New News

"BBC World" was enough. What's the need for "BBC World News"?

'BBC' IS 'News' for most of the world and I don't see a need to emphasize that by appending 'News' to 'BBC World'.

"This is BBC World..."

"This is BBC World News..."

Which of the two sounds better?

While appreciation of colours is obviously a subjective matter, you could have done a lot better than what appear to be flakes of blood alongside dark grey. And if you are going to have something resembling the rings of Saturn moving across the screen why not have colours attractive to the eye rather than alternating between shades of light red and nothingness? It's flimsy and insubstantial.

I also don't understand why the BBC is spending tons of money and making such a big deal out of the new designs. You are simply providing ammunition to those who claim you are all style and no substance.

You should rather work on improving the content of your news - the careful political correctness, the implacable support of left wing parties at the expense of all others and the avoidance of inconvenient facts.

The opening titles are nice (except for the red box) but those graphics and the ticker are foul - they look so amateurish after the graphics we've had until now. I don't understand why BBC News 24 has changed its name - it had 'BBC News' in it! 'News Channel' sounds dire. Silly changes really.

"BBC World" please. The "News" part is redundant for us international viewers.

I like the new globe.

The scrolling text down the bottom of the screen is now grey -- which is very ugly. Please go back to white.

Why is there blue now on some of the on-screen graphics? I would have simply stuck with white and shades of red/orange instead of red, white, grey, and blue!

I'd like onscreen title graphics (headlines, breaking news etc) to be somewhat conservative.

Remember the London 2012 Olympic branding that you attacked so viciously? Perhaps you could run a competition to see if viewers could do better than your highly paid consultants. That would be fair, wouldn't it? I'm sure my unborn child could do better; in less than zero time and would pay you for the honour!

You describe the look as 'clear'. You are joking aren't you? The colour scheme and motion is nauseating.

Is there anyone left at the BBC who understands you are a public service broadcaster? You should not be competing with the commercial sector for the most scandalous speculation and gossip. You should focus on the quality of the output, with the emphasis on fact rather than opinion. This rebranding exercise will not improve your output. There will be more trivia, celebrity stories, sports events given more significance than wars and endless broadcasting from the doorsteps of murder victims or suspects, trying to scare us regardless of the statistics, supported by comments from the same dozen 'rent a mouths' that seem to have opinions on everything but understand nothing and don't reflect the public mood.

Please will someone save our BBC from this descent into the depths of mediocrity?

Is it just me, or it a bit bland though?

This is just from watching a bit of BBC News 24, which has lost the vaguely interesting 24 from its name to become the bland BBC News Channel (clearly patterned after the highly successful ITN / ITV News Channel). As David Cameroon said, the new set is rather spartan, and the graphics have gone from the subtle textures and animations to plain and flat. The new titles are OK though, if a bit over abstract (which kinda makes the random place names a bit well, random), although the wipe between headlines looks awful. I suppose you wanted it to be lighter than the old black and crimson look, but it’s just become rather sterile instead. Although as you clearly want BBC News to become some sort of homogenous branded blob, blandness is perhaps unsurprising.

Oh, and Gill Sans is a nice font, but the BBC introduced it as a corporate font in 1997, and it was nice in recent years that bits of the BBC stopped using it like no other font existed. Now it seems to be used everywhere again. It gets somewhat repetitive.

I like the new look, and how it continues the evolutional approach that stems from the original BBC News rebrand back in 1999. In some respects however, this is just undoing all the tweaks and changes that have occurred over the last 9 years, to return it back to something very similar to what you had then (including the lighter colour palette).

I have huge respect for Martin Lambie-Nairn (the BBC certainly gets a better product when they use their trusted friend), but it does make you wonder how long it will be before this design gets dismantled piece by piece again - especially by the regions which seem to be a law unto themselves.

I'm not too sure of the name BBC News for the rolling news channel. I note that you are already diminishing the name by continually referring to it as 'the BBC News Channel', whereas BBC News 24 removed all ambiguity as to what aspect of the service you were referring.

More on naming - weren't the bulletins originally renamed 'BBC News at One' etc back in 1999? Again, I wonder how long before you return to using O'Clock. It may not sound as 'cool' and 'hip', but it's as much part of your brand as the pips are.

Now that this re-brand is out of the way, hopefully you will be focusing back in on giving the website the same level of quality and finish that these new idents certainly have, a finish it so evidently lacks currently. (And please, get rid of that God damn awful use of Veranda!)

Another rebrand? Why?

Anyway. What's with the 'BBC' overkill? 'BBC South Today' and 'BBC News' on the same screen? Why do we need 'BBC' to appear twice? We're not goldfish - we won't forget 'BBC' in half a second...

I got up this morning to watch the new graphics for the BBC News Channel and have to say they look very impressive indeed (can't wait to see what you do for the locals with them).

However, I do have to express a slight concern for the new graphics for the BBC Wales news programmes. The example that you have included shows red along Cardigan Bay and green in Monmouthshire. I feel I should say that you should pause the launch of these graphics as Wales until the second week of May, as Wales is in the midst of a local election campaign and it might reflect badly on the BBC if it could be precieved that they were backing Labour candidates in Gwynedd, Ceredigion and Carmarthenshire and Plaid Cymru candidates in Monmouthshire.

It reminds me of the opening credits to Brasseye

Overall very nice, very very nice.

3 Visual improvements though are needed...

The name astons don't use the full length of the screen in 16:9 would be good to see it go full length rather than stop at the edge of the 4:3 safe zone.

There is a slight crack in one of the screens behind the presenters at the desk that needs sorting.

Please oh Please sort that ticker out... BREAKING NEWS ticker is now grey, make it stand out again in red, more dynamic.

Much better set though - well done!

'BBC News Channel' ... 'BBC NEWS CHANNEL' ?! Do you not remember the ill-fated 'ITV News Channel'?

Renaming the most popular news channel to the BBC News Channel (yes, I know it is simply BBC News, but even your web site itself has labelled it as 'BBC News Channel') is the biggest mistake of this so-called re-brand.

I'm so very sorry that you felt the brand wasn't strong enough but the brand of the BBC goes without saying. I agree with 'imaginativename' - the graphics look like they were made on PowerPoint. The last set of digital on-screen graphics were far superior, why fix it if it ain't broken?

well the graphics are still better than sky. Bit grey overkill though, especially with the bleed on the ticker which is visible with my TV card.

Studio looks good, thank god it still looks better than american networks.

BBC News 24 still flows better when referring to the dedicated channel. If I ever asked someone to turn to BBC news on the phone or online they would likely turn to BBC One.

Peter - thanks for your offer to respond to comments... I suspect that you may not realize what you're letting yourself in for :P

I was actually quoted in the Times and the Metro on the rebrand of the news on Radio 4 as reported here, and I've basically got the same thing to say again: what, exactly, was wrong with the old titles? Or the titles before those? Could you, in your response, please state how much of the BBC News budget has been spent on this pointless rebranding exercise?

It seems like BBC News is going mad for stamping its "athuritah" (Cartman voice) over all of the programmes that it produces in a sort of tribal marking-with-urine sort of way that bears no relevance to what viewers actually care about.

And offering to respond to comments at this point is moot - the BBC has yet again followed a "do and be damned" approach to its viewers, by making the changes they want to make without asking what viewers want *in advance*. It would have been far more sensible to offer this consultation *before* rolling out the new graphics - because you are hardly likely to switch back to the old style now for fear of losing face.

---

Now some substantive points on new titles:

1. go and watch The Day Today again. Yep, BBC News is looking ever more like the titles to the paragon of news satire.

2. you've gone and called your 10pm news "BBC News At Ten" - like anyone is going to call it that, when there's already an "ITV News At Ten". They are still going to call it "the ten o'clock news", to differentiate it from the other guys.

3. calling News 24 "BBC News" is again just going to lead to confusion, because people won't be sure *which* BBC News show or channel you're referring to. 24 was fine, and by fiddling around you have made a definite backwards step.

4. News 24 might be the most popular TV news show, but Carling is the UK's most popular lager. Popularity does NOT equate to quality! ... and isn't Sky News "News Channel of the Year" at the moment?

Have to agree with comments on the ticker:

It looks like it has been plastered on; it looks completely out of place and the grey looks *horrible*

And the ticker *still* has to be turned off when the Weather comes on to avoid a clash with the Weather graphics!!

Why not keep the ticker running all the time..why does it need to be turned off anyway?

However, it's good to see that the "ticker text" has been made bigger and is now far more readable.

The other big problem is that the on-screen graphics look 'flat'.

There is no depth to them unlike the graphics on Sky News (and Sky Sports News for that matter)

There is no polish or sheen to them.

The "PowerPoint" theory is one I would agree with.

On the plus side, the Studio looks more crisp and professional.

Haha, only on the comments to a BBC blog would we find people convinced they know better than the legendary designer and brand expert Martin Lambie-Nairn.

"My child could do better" ....Just classic!

I give it 10 minutes before we get the usual staple ingredients - slipped-in accusations of BBC's apparent left wing culture and political correctness, comparisons with other popular "fiascos" like Terminal 5 or the 2012 logo, and general "outrage". It could all have come straight from the pages of a certain unremittingly negative 'Daily' newspaper...

Personally, I quite like the new graphics - always felt the black/red was too sombre. However I'm surprised you've taken the decision to change BBC News 24 to just BBC News. As someone has remarked, when you talk about BBC News, it will be necessary to call it the BBC News channel in order to identify the dedicated channel as opposed to your general output. Will be interesting to see how this beds in....

It would be interesting to know how much of our money was spent on this fatuous rebranding exercise. What was the point?

Yet again design over substance!

The new opening titles make me feel dizzy watching them and the on-screen graphics appear to be a retrograde step in terms of style.

From the comments made in the editor's blog, it would appear that the BBC1 bulletins are to share the same studio set as the News Channel. I have always found the News 24 backdrop to be distracting, and whilst the new set is a considerable improvement, it is still not ideal.

There was something authoritative about the sombre and under-stated studio set previously used for BBC1 bulletins so I do hope that a rethink will be applied.

Also, as red is a prime characteristic of BBC News, please restore the former on-screen digital graphics, which were both clearer and far superior to the new look.

I'm indifferent about the layout changes personally, though as a web designer I agree with the move to wider screen formats in general so good move there.

I see lots of "Sorry this content isn't available at the moment" in the flash widgets (is that the i-player hiccupping)?

The worst thing I'm seeing is no closing p tags in the html of the stories. This is html 101 and really should be fixed as it occasionally causes firefox to have trouble with applying the CSS, resulting in tiny text on some paragraphs where there's an image table in there.

Keep up the good work though, the BBC News website is still by far the best news site on the web.

The sequence looks good but I think it needs to be slowed down. You might give someone an epileptic fit whilst they're eating their breakfast!

Well, the new branding has completely failed to upset or scandalise me, so I guess that's a good thing. Or maybe that just means it's rather bland and not all that much unlike the last 9 years of BBC News designs (according to that "BBC News through the ages" compilation of clips.

It's very swirly... I thought swirls had been done to death in the days of Accenture and Consignia, and then mercifully dropped. Also, does it really require a "rebranding" to change the names of news programmes? Does anyone actually care whether the evening news programme is called "BBC News at Six" or... er, actually... was it actually any different before? "Six o'Clock News", maybe.

Anyway, that illustrates my point perfectly. If the content is good (and let's face it; the 6pm BBC1 news is now dumbed down way below the level of John Craven's Newsround) the minor details of the programme title are irrelevant.

I have to admit that your two largest mistakes are the name changes - "News 24" means BBC News. We all know that, and it is a name that sticks in the mind. BBC World is BBC World - what happens when you show things like Top Gear on the channel (which you do do), that doesn't fit in the "World News" theme does it?

Change for change sake is not a good thing - and whilst the majority of the changes you've made aren't bad, the name changes are pretty unforgiveable.

I won't comment on the look, but please do our ears a favour and eliminate *all* the added 'noise' - the boom-boom-boom played over the reporter's words. I presume that it's meant to heighten the drama of lead stories; IMO it's as welcome as someone's mobile phone going off in a concert.

In general, I think the changes are good, I can see the logic in renaming BBC World, however the renaming of BBC News 24 to BBC News is going to cause confusion between the content and the channel.

To make it clear what they are talking about, people will end up talking about "The BBC News Channel" or some-such, rather than the shorter and clearer BBC News 24.

In effect, you have simply removed the channel's identity and that will have exactly the same consequences as if you had decided to rename

BBC 1 as "BBC Programmes"

Hmmm, those new graphics look very similar to the graphics used by the French news channel France24 !!!

Comments on the website redesign pages appear to be closed so I'm posting here.

A change to the BBC News masthead appears to have been made this morning.

It no longer renders correctly in Firefox. The BBC News logo is red on red with a white border.

This is the way it has always rendered in Opera on my WM6 phone.

Unsurprisingly it's fine in IE!

The progressive downgrading of the appearance of the BBC online continues :-(

The titles and studio look good, but why on Earth have you taken such a gigantic step backwards with the on-screen lower third? It's uninspired, blocky and Gill Sans does not make a welcome return, it's really not that suitable anymore for 24 hour news.

The graphics in use up until yesterday (and only in use for a relatively short time in the grand scheme of things) were classy, elegant and unobstrusive. These monsters look like they were generated in a few seconds, and whilst I can probably predict the excuse that there's a consistent look across all of BBC News, surely the regions etc. could have easily just generated a static version of the previous News 24 graphics? Seriously awful I'm afraid.

The background to the new News looks like a vandalised scratched plastic window on a bus shelter.
Why this obsession for unfocussed backgrounds when you have access to external views form all over the world?
A good example being the background to the Andre Marr Show with "live" shots of the capital.

The opening titles are fine, but the studio and the on-screen graphics really need work.

With the titles, white is the background colour. When you get to the studio, it's a horrible dull metal grey. That's too jarring.

The blue screen in the studio is awful, too. What was wrong with the old set? At least you knew it was coming from a newsroom. Now it could be coming from any old shed.

I'm watching Gordon Brown's speech now, and the on-screen graphics are just too disparate. There's Black text on white, white on red, white on black and white on grey.

The colour palette needs to be more focused. Change the grey ticker to black and instantly that looks better.... but please, sort that horrible studio out.

one thing that no one has mentioned is the minor graphics changes for breakfast, are there going to be more extensive changes?

Nice titles, shame you couldn't have spent some money on things called computers and software for the content graphics, the designers hands must ache cutting out those antique photos and red and white card. Are you in this century? My builder's homemade website is more technologically sound. Are you portraying ironic retro? or just plain lazy.

Didn't Mr Horrocks preside over a VERY stylish election programme last century? it even had depth, colour, and I believe, even used computers - wow!

It is not very different.

Feels like a cautious decision rather than a radical one. Probably afraid of creating a backlash like the London Olympics did with their logo.

As a result it looks fine, but nothing great.

Much preferred the News 24 brand. The graphics sequence intro etc is an irrelevancy, and an irritation when over-long.
I am more concerned though at the poor quality of weather report presentation. At times the map is shrunk so that you need binoculars to see any detail. Usually the presenters have to gabble away at such a pace that it is unintelligible, at least to older viewers, and the mapping is a disgrace. Slow down, say less, and get a large background map with some decent graphics (see Sky) instead of giving us all air-sickness by zooming all around the country.

Whilst everything is very nice, you've NOT CHANGED ONE OF THE MOST BASIC PROBLEMS!

On BBC News (24), there is a countdown to each hour, before the hourly headlines. The countdown is displayed on screen in seconds, tenths of a second and hundredths of a second. The tenths of a second numbers count down incorrectly - only displaying the digits 2, 1 and 0 - whereas the hundredths are done properly. Watch it and you'll see what I mean.

So come on, it can't be that hard if you can do it for the hundredths, and it's such a stupid error.

Its a great look, but still some ironing out left to do ..

Not sure about the grey ticker and bring back the red ticker for breaking news

But no one seems to have learnt a lesson about from the last graphics refresh a year or so ago, regardless of overscan and the whatnot, the live location bug, seems to be drifting in and out of the graphics safezone, and in this case off my tv screen; and that is on a 28 inch CRT and also on a 28 inch LCD;
Moving it by 10 to 20 pixels down or so and within the 4:3 Safezone will make sure it stays on screen regardless if someone is watching on any TV, overscan or not. Sky and other broadcasters can get it right, so why not the BBC.

Also, if you were going to do a name change on a channel, what about cross promtion on News 24, over the weekend and advising people that News 24 will become the 'BBC news' or the BBC news channel ?

But why change the name anyway, now you have one channel and two names for that channel - the screen ident says"BBC News", but it has been referred as the BBC News channel, by a presenter, so which is, but as others have pointed out that will get confusing.

At least with News 24, there was one name, even if not all presenters and guests used the BBC suffix before it.

What I'd like to see is how much research and public consultation, went into changing the name of this news channel?

Come on BBC sort it out.

It now appears that how out there the graphics can be, and what colour-scheme is used has become more important than the news itself! I cannot wait to see this on Bremner Bird and Fortune in a month!
Renaming channels and bulletins by changing a word or word order? And you paid people for this? Isn't that new for the sake of newness?
The best news introduction was around 2002- cream and red- I think that was the last time it was simple, and didn't involve spinning, chopping and some futuristic spacecraft.
Mind you, the music is good, and we'll all think this is brilliant in a year when you're changing it again.

Oh yes, I think it is rather cheeky of you to use such long and lovingly crafted shots of Daniel Craig on your N24/BBC News trailer to hook viewers in. I hope you are paying him.

you should warn people they need a licence to watch the live news on the website. even better put it behind a login screen. otherwise its just entrapment.

Ok, I don't mind the new bouncing beach ball logo. It looks smart. Or the rebanding to just BBC News. It makes sense.

I do however object to the set the News Channel is now on. They used to be in a newsroom. It gave a sense of immediacy, that if breaking news happened the presenters were in the midst of it. Now they are in the basement with some faux nonsense going on on the screens behind them.

It's as if you've sucked the life out of the 'live' news channel. To compound matters, the set is dressed in dreary grey. The whole set up makes me feel depressed rather than excited. I'm afraid this is not progress. Sky's over the top, brightly coloured, super whizzy "news centre" has never seemed so appealing when compared to the BBC's new supe drab "news cupboard".

Yeah I've been staring at these new graphics and it's stilll mostly rubbish (BBC World News). I love the new globe and related graphics/animation/transitions/wipes, but the onscreen titles are far too chunky and big.

If distinctiveness was the objective this hasn't been successful. It's not much less distinctive than it was before, but not more distinctive either. Reminds me a bit of CNN International.

Oh look! Two shades of ugly grey! One for the ticker and another to display (in gigantic text) the URL to this blog...

Hmm the weather segment seems to be the same.

There will inevitably be lots of complaints, people love to criticise the BBC and they would do it even if the thing is perfect. But I like the changes, they make it look a bit fresher and better to look at IMO. Unlike others I like the grey, it makes the text easier to read and also makes the bar a bit more distinctive. I disagree that it is not bright enough, just because it is grey that doesn’t mean it is dark. Why does it have to be bright anyway? Surely making everything nice and bright would be part of the “dumbing down” which is another accusation being made?

I like the opening sequence, it keeps the strong and easily recognisable BBC brand but again, makes it a bit more fresh and modern.

I don’t understand the name changes though, I see very little benefit out of changing them. As many have said, “BBC News 24” is unique and distinctive, there is no need to change that. The changes of the bulletin names is also pointless and simply makes it sound more like ITV News.

I am not fond of the new background either, although in a strange way I like it I feel it would be better to either have live shots of somewhere or to at least be looking onto the newsroom like the old one. The new background closes everything off and IMO goes against the idea of trying to make things a bit more clean and fresh.

I am undecided about whether the changes were necessary, although I understand the reasoning behind them. It seems to me though like you finish a rebrand of BBC News and start another straight away. There are some people who seem to think there is never a need to change, a quick look at BBC News a few decades ago shows that sticking with the same would be wrong and that change is appropriate, as long as it is not done too often which IMO you are somewhat guilty of.

Overall, I like the changes (apart from the new names which make no sense to me) and think they are an improvement. They are a little more clean, fresh and distinctive whilst managing to keep the strong BBC brand. Many of the complaints contradict each other which I think illustrates just how tough a job rebranding something like this is. It is impossible to completely please everyone but I think over time most people will become accustomed to it and have no real problems.

Good work.

You've tweaked the music, and the ending isn't as good now. The ending just kind of fizzles out, whereas previously it built right up until the countdown finished. Please reinstate the previous music! Was there really any need to tweak it?!

Also I agree with all the other comments that changing 'BBC News 24' to 'BBC News' is just plain stupid. Nobody is going to call it 'BBC News' because they won't then be able to differentiate it from any of the many other news programs. I for one will continue to refer to it as News 24.

New graphics look fine to me, though I'm not sure I like the empty background to the BBC News Channel set - I find myself looking past the presenters all the time trying to work out what is going on behind them. I'm afraid I really don't like "BBC News Channel", it's a bit of a mouthful, "News 24" was much easier. There is no point in saying it's actually just called "BBC News" as all the links on the website have channel added to them, because "BBC News" could apply to so many things. "BBC News at Ten"? No thanks, it's another mouthful, it'll always be the "Ten o'clock News" (or just "The Ten") to me.

About the website: I really like the new look, especially the embedded video. But can someone please sort out the programming of the few lines of tiny text next to pictures?? I thought it was a little issue that would be ironed out in a day but it is still happening! It might be just in Firefox but it still looks very unprofessional!

I've always liked "BBC News 24" it sounds dynamic, connected, up-to-the-minute, reliable etc. "BBC News" doesn't have this and just seems bland (and obvious).

I'm not happy with the changes.

I like it. It is plain and simple. What more do you want from news channel?! I think when you are start introducing more complex graphics, that is when things start going wrong. All a news channel needs to be is a place where you get the news and not be dazzled by state-of-the-art technology.

ok so I like the new look to BBC News but disagree with Peter Horrocks on a few aspects:-

1. Renaming of BBC News 24 --- Crazy. As Peter already said it is already Britains most popular news channel .....er...why change it ? BBC News has potential to confuse and it also sounds clumsy when referred to BBC News Channel. Sky only run News on Sky News that's why it works with Sky. On the BBC though there are so many outlets calling one "BBC News" is bonkers .

2. Renaming BBC World .....this baffles me on a couple of fronts. Firstly the justification for other changes is to give the BBC News brand prominance. Isn't one of the rules of branding not to "break the flow"....BBC World News does just that. Secondly I disagree that the brand BBC News means something to a worldwide audience. Does it ? Are you sure its not just the "BBC" that has this ? or BBC World ?? How has the BBC World Service managed to gain such trust and respect without the word "News" ?

3. Forcing BBC News brand on regions. Ask a typical man in the street why they watch their regional news programme on BBC1 then they will tell you its because its local. If anything sticking the BBC News logo on it makes it more London centric. BBC News to most people is a London based organisation. What's wrong with having some regional variations demonstrating some real appreciation of the breadth and variety of the UK. This branding exercise smacks of top down, London heavy management.

Just to add to my comment earlier, i think the grey needs to be changed to a more lively colour. (unless the designers thought 'news is not colourful and represents most of the news, dark and dreary).

Can someone please recognise that the entire world does not have access to satellite or freeview and therfore would like to see a complete news broadcast and not be told to go to BBC News (News 24) for the full story.

As for the designs fine but please keep them for a number of years.

WE WANT BBC 'NEWS 24' BACK!! That was the most update part of the BBC! Plus I thought the old intro thing was better, somebody got it spot on above, saying its more bland. This might make me switch to Sky.

I really like the new look. It's fresh but not so different that you don't recognise it. The BBC has always been ahead with this sort of thing (eg the new weather maps). The clearer style on the website is great too.

I'm glad the music is the same, I've always really liked that. Bill Bailey does an excellent send up of it (search "Bill Bailey News Themes" on youtube) which is well worth seeing.

I love the new opening titles - it does look fresh, exciting, new, clean.

However, I was absolutely disgusted when I tuned in to "News" (yeah, News 24 was better) to see these flimsy graphics, as if they'd been done on Paint - the ticker along the bottom was fine as white, and if you want the news headline bar as white, that'd be fine too - but where is any of the effects that make it look anywhere even close to the 21st century? It's all block colours, and looks absolutely ridiculous. There's nothing clean about it, it looks clumpy and quite a bit of a disgrace to be honest - if you're going to launch a new visual effect, it needs to be at LEAST as good as the one you're replacing, and from what I can see it's far from that.

You really, really, really need to look at the on-screen graphics during rolling news on 'News' - the ticker that used to fade before hitting the timestamp was nice, it was clean (as were the little BBC logos dividing the news headlines), the smooth edges and reflections, were all good. Now it looks exactly like it did in 2001, boxy and clumpy.

It looks so pathetic that, yes, I turned to Sky News this morning.

On the other fronts, I think you've made some good decisions. Although, despite you saying that red is one of the key things that people associate with you, I think there's a bit too much focus on white. But nonetheless, the idea is serving you well, bringing the channels closer under the BBC brand is good - but I'm just still flabbergasted by what I'm watching on 'News' now. =/

Quote from message 35:

"On BBC News (24), there is a countdown to each hour, before the hourly headlines. The countdown is displayed on screen in seconds, tenths of a second and hundredths of a second. The tenths of a second numbers count down incorrectly - only displaying the digits 2, 1 and 0 - whereas the hundredths are done properly. Watch it and you'll see what I mean."

I suspect that the countdown is in seconds and frames, as in the frames per second of a TV picture. 25 frames per second for PAL would mean only seeing the digits 2, 1 and 0 directly after the colon.

And, LOL, Declan just mentioned "BBC News 24" on air. He realised his mistake, and said, "Oh, I'll have to put a pound in the swearbox now for saying the number", but still, it sounded much better as "News 24" just then. And everyone looked a bit awkward, to be honest; I really do think it should have stayed. ;D

Seems nice enough. Perhaps a bit busy, but much more consistent across the board.
The News channel countdown still uses fractions of a second for some inexplicable reason though. There aren't enough frames a second to display them, so you end up with two numbers alternating - what's the point??

Please can we turn down (or preferably bin altogether) the background "noises"? They are annoying and add nothing to the presentation. Please do not get into the habit of another news channel of adding "whooshing" noises at every opportunity. This problem seems to pervade everywhere from the news on TV and traffic reports on BBC radio (local and R2) to even nature programmes - is this to counter modern man's poor concentration span? The intro "tune" (which now seems to be out of sync with the countdown seconds + TV frame count clock or was early this morning) is acceptable as a lead in to the headlines on the hour - but do we really need the rest of it?

The new countdown music sounds very similar to remixes I did of the BBC News 24 countdown last year. You can find them by searching for "jessemoore" on youtube. I need to get a job at the beeb!

I'd like to comment on this article but unfortunately I can't read it all ... its littered wth

"In order to see this content you need to have both Javascript enabled and Flash installed. Visit BBC Webwise for full instructions"

paragraphs. I do have Javascript and Java installed and running ... I assume its just my fault for being at work and using firefox on Solaris

Who's died?

Why change it to something that looks the same? Same colours, same music! Why not have different colours for different parts of the day? or different news presenters? If you wanted change, change completly and e in competition with Sky, CNN etc. Changing to BBC News rather than BBC News 24 has not done a lot!
Change is good, but change should mean change, not Jazzed up!!

I have to agree with the comment at number 24, please please please stop that bl**dy annoying thumping noise as the head lines are read out!!! It adds nothing to the broadcast and frankly makes me want to turn over, how can anyone think that its a good idea??

On another point, is there really any point in asking people for their opinions? Lets face it you might make the odd tweak but even if every single comment made on here was negative you wouldn't fundamantally change anything or go back to the drawing board would you? Isn't this is just another window dressing exercise in appearing to be open to the people who pay the bills while continuing to do exactly what you want to do??

Firstly I'm very happy that you've decided to retain David Lowe's music. It's excellent and hasn't dated since it was first used - it's still sharp, particularly with the recent touches.

I do however agree with what people say about the name change - News 24 was well established, and provides distinction between the channel name and it's content. You've removed the definition between the specific brand and the output. I think I understand why you've done this, but it's one of those things where 'it works, don't touch it if you don't need to' should've been applied. Look at how BBC London (radio) has been tweaked - it just gives the impression that something's not right and needs plasters put on it!

What a colossal waste of licence-fee payers' money.

Errr, i think you are drowning in your own self importance, this is hardly a quantum leap now is it ... or newsworthy for that matter!

Could you make it a little more grey please?

I have to say that I think its all brilliant. Nice fresh clean crisp look. And I have no problems with the ticker that people seem to be on about. All round great improvements.

What a wonderful thing to wake up to in the morning! I'm so glad you kept David Lowe's music. Whenever you think BBC News you think accuracy, trust, and 'beep'.
His music is simply astounding.

However. "BBC News Channel" What on earth? That sounds dreadful.

I agree with TonyRut about the jangly noise composed? by David Lowe you call a signature tune for the BBC news. I understand that it uses the "pips" which preceded the news on 'steam radio' as a motive.

I watch the news from Sweden on the BBC World channel and I am continuously frustrated by the fact that the presenters are battling against this jangly noise when trying to present the news headlines (I can see it in their body language!). I note that the jangly noise is faded out before the headlines are presented on the national news broadcasts. Why can't you do the same on the BBC world channel? Most of those watching the BBC world channel have English as a second/or third language and must find it more irritating than I do! No wonder they turn to the competition for their news!

Why not have a competition to find the best signature tune with the winner chosen by the listening public. I am not asking for the return of 'Lilliballero', which was the signature tune for the news on the BBC world service radio. It was originally written as a protest song against Catholics and the Irish! But you can do a lot better than to emulate the jangly noises of the commercial channels. Have you forgotten the original charter of the BBC from 1926 to serve your public?

I am afraid that the signature tune? for the world business rapport is not much better. There is a fantastic heritage of British music as well as many living British composers who could produce a signature tune for the BBC worthy of the name.

I spent many years as a sound engineer and dubbing mixer in film and video fighting my clients tooth and nail not to drown out their voice-overs with jangly noise(music?), which didn't fit!

I can't get the damn site to render even vaguely correctly under anything other then Windows and IE.

Neither of which we use.

BBC - get out from under Microsoft and make your site compliant with the standards.

Use the W3C validator - it shows 353 errors on your front news page.

You have gone, over the past twelve months from a paragon of how it should be done, to a complete mess.

Together with the Iplayer nonsense you have virtually excluded us from effective use of your site.

I've just spotted this a few posts above:-

"I do have Javascript and Java installed and running ... I assume its just my fault for being at work and using firefox on Solaris"

And I am using Firefox under Linux.

Did you guys do *any* testing with anything other than MS stuff??

Why do I have to 'join blogs' (wozzat?) to comment? What have I just signed up to? How can I resign?

Yours is the first page for me daily, and the new 'design' would no doubt win competitions, but there seems too much white space and scrolling (why not do a typesize choice for 'accessibility' issues?)

Also the banner at top is too intrusive on reading-space - less depth please.

And fun stuff scrolls across too fast for us oldies both to digest and click: can't you do a dynamic dropdown there? (as in Ubuntu Firefox already).

I really dont like the revamp. Yes the old graphics may have been sombre but i believe they gave the BBC authority when devlivering the news.

The new titles make me feel rather sick with all the spinning about.

The new black and white banners dont look right and the live bug is a different colour again. I really believe the BBC should reinstate the last banners. Aslo they finish in the 4:9 safe zone, allow them to go all the way to the screen, just looks better.

The new studio is ok, just feels a bit cold. I think a wooden effect floor like the studio before had makes it feel warmer.

I really would reconsider the colour screen and return it to the red and black, the BBC news colour

Whatever the cost of this rebranding I'm sure the money could have been better used.

It probably would have doubled the budget for BBC Parliament...

The studio is very nice, and I've always liked Gill Sans, but virtually everything else is wrong:

1) The name changes are unnecessarily confusing, and worse still make too much of a break from existing well-regarded brands.

2) The dark off-red was tired ten years ago, and no number of rearrangements can alter this. It makes it look like BBC News has been decorated by Lawrence Llewelyn-Bowen. Perhaps reverting to the nice crisp Six o' Clock News blue from the 1980s would be a good idea. At least you have moved a little away from that red in Wales and Scotland.

3) From that globe, am I to gather that man has colonized Jupiter?

4) The beeping and thumping simply isn't music; it's just irritating. Worse still, continuing in the misguided policy of using the same racket before everyone's regional news gives extremely bad messages about identity. There are ways of making programmes distinct, but still obviously BBC News -- this is something the rest of BBC News should learn from Newsnight.

As someone who has difficulty hearing, I am saddened that you have put background noise (bleeping?) against the sounds of the presenters speaking. The added sounds are unecessary, and only serve to distract from what is being said.

The news should be about clarity, please ensure that the auditory presentation is as clear as possible in order to reach the widest possible audience.

Im pretty neutral on the change, I dont hate it but I prefer the previous look. I do have two minor niggles with it however, firstly as pointed out before the grey news tickers look terrible, secondly with so much white it has a very clinical, sterilised look that makes me think of clean rooms and operating theatres rather than the warm colours previously that gave a welcoming by the fire feel.

Glad the music hasn't changed significantly, I love the beeps, and I understand the globe usage, but I'm afraid I must join the long list of viewers who want the return of "24" (and I don't mean the one starring kiefer sutherland (though I do enjoy that american series of gratuitous violence)).

Put the 24 back on the end of "BBC News" so that we can distinguish the channel from the individual programmes and so that it gives a sense of difference from sky news, and the ill fated itv news.

Generally, it seems to be good, although the way the globe keeps changing rather quickly and flashily makes my head spin rather. I don't know what effect it would have on an epileptic person.

I'm pleased you kept the apocalyptic rave music (see Bill Bailey).

I preferred the previous graphics. In fact, looking back through your video of all the changing graphics made me think the 1999 ones are the best.

Specifically, I don't like the White, it jars too much. The Yellow was far better.

Forget the Marketing blather - that is just froth.
CONCENTRATE on the quality of the News - not "pop" news but REAL news with accurate, detailed information given.
Leave the "popular" news to all the other radio, tv and newspapers.
Keep the BBC as the one and only truth telling source of all the real facts in each story.
A bit of fun sometimes (Flying Penguins, Spagetti trees) but keep it true, keep it factual.
Drop the shouting of headlines, just say them clearly and carefully.
Drop the unnecessary OBs of reporters who know no more than the studio waffling and passing control onto another -ditto-!
Keep it BBC!

I'm watching the News Channel, and I don't know what the time is because there is no onscreen clock. We've been through this before, and you then added a clock onto the latest revision (after an explosion from viewers) and now, at the next opportunity, you've removed it.

This is the listening BBC, hey?

Peter.

Thanks so much. Until today I was really worried about what BBC News brought to the world.

I saw the vacuous 'lifestyle' nonsense that is broadcast on two channels as "Breakfast" every morning.

I saw the ever-increasing reliance on comments from Joe Public with no filter of whether these comments are insightful or from experts in the field.

I saw the increasingly simplistic and patronising BBC Six O'Clock News filled with stories about Britain lest other countries confuse the poor viewers.

I saw newscasters chatting amongst themselves as part of 'ínformal' links that seem to value tired jokes or ‘banter’ above news content.

And then, this morning, I saw a changed background colour and a different name for the programme! Finally - you have provided the "clarification of what we are about". All is now well with the BBC News output.

I’m far from someone who looks at all the past as halcyon: I think Newsnight and Channel 4 News are still excellent, but if I look back at the Six O’Clock news from the ‘blue’ days I am struck by just how poor quality BBC News has become; how bland and vapid it is and how little detailed analysis it ever conducts. No re-brand alone is going to fix this – it takes a culture change.

What a complete waste of License payers money. Not only that but logo is ugly and over complicated.

The new look must have cost the BBC a fortune. Was it necessary? Probably not.

Thanks for spending my money so wisely BBC.

I don't mind the new setup - but PLEASE fix the html and css. The css isn't too bad but have you even run the front page through a html checker????

At the very least clean up the basic stuff, its not that hard to do.

I like the new look but however you try to defend it, renaming News 24 and, to a lesser extent, BBC World was a big, unnecessary mistake and I have no doubt that the names will be reverted back within the year. 'BBC News' implies that this is the most important service when for many people it isn't. 'BBC News' should only be used for the department itself. 'News 24' seperates it from other news services in the BBC, I don't understand why you would want to make it more confusing for the viewer.

As for BBC World News, that's just patronising to the viewer: everyone knows it's a news channel, they don't need to be told that. I have a feeling the name change is solely for American viewers that will be seeing the channel on a bigger scale once the channel rolls out across the country.

Please return the BBC News Channel to BBC News 24!

It sounds so tacky as BBC News. Also, bring back the graphics we just had! They were what I liked about tuning to sky channel 503 everyday.

Please also get rid of that hideous red box, is there really any need for that to be on screen. I think the new graphics look dreadful to be perfectly honest.

What was wrong with the white ticker and 'arial' font used on the previous graphics. And the effects used on the banners and 'live' captions?

They were what made BBC N24 a better news channel than Sky's. BBC, if you're planning on listening to us, then take the feedback and bring back the much loved 'NEWS 24'.

It seems everyone is being incredibly negative about the changes, so i'll attempt to infuse some positivity.

I feel you've done an excellent job with the rebranding.

Change is necessary. If the BBC News remained as it was in the 1980s it would look out of touch and outdated.

I think you've made a good job of improving the graphics. You've recognised massive changes aren't necessary and all the changes have been an improvement.

Those who say you should have consulted prior to the changes, probably haven't read fully your explanation for the changes. It appears you have done significant research and used it to heavily influence the changes.

Good job!

Oh lord, the reactionaries are out in force.

I like the new look - I agree with the comment above that the on-screen graphics now seem a little dated, but on the whole a step forward.

I think people will get used to "BBC News" rather than "News 24", and it forces those of us who often say the names of the channels to say 'BBC', which I guess is part of the point.

Whenever something changes at the BBC, rather than say "well it's not right for me", or "I don't like it" people so often reach for "colossal waste of licence fee payers money!" - it's just not true. The BBC serves upwards of 50 million people. Not everyone can like every aspect.

It looks like you've copied Sky News:

The two news readers on the desk are closer to the camera.
A single news reader is shown in a close-up portrait shot.
The shiny, 'floaty' desk and background.

The BBC should be leading and setting higher standards, not following other news channels.

new tiles are nice but but the straps which say things like breaking news and the reporters name are hideous they look like they have been made on paint.
and the set is dull and cold maybe change the floor colour to red and callng bbc news 24 bbc news is a good idea

the regional news in the north west has just got a New set, graphics, and music now with the corporate look it looks awful why not introduce the Old north west tonight new look
In all the BBC regional news and it would look great

and sort the straps out they look awful!

I think BBC News is just awful. BBC News 24 kind of... Well, it kind of 'sat well' and sounded right when said out loud. It also, most importantly, communicated that we could get BBC News 24 hours a day. Nice and easy and to the point.

When I reference BBC News, I'm usually talking or writing about something I've seen on the website.

This change is pointless and pointlessly expensive, no doubt--though not as appalling and nausea-inducing as the BBC3 makeover, which not only saw the blobs killed off but also introduced ghastly pink as a main colour along with ghastly 70s-retro text, at the same time telling those of us over the age of 30 that we weren't welcome to watch the channel anymore as we aren't the target audience of yoof.

So. If something isn't broken, why fix it?

Unlike the website re-design, these changes seem (to me, anyway) to be generally pleasant and improve recognisability/ease of use etc.

What is this criticism of the wonderful title music though? I love the beeps and I think they communicate "BBC News" as well as music can. I personally don't mind it going over the newsreader's introduction, but if it's causing accessibility problems for partially deaf people, then it needs to be rethought.

The only bit I would argue with is News 24 --> BBC News. It's already become BBC News Channel which is just ugly. Something a bit more specific is needed, perhaps?

I neglected to say in my last comment, noting other users' comments about the site and how it appears under anything but Windoze, I find it frankly disgraceful that pages often render incorrectly in Firefox under Mac OS X.

This adds further insult to those of us who aren't Microsoft-loving saps. First, we get told we can't download iPlayer content, only PC users - and yet no offer of a discount on our licence fees, given that we have effectively shared the cost for Windoze users to have that ability we do not - and second, we then find you allow certain content to be available FOR A PRICE if I'm prepared to swallow it, by downloading from iTunes.

You then announce a deal with Nintendo to provide iPlayer on TVs attached to Wii consoles, while Apple TV was and remains a perfect vehicle for BBC content.

I'm not wishing to shoot the messengers, no, but the site designers and overall technology planners? Yes. Absolutely! What, did Microsoft and Nintendo PR offer all you backroom boys free Xbox and Wii consoles for giving them a huge boost?

Hugely disappointing and a complete waste of money. How can you spend 550,000 quid to step back in time? As mentioned by other bloggers - the font is old hat, the Breaking News aston does nothing to grab viewers attention, a stark contrast to the statement made by the BBC the last time there was a lick of paint. To quote Roger Mosely, head of BBC TV News, said there was a perception that the channel was slower than its main rival, Sky News, in airing breaking news stories.

He said in fact the channels were about even on breaking news. The BBC's enhanced graphics will emphasise this area of its output, he said.

Apparently his vision has been canned.

The studio is cold, lacks the feeling of a fast paced rolling news channel.

Sadly, this is the most dreadful of revamps, a real shame considering the channel was doing so well.

hmmm blue for Scotland and green for Wales I get, but orange for Northern Ireland???

One last thing - Please change the lower thirds. The color scheme is absolutely vile. A Grey ticker?!

Bring back he pre 1999 title music. It was much more dramatic and was a metaphor for the news's importance.

The post 99 soudtrack is diluted and does nothing to attract or appeal the younger generation

Erm... I have to say that I'm not sure I really noticed any difference. This feels a little like the Emperor's New Clothes. How much of my money was spent on this? What was the point? Was something wrong with whatever it was you've got rid of?

I'm not so sure about the new News not 24 studio look.

It seems very cramped, the old one had proper visual depth (not as much as back in 1997, which I loved).

The main news studio with the 'buildings skyline' backgrounds worked because the effective perspective was huge.

But the 'virtual newsroom' look like a green-screen setup and lacks perspective.

Three "issues"

-fix the lousy lower-third powerpoint graphics
-change the name of BBC News Channel to BBC News 24
-quieten the beeps. whooshes and thunderclaps

Other than that - love the new studio, like the new idents and most of the music is good!