Between February 2011 and September 2011, I contributed to the British Television Website, TV-LIVE as a contributor to their “Viewpoints” section.

Not all of the articles that I made were published and on September 22, 2011 It was announced that the service would be shut down and the best articles would survive in the refurbished TV-LIVE plusONE.

Here were some of the articles that were published on TV-Live.

Can a new look really change one’s idea about Channel 5? Part One( of Two)


On February 14th, Following ownership changes, the Five network, returned to its former insignia and identity, “Channel 5″, despite the rebrand  it replaced ( the 2008-10 rebrand) helped bring its colors back.

To the eyes of a person on the outside looking in, its a returns to basics (even though its not the exact logo or look from the channel’s inception) but to those who are in the business or those covering the rebrand changes on fine websites such as TV-live and others, what does it actually do for the channel and does it really matter to viewers?

Five’s Colors return–albeit shortlived from 2008-10 /tvlive

As as example of how rebrands can help or hurt the channel,  I will use the 2005-07 rebrand issued by Sky News as an example of how can a rebrand hurt a channel.

On 6am on October 24th 2005, Sky News moved to a new studio with revised music and on screen graphics all in Widescreen (16:9) format and a new schedule which featured new shows.

In addition, James Rubin joined to present an evening show ( which was cancelled around 2007), and ex-GMTV patriot Eamonn Holmes to present Sunrise.

Sky News’s rebrand 2005-07/tvlive

This relaunch was proven to be disastrous for the channel, and since October 2005, the channel formerly known as BBC News 24 has overtaken Sky News in the ratings despite that Sky News is carried on more platforms than BBC News.

Although Sky has since regained some of the viewers lost when they refreshed the channel in 2007 and helped shape the channel into what it is today, its a period that ratings-wise they would rather ignore.

Can a new look really change one’s idea on Channel 5? Part Two


One thing that can be learned from the Sky News 2005-07 rebrand that it can be looked down upon as uncreative or too simplistic (which can not be said for the current graphics) or “overkill” .

But with the bad, there is the good- as an example of brand solidification, I’ll look at the BBC. When BBC firebrand its news operations and news channels, BBC News 24 and BBC World turned into BBC News Channel and BBC World News, it solidified the respected “BBC News” brand and also ties to the

tradition of the BBC brand. the BBC’s Persian channel immediately launched the new look when the channel was founded and so did the BBC Arabic news channel, the BBC regional news programmes and the BBC Alba produced news programme, “An La”.

Perhaps there is a silver lining with this rebrand and that it will actually benefit Channel 5 and the new owners.

Since this is the first week of the new look, I will give them the benefit of the doubt because the brand its still in its infancy.

There is an underlying in the question since the rebrand?–How will viewers see the rebrand?

The new look 5 News is basically them same but as a callback to the 90′s, the presenters ( the 17:00 bulletin is fronted by Matt Barbet, and the 19:00 bulletin is fronted by Emma Crosby) are standing up rather than being behind a desk.

The launch DOG revived the “5″ motif, originally as an opaque 5 cutout in a white circle. From 18 February 2011, the DOG was modified to a white translucent “5″ on a faint grey circle following a number of viewer complaints about the intrusive look and high opacity of the original design.

So if viewers were complaining about the DOGs, imagine the outcry from some viewers if the font for the Promo boards are too big or look too ugly on screen or if the new 5 News is nothing like Five News, etc..

Since the new look is a week old, It will be hard to tell whether or not, are viewers going to watch Channel 5 just because they went back to basis?

Sky News to be spun-off


In order for News Corporation to buy the majority stake of BSkyB, News Corp. will have to spin off Sky News and have the channel run independently. This article features my viewpoint and a rundown of the planned proposal.

The plan – in which the Sky News channel would formally be separated from BSkyB to head off concerns that the News Corporation would gain too much control over British news media – could be announced Thursday.

The conglomerate already owns several major British newspapers, including The Times of London, The Sun and (The) News of the World and currently owns 31% of BSkyB.

But the News Corporation’s bid has come under severe scrutiny from people who oppose further consolidation of media companies.

BBC Business Editor Robert Peston said on-air today, “Some will see that as a U-turn,” due to UK Culture Secretary Jeremy Hunt had promised to heed the advice of regulator Ofcom, who wanted the deal referred to the Competition Commission.

“This deal can be seen as not changing News Corp’s relationship with Sky News, because News Corp would continue to own 39% of Sky News, even if its holding in the rest of BSkyB goes up to 100%,” he added.

“Or, if you are that way inclined, you could see it as News Corp selling a majority stake in Sky News.”

History of BSkyB & Sky News

BSkyB, which was formed in 1990 following a merger of Sky Television and British Satellite Broadcasting.

BSB, which was funded by the government until the merger, closed up shop in November 1990. The reason BSB did not survive was that BSB did not air 24 hours a day and came out later than Sky which already had a stronghold since the Sky channel’s inception in 1985.

Sky News, which is the world’s second oldest news channel (CNN being the first oldest and Canada’s CBC News Net/Newsworld being the third oldest) came to existence on February 5th 1989 at 6pm UK time.

Despite Sky News being ridiculed in its early days, Sky today has grown to be one of the most respected news channels, gaining the respect of viewers and the industry alike.

My Viewpoint: I agree that Ofcom was worried that News Corp would have turned Sky news into the British equivalent of Fox News ( highly successful yet controversial) due to Sky News being all news and that the British are not into opinionated programmes that involve screaming down someone else’s throat.

I respect the British for not believing in opinionated programming. It should be noted that I have nothing against opinionated programmes but do not lie to the viewers and say that its called news.

Sky News may not have opinionated shows 24/7, Sky has become a great hit with viewers especially the sports division, which has the presence of ESPN in America and viewers accept the fact that no one at Sky is shoving their own opinions down the throat of the viewers.

If the deal is approved, viewers will not have to worry about Sky losing its editorial independence. Sky News will be spun off and will have a governing body and News Corp will not have editorial control. Sky News will also have to have a license to use the “Sky News” name for seven years for the forseeable future.

There is a question that ties in with the takeover – how will this affect the rest of Sky Television including the popular Sky 1 and their Sky Sports division and the Sky News-produced Channel 5 News?

There will be more on this story soon and if everything become official, Sky News could become owned by “Sky News Ltd” or something close to that.

NOTE: Since the writing of this article, The spin-off plan was dropped.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s