, and I would expect no less a response if I were to post similar information.
So, again, please move the discussion to PM, and that way perhaps you can trade information that you might not otherwise want to in public, and possibly resolve this issue. But any more sniping and I might have to split the thread before your argument began and hand out warnings. I just have to figure out how to do that.
Back on topic, if you please.
http://homepage.mac.com/robertpalmer/tvforum/sig.gif
So, again, please move the discussion to PM, and that way perhaps you can trade information that you might not otherwise want to in public, and possibly resolve this issue. But any more sniping and I might have to split the thread before your argument began and hand out warnings. I just have to figure out how to do that.
Back on topic, if you please.
http://homepage.mac.com/robertpalmer/tvforum/sig.gif
If Mr LDN wishes to continue the discussion I am happy to do it privately via the PM system. I have taken on-board that some of my posts may be 'vague' and 'shaky' - I also understand that the journalist in all everyone will want to know who somebody's sources are, but I'm not revealing who they are. Not that I believe if I do he/she will commit suicide and a lengthy enquiry will be opened, but that it would be unfair on him/her.
What is your opinion on the presenters MrTom? Should we have a change...
IN
I`ve heard that their might be several presentation devices which have never been used on the channel before.
1/ if youve ever seen MSNBC before, you will see this all the time. the plasma screens are fitted to variable lever systems fixed to a pillar or celing so they can be lowered down into view of the presenter, or raised out of the camera shot. something simular may be used.
2/ a large rear projection big screen like the BBC1 studio has, but slightly larger, more like the size of the newsnight screens, for use with graphics etc.
Also, i have no idea why people moan about all the presenters being rubbish. some are excellent and are in the right place in schedule, some are excellent but are in the wrong place, but there are some not so good presenters, same with all news channels.
Mornings could do with something to make it more lively. Afternoons are pretty good, no change needed their I don`t think. Early evenings need change, Jane Hill is fine, but i think Amroliwoliduda could be better suited to something else. He should be replaced with Peter Dobbie, who is wasted in the 11pm-1am strand. Evenings need no change either, Jon Sopel is excellent, he can turn his hand to almost anything, and Louise Minchin is excellent as well.
1/ if youve ever seen MSNBC before, you will see this all the time. the plasma screens are fitted to variable lever systems fixed to a pillar or celing so they can be lowered down into view of the presenter, or raised out of the camera shot. something simular may be used.
2/ a large rear projection big screen like the BBC1 studio has, but slightly larger, more like the size of the newsnight screens, for use with graphics etc.
Also, i have no idea why people moan about all the presenters being rubbish. some are excellent and are in the right place in schedule, some are excellent but are in the wrong place, but there are some not so good presenters, same with all news channels.
Mornings could do with something to make it more lively. Afternoons are pretty good, no change needed their I don`t think. Early evenings need change, Jane Hill is fine, but i think Amroliwoliduda could be better suited to something else. He should be replaced with Peter Dobbie, who is wasted in the 11pm-1am strand. Evenings need no change either, Jon Sopel is excellent, he can turn his hand to almost anything, and Louise Minchin is excellent as well.
TW
If Mr Buerk could be persuaded to do Breakfast on a permanent basis, that would be even better. Dermot Murnaghan could then do the morning slot on News24.
By the way, saw the N24 CSO set in action for the first time on Breakfast this morning and I thought it looked reasonably convincing. I noticed that they used shots of the two presenters together for just about everything, presumably to attempt to limit the possibility of disaster.
I did notice when they were doing the newspaper review that the CSO overlay could be seen on some of the pictures in the papers (presumably they were the same shade of blue as the walls of the studio). And when Bill introduced the vicar lady doing the papers with him he said that because they were in a "slightly different studio they'd be riding on the seat of their cassocks" - it's nice that one of the presenters has the courage to be honest about the changes, and the limitations that they bring.
By the way, saw the N24 CSO set in action for the first time on Breakfast this morning and I thought it looked reasonably convincing. I noticed that they used shots of the two presenters together for just about everything, presumably to attempt to limit the possibility of disaster.
I did notice when they were doing the newspaper review that the CSO overlay could be seen on some of the pictures in the papers (presumably they were the same shade of blue as the walls of the studio). And when Bill introduced the vicar lady doing the papers with him he said that because they were in a "slightly different studio they'd be riding on the seat of their cassocks" - it's nice that one of the presenters has the courage to be honest about the changes, and the limitations that they bring.
DU
Once more, forgive me for not necessarily believing your insider knowledge on your second post on this forum.
On point (1), I have been told on this forum in the past that this would be all but impossible in the current studio, since it's actually an office and so has low ceilings- you can see the ceiling on the wide shots, so lifting them out of camera shot is not possible.
On point (2), I agree that this is very likely- I think projecting onto glass (that normally acts as a window to the news-gathering desks) would be very interesting. I've always thought that the projection method of a "newswall" looks a lot better than the bank of screens as seen on Sky News.
intheknow posted:
I`ve heard that their might be several presentation devices which have never been used on the channel before.
1/ if youve ever seen MSNBC before, you will see this all the time. the plasma screens are fitted to variable lever systems fixed to a pillar or celing so they can be lowered down into view of the presenter, or raised out of the camera shot. something simular may be used.
2/ a large rear projection big screen like the BBC1 studio has, but slightly larger, more like the size of the newsnight screens, for use with graphics etc.
1/ if youve ever seen MSNBC before, you will see this all the time. the plasma screens are fitted to variable lever systems fixed to a pillar or celing so they can be lowered down into view of the presenter, or raised out of the camera shot. something simular may be used.
2/ a large rear projection big screen like the BBC1 studio has, but slightly larger, more like the size of the newsnight screens, for use with graphics etc.
Once more, forgive me for not necessarily believing your insider knowledge on your second post on this forum.
On point (1), I have been told on this forum in the past that this would be all but impossible in the current studio, since it's actually an office and so has low ceilings- you can see the ceiling on the wide shots, so lifting them out of camera shot is not possible.
On point (2), I agree that this is very likely- I think projecting onto glass (that normally acts as a window to the news-gathering desks) would be very interesting. I've always thought that the projection method of a "newswall" looks a lot better than the bank of screens as seen on Sky News.
IT
On Sunday night when BBC World were using TC10, and on Monday when N24 moved in, it was easy to tell that they were in a diffierent studio - but this was mainly due to the lighting (plus they had lots of other problems in the technical dept). However, later in the week, they fixed the lighting, and it seemed the TD's got used to their new surroundings, and I personally think it is pretty difficult to tell it's fake! The only time I can tell is when the lighting is dim, and when they interview a studio guest, as the backdrop isn't correct, and you can see the end of the CSO and the greyish studio floor. Apart from that it's pretty good!
itsrobert
Founding member
Turnbull & Williams posted:
If Mr Buerk could be persuaded to do Breakfast on a permanent basis, that would be even better. Dermot Murnaghan could then do the morning slot on News24.
By the way, saw the N24 CSO set in action for the first time on Breakfast this morning and I thought it looked reasonably convincing. I noticed that they used shots of the two presenters together for just about everything, presumably to attempt to limit the possibility of disaster.
I did notice when they were doing the newspaper review that the CSO overlay could be seen on some of the pictures in the papers (presumably they were the same shade of blue as the walls of the studio). And when Bill introduced the vicar lady doing the papers with him he said that because they were in a "slightly different studio they'd be riding on the seat of their cassocks" - it's nice that one of the presenters has the courage to be honest about the changes, and the limitations that they bring.
By the way, saw the N24 CSO set in action for the first time on Breakfast this morning and I thought it looked reasonably convincing. I noticed that they used shots of the two presenters together for just about everything, presumably to attempt to limit the possibility of disaster.
I did notice when they were doing the newspaper review that the CSO overlay could be seen on some of the pictures in the papers (presumably they were the same shade of blue as the walls of the studio). And when Bill introduced the vicar lady doing the papers with him he said that because they were in a "slightly different studio they'd be riding on the seat of their cassocks" - it's nice that one of the presenters has the courage to be honest about the changes, and the limitations that they bring.
On Sunday night when BBC World were using TC10, and on Monday when N24 moved in, it was easy to tell that they were in a diffierent studio - but this was mainly due to the lighting (plus they had lots of other problems in the technical dept). However, later in the week, they fixed the lighting, and it seemed the TD's got used to their new surroundings, and I personally think it is pretty difficult to tell it's fake! The only time I can tell is when the lighting is dim, and when they interview a studio guest, as the backdrop isn't correct, and you can see the end of the CSO and the greyish studio floor. Apart from that it's pretty good!
RE
The male presenters on news 24 are okay at the moment - perhaps Adrian Finighan should be used more, he seems better when hes got someone to chat to rather than just trundling through on his own on BC World 
So perhaps Adrian and Jane Hill, apart from Jane most of the female presenters are quite scatty with Gosling, Munchings, Pike, Gracie all droning on!
So perhaps Adrian and Jane Hill, apart from Jane most of the female presenters are quite scatty with Gosling, Munchings, Pike, Gracie all droning on!
JA
I personally believe that many forum members are too keen to state their dislike for N24 newsreaders. I agree that they may be as dry as Ryvita, but atleast they can actually spell intelligence, unlike most of what you see on Sky News.
The N24 newsreaders always have a background knowledge to what is happening so they can put events into context, such as the Israel/Palestine conflict, the Pope's silver jubilee and so on. I have never seen such an understanding on Sky News before, I believe this is more important than being able to make some cheap joke about what ever the 'funny' news story of the day is.
The N24 newsreaders always have a background knowledge to what is happening so they can put events into context, such as the Israel/Palestine conflict, the Pope's silver jubilee and so on. I have never seen such an understanding on Sky News before, I believe this is more important than being able to make some cheap joke about what ever the 'funny' news story of the day is.
BI
i also think the n24 presenters are fine. they have a great knowledge, and sometimes makes jokes (which are funny).
n24 is the best news channel. sky news is sub-standard. it looks cheap and the presenters always seem lost. and things go wronf on sky news all the time.
interesting to see how n24 will change...
n24 is the best news channel. sky news is sub-standard. it looks cheap and the presenters always seem lost. and things go wronf on sky news all the time.
interesting to see how n24 will change...
MT
Seeing as though I can't get News 24 here, I can't exactly comment. But in general, the thing about rolling news presenters, is that you have to keep things interesing and lively and new regardless of whether you're telling the story for the first, third, or sixteenth time. The presenter has a responsibility to do this in a compelling way, hour after hour. If the presenter can't do that, then they aren't suited for rolling news.
There is something to be said for relating stodginess to credibility, but we've all seen how Fox News operates, and 69% of America thinks their poop doesn't stink. Striking a careful balance between youth and establishment is something the BBC has traditionally done a very good job of (music, graphics, presenters, format, etc.) and News 24 should invest heavily in that image.
http://homepage.mac.com/robertpalmer/tvforum/sig.gif
RTS posted:
What is your opinion on the presenters MrTom? Should we have a change...
Seeing as though I can't get News 24 here, I can't exactly comment. But in general, the thing about rolling news presenters, is that you have to keep things interesing and lively and new regardless of whether you're telling the story for the first, third, or sixteenth time. The presenter has a responsibility to do this in a compelling way, hour after hour. If the presenter can't do that, then they aren't suited for rolling news.
There is something to be said for relating stodginess to credibility, but we've all seen how Fox News operates, and 69% of America thinks their poop doesn't stink. Striking a careful balance between youth and establishment is something the BBC has traditionally done a very good job of (music, graphics, presenters, format, etc.) and News 24 should invest heavily in that image.
http://homepage.mac.com/robertpalmer/tvforum/sig.gif