It's interesting to see how many years behind the Sky channels some of those provided by both ITV and BBC are.
At long last Sky have recently removed their DOGs from the bulk of programming, presumably because someone higher up in the organisation has come to realise that DOGs are generally the equivalent of "you are now watching a naff satellite channel".
Got a reply (in 2 different fonts from their cutting and pasting of standard replies :rolleyes:) :
Thank you for your email.
We have launched an on air STV channel ‘bug’; appearing on all our programming apart from idents and commercials. We have approached it in the same creative style as our STV HD bug which has been on our HD channel since launch and has not interfered with the enjoyment of our output.
In the ever increasing world of multi channels we were keen to be able to help our audience identify STV at all times. Many channels now have this form of easy identification which we believe will be of value to our audience.
Hope this helps to clarify the situation for you and thank you again for taking the time to get in touch.
Jesus H. Corbett, that's made my blood boil. I've just emailed them with:
"I saw your reply to a friend of mine*, pasted below, about the logo and have to ask some questions:
1. What the hell is creative about it?
2. "In the ever increasing world of multi channels we were keen to be able to help our audience identify STV at all times" - let me deconstruct that:
Part 1: "In the ever increasing world of multi channels" - Well, you're NOT. You're part of the main channel set. Everyone knows where channel 3 is.
Part 2: "Identify" - definition: A word used by marketing bods which comes up frequently in games of Bullshit Bingo.
3. You believe the channel logo "will be of value to our audience". Er... how exactly? The EPG tells you what channel you're on, and the only time a viewer selects a channel and then does NOT know which channel they're watching, is when they're (a word that'll probably get blocked on here - don't worry, I'm not expecting a sentient reply from STV). Perhaps that defines the entire marketing and management team at STV?
Even Sky have stopped their logo from being shown on a permanent basis, so if you think your copy-and-paste bullshit will fly with your audience, you're as mental as they are not.
I thankyou,
Dom Robinson"
And if I do get a sentient reply from STV which properly addresses all my points, I'll bare my bottom in Curry's window.
I concur entirely. It makes less sense to have DOGs now in the digital age than it did before with analogue TV. I'm still annoyed that the BBC do it with all of their channels (assuming one watches the HD version of programming when available).
We are sorry to hear that you are unhappy with the 'bug' however unfortunately there is no futher information we can add regarding this matter.
Please be assured I have recorded your comments and, in addition, your comments shall be included in a report that is viewed by our senior management.
With regards to STV HD, we are currently working with Sky, Freesat and ITV Network with a view to making STV HD available via satellite as soon as possible however cannot confirm a date as yet.
We thank you for taking the time to get in touch; viewer feedback of any kind is always welcome here at STV.
As STV HD has been "coming soon" on satellite since summer 2010 I would suggest STV have not exactly tackled this with any urgency. I note that you can actually watch STV HD on satellite by adding the channels manually (although as viewers cannot record, pause or rewind in this way, it detracts from the viewing experience). Why is STV HD not on the electronic programme guides of Freesat and Sky? Is it the level of fees for EPG access for Sky and Freesat or are ITV plc preventing STV from re-broadcasting their HD productions?
Full, easy access to HD services would be "of value to [your] audience" much more than a tacky, poorly designed logo cluttering up the screen and distracting viewers from the content of the programming.
I would be grateful if you could confirm if my comments are reported, in full, in the report you referred to in your reply.
I still fail to understand why it is that people think they have a right to moan about a channel thats free to watch, having an onscreen logo.
And yes, i actually sent them a email praising this move, as the moaning over a channel that you pay nothing to watch for, can have a logo of they so wish.
There is more to life and than kicking off because STV and whoever else have them, its part of broadcasting, i suggest you accept it, because it won't change.
You pay to watch commercial TV with your attention to the adverts, which they sell. It's not free. So they have as much an interest in keeping audiences as anyone. Complaints to the channels with other revenue streams worked, so why not here?
It hasn't worked here because STV see that the small small amount of complaints regarding what they choose to do in terms of branding of their channel thats free to watch is so tiny that its going to have next to no affect! UTV has one and again, not affected them
BBC One HD, BBC Two over night, BBC Three & BBC Four have on screen logo's and their audiences are good, so your point about the fact they have to keep an audience by not branding their channels has just died on its backside aswell.
Also, if that was the case for Sky Sports, that they don't get good audiences and they get good ones, big ones, its not driven them away with Sky Sports 1 HD on the screen has it?
How many channels in the UK has no onscreen logo now?
BBC One, ITV1, Channel4, S4C, that i can think of. Does it affect tv audiences? No
Sky1, Living & Atlantic have them but they fade away, its made sod all difference to their audiences though.
On here, you get a few that kick off over it and it looks bigger than what it actually is.
They won't get rid of it. Broadcasters don't give a damn whether the public like them or not. They've been told over & over things like DOGS, credit squeezing etc irritate us but they're hell-bent on ramming the things down our throats & have the cheek to make up stories that people want these things. As mentioned earlier in the thread UTV have had it for the last few years & there's no going back now.
It hasn't worked here because STV see that the small small amount of complaints regarding what they choose to do in terms of branding of their channel thats free to watch is so tiny that its going to have next to no affect! UTV has one and again, not affected them
BBC One HD, BBC Two over night, BBC Three & BBC Four have on screen logo's and their audiences are good, so your point about the fact they have to keep an audience by not branding their channels has just died on its backside aswell.
Also, if that was the case for Sky Sports, that they don't get good audiences and they get good ones, big ones, its not driven them away with Sky Sports 1 HD on the screen has it?
How many channels in the UK has no onscreen logo now?
BBC One, ITV1, Channel4, S4C, that i can think of. Does it affect tv audiences? No
Sky1, Living & Atlantic have them but they fade away, its made sod all difference to their audiences though.
On here, you get a few that kick off over it and it looks bigger than what it actually is.
The fact is that logos have been introduced and taken away, in the case of digital BBC1 and 2 pretty damn quick in response to viewer complaints or negative responses. I admit I was astounded but happy when Sky did it. BBC Four looked like it might go a while back, when they started taking it not only off films but off 'high quality' programmes like a documentary on Elgar. Obviously it hasn't happened (yet), but I continue to hope that they will realise that even by their own fraudulent survey methods the BBC Four audience will be most irritated by a logo.
So these things aren't inevitable. But if people's reaction is to passively accept things they don't like, or spend their time coming up with justifications for advising that it's not worth complaining (or, incredibly, sending supportive e-mails for the most perverse reasons :mad:) they surely will become so. The branding departments will have a free hand and we will end up with huge animated coloured logos and continuous snipes across the screen as happens elsewhere. And the audience (which won't include me but obviously will you) will deserve it.
I've always liked STV and supported their independence, but a permanent logo is enough for me to switch back to ITV1 which is my region anyway.
If the Sky set of channels have made the decision to go logo free what does that say about their prestige?, the Sky channels are obviously in a very multichannel environment and yet they have now rewarded Sky viewers with an unspoilt picture and this has definitely made them seem less cheap and tacky and gives them a bit of an edge over the other regular multichannels.
The logos look sort of cool and I guess psychologically they boost the ego from the point of the view of the channel itself but I don't think there is a strong argument that can be made in favour of them and fundamentally they are pro-channel but anti-viewer. It would be better if channels just had creative break bumpers and continuity presentation and followed the Sky channels lead of showing a DOG for just a few seconds as the programme starts and in and out of breaks, this solves the whole copyright argument as well that DOGs can watermark recordings made, there is really no need at all for a permanent on screen DOG.
So perhaps someone can email STV and suggest that they put the DOG on only a few seconds into the start of a programme from breaks and that is all.
Also include a link to this thread.
(or, incredibly, sending supportive e-mails for the most perverse reasons
Because i think its rather silly to think you can dictate to a broadcaster that gives you a channel to watch for free that they cannot have onscreen branding.
If you don't like the channels decision, then don't want it, it couldn't be simpler.
Also, make sure you don't go to the US, because they have rather larger ones on the screen all the time and i think you might just go nuts..
Because i think its rather silly to think you can dictate to a broadcaster that gives you a channel to watch for free that they cannot have onscreen branding.
It's not dictating. (How does that even make any sense?) It's viewer feedback. And viewers matter to them.
It's not dictating. (How does that even make any sense?) It's viewer feedback. And viewers matter to them.
Indeed. But it's helpful to them to know why.
Don't you see where the logic of this attitude leads? And how e-mails like yours will get us there all the faster?
How self-defeating can you get?
The point is, to me, IMO, onscreen branding of a free channel doesn't make me react this way.
And if broadcaster wants to brand their channel onscreen during a broadcast,, thats their choice and in actual fact, wont make viewers go away in droves as they are not bothered, because 98% (A rough guess) of channels on air in the UK have onscreen branding, so if it was that bigger issue, they would all be logo free.
.
I don't believe that ITV1 are daft enough to even consider a DOG on their broadcasts.
It's bad enough that (Channel) 5 have a horrible clunky DOG.
For what it's worth, I don't think that any of the five "terrestrial" channels should be permitted to have this on-screen clutter.
Why not? In every other country every channel including the main ones carry DOGs. When I lived in Italy I saw all the main channels carry DOGs on a corner of the screen and it didn't bother me in the slightest. Infact I quite liked them. I'm really baffled by the hostility to them from people in this forum.
Why not? In every other country every channel including the main ones carry DOGs. When I lived in Italy I saw all the main channels carry DOGs on a corner of the screen and it didn't bother me in the slightest. Infact I quite liked them.
I don't think we need to be setting our standards by Italian TV....
I still fail to understand why it is that people think they have a right to moan about a channel thats free to watch, having an onscreen logo. And yes, i actually sent them a email praising this move, as the moaning over a channel that you pay nothing to watch for, can have a logo of they so wish.
So what's the weather like at Oregon State Hospital?
There is more to life and than kicking off because STV and whoever else have them, its part of broadcasting,
People who say that sort of thing are the most ridiculous because if you really thought that, then you wouldn't waste your time discussing it either way.
i suggest you accept it, because it won't change.
That's pretty much the attitude when one country invades another. Might is not right.
I don't think we need to be setting our standards by Italian TV....
As an Anglo-Italian, I find your comments offensive and totally without merit.
FYI, Italian tv is full of programmes with middle-aged presenters alongside younger, half-naked females, football discussion programmes with middle-aged men talking over each other while scantily-clad women sit there, saying little and doing nothing except smiling at the cameras, looking pretty.
We also have our annual Miss Italia Contest where women compete to be crowned most beautiful woman in Italy. The biggest commercial network is owned by the former PM Berlusconi and an episode of Italy's version of Strictly Come Dancing starts roughly at the same time as the BBC version but doesn't finish til sometime past midnight.
So there! British tv doesn't look so clever now, does it? :mad:
Comments
At long last Sky have recently removed their DOGs from the bulk of programming, presumably because someone higher up in the organisation has come to realise that DOGs are generally the equivalent of "you are now watching a naff satellite channel".
Jesus H. Corbett, that's made my blood boil. I've just emailed them with:
(*they probably wouldn't understand 'fellow DS poster'
"I saw your reply to a friend of mine*, pasted below, about the logo and have to ask some questions:
1. What the hell is creative about it?
2. "In the ever increasing world of multi channels we were keen to be able to help our audience identify STV at all times" - let me deconstruct that:
Part 1: "In the ever increasing world of multi channels" - Well, you're NOT. You're part of the main channel set. Everyone knows where channel 3 is.
Part 2: "Identify" - definition: A word used by marketing bods which comes up frequently in games of Bullshit Bingo.
3. You believe the channel logo "will be of value to our audience". Er... how exactly? The EPG tells you what channel you're on, and the only time a viewer selects a channel and then does NOT know which channel they're watching, is when they're (a word that'll probably get blocked on here - don't worry, I'm not expecting a sentient reply from STV). Perhaps that defines the entire marketing and management team at STV?
Even Sky have stopped their logo from being shown on a permanent basis, so if you think your copy-and-paste bullshit will fly with your audience, you're as mental as they are not.
I thankyou,
Dom Robinson"
And if I do get a sentient reply from STV which properly addresses all my points, I'll bare my bottom in Curry's window.
And it won't have Paddy Power pants covering it
Thank you for your most recent email.
We are sorry to hear that you are unhappy with the 'bug' however unfortunately there is no futher information we can add regarding this matter.
Please be assured I have recorded your comments and, in addition, your comments shall be included in a report that is viewed by our senior management.
With regards to STV HD, we are currently working with Sky, Freesat and ITV Network with a view to making STV HD available via satellite as soon as possible however cannot confirm a date as yet.
We thank you for taking the time to get in touch; viewer feedback of any kind is always welcome here at STV.
Kind Regards,
stv Viewer Contact
Tel: 0141 300 3704
Email: yourview@stv.tv
Website: http://stv.tv
My response:
Thank you for your further reply.
As STV HD has been "coming soon" on satellite since summer 2010 I would suggest STV have not exactly tackled this with any urgency. I note that you can actually watch STV HD on satellite by adding the channels manually (although as viewers cannot record, pause or rewind in this way, it detracts from the viewing experience). Why is STV HD not on the electronic programme guides of Freesat and Sky? Is it the level of fees for EPG access for Sky and Freesat or are ITV plc preventing STV from re-broadcasting their HD productions?
Full, easy access to HD services would be "of value to [your] audience" much more than a tacky, poorly designed logo cluttering up the screen and distracting viewers from the content of the programming.
I would be grateful if you could confirm if my comments are reported, in full, in the report you referred to in your reply.
And yes, i actually sent them a email praising this move, as the moaning over a channel that you pay nothing to watch for, can have a logo of they so wish.
There is more to life and than kicking off because STV and whoever else have them, its part of broadcasting, i suggest you accept it, because it won't change.
Like the Sky logos, you mean? Or the ones on BBC1 and BBC2 digital?
They are meaningless in the info-bar era.
You pay to watch Sky and BBC channels @mwardy
You pay to watch commercial TV with your attention to the adverts, which they sell. It's not free. So they have as much an interest in keeping audiences as anyone. Complaints to the channels with other revenue streams worked, so why not here?
BBC One HD, BBC Two over night, BBC Three & BBC Four have on screen logo's and their audiences are good, so your point about the fact they have to keep an audience by not branding their channels has just died on its backside aswell.
Also, if that was the case for Sky Sports, that they don't get good audiences and they get good ones, big ones, its not driven them away with Sky Sports 1 HD on the screen has it?
How many channels in the UK has no onscreen logo now?
BBC One, ITV1, Channel4, S4C, that i can think of. Does it affect tv audiences? No
Sky1, Living & Atlantic have them but they fade away, its made sod all difference to their audiences though.
On here, you get a few that kick off over it and it looks bigger than what it actually is.
The fact is that logos have been introduced and taken away, in the case of digital BBC1 and 2 pretty damn quick in response to viewer complaints or negative responses. I admit I was astounded but happy when Sky did it. BBC Four looked like it might go a while back, when they started taking it not only off films but off 'high quality' programmes like a documentary on Elgar. Obviously it hasn't happened (yet), but I continue to hope that they will realise that even by their own fraudulent survey methods the BBC Four audience will be most irritated by a logo.
So these things aren't inevitable. But if people's reaction is to passively accept things they don't like, or spend their time coming up with justifications for advising that it's not worth complaining (or, incredibly, sending supportive e-mails for the most perverse reasons :mad:) they surely will become so. The branding departments will have a free hand and we will end up with huge animated coloured logos and continuous snipes across the screen as happens elsewhere. And the audience (which won't include me but obviously will you) will deserve it.
If the Sky set of channels have made the decision to go logo free what does that say about their prestige?, the Sky channels are obviously in a very multichannel environment and yet they have now rewarded Sky viewers with an unspoilt picture and this has definitely made them seem less cheap and tacky and gives them a bit of an edge over the other regular multichannels.
The logos look sort of cool and I guess psychologically they boost the ego from the point of the view of the channel itself but I don't think there is a strong argument that can be made in favour of them and fundamentally they are pro-channel but anti-viewer. It would be better if channels just had creative break bumpers and continuity presentation and followed the Sky channels lead of showing a DOG for just a few seconds as the programme starts and in and out of breaks, this solves the whole copyright argument as well that DOGs can watermark recordings made, there is really no need at all for a permanent on screen DOG.
So perhaps someone can email STV and suggest that they put the DOG on only a few seconds into the start of a programme from breaks and that is all.
Also include a link to this thread.
Because i think its rather silly to think you can dictate to a broadcaster that gives you a channel to watch for free that they cannot have onscreen branding.
If you don't like the channels decision, then don't want it, it couldn't be simpler.
Also, make sure you don't go to the US, because they have rather larger ones on the screen all the time and i think you might just go nuts..
How self-defeating can you get?
The point is, to me, IMO, onscreen branding of a free channel doesn't make me react this way.
And if broadcaster wants to brand their channel onscreen during a broadcast,, thats their choice and in actual fact, wont make viewers go away in droves as they are not bothered, because 98% (A rough guess) of channels on air in the UK have onscreen branding, so if it was that bigger issue, they would all be logo free.
Probably because they are completely pointless when they are multiple ways of seeing what channel you are on the era of digital TV.
^^ This!
So what's the weather like at Oregon State Hospital?
People who say that sort of thing are the most ridiculous because if you really thought that, then you wouldn't waste your time discussing it either way.
That's pretty much the attitude when one country invades another. Might is not right.
Ask after med time. They let us out for 'roaming' time! :cool::cool:
FYI, Italian tv is full of programmes with middle-aged presenters alongside younger, half-naked females, football discussion programmes with middle-aged men talking over each other while scantily-clad women sit there, saying little and doing nothing except smiling at the cameras, looking pretty.
We also have our annual Miss Italia Contest where women compete to be crowned most beautiful woman in Italy. The biggest commercial network is owned by the former PM Berlusconi and an episode of Italy's version of Strictly Come Dancing starts roughly at the same time as the BBC version but doesn't finish til sometime past midnight.
So there! British tv doesn't look so clever now, does it? :mad:
Oh I dunno, I rather like the very pretty young ladies they have doing the continuity on RAI