I've seen the future of TV logos and it isn't good

Yeah true, but why should have to go to the trouble to rip my DVDs just to
skip ads.? These should be optional, not mandatory, FFS.

True but, unlike the examples being talked of in this thread, you do at
least have some option. If they started burning ads over the top of the main
programme on the DVD then that would be a different matter.

"Dave" wrote in message
ps.com...
Really? Can you give an example of a commercial channel that has less
advertising than BBC1 in the UK?

'Five' in the early hours of the morning has no ads at all.

--
Max Demian

mike ring wrote in
. 1.4:

"

Some channels are ad free, like Showtime

And, of course, the BBC.



Well, that went well.

It was the sardonic comment of a disgusted ex-employee

I thought you folks knew me better than to think otherwise

sigh

mike

Dave wrote:
For those on here who go on about logos on TV channels in the UK and
Australia I'm currently in the USA and have a 'taste of the
future' and it is not looking good.

We don't often get British newsgroups cross-posted into aus.tv so I
need to ask, what are these "DOGs" that several of you have disparaged?

"Wolfgang Wildeblood" wrote in message
oups.com...
Dave wrote:
For those on here who go on about logos on TV channels in the UK and
Australia I'm currently in the USA and have a 'taste of the
future' and it is not looking good.

We don't often get British newsgroups cross-posted into aus.tv so I
need to ask, what are these "DOGs" that several of you have disparaged?

Logos Such as Sky One, UK Gold etc.

I think the most annoying is when they put up things under the Logo like
*Starting next week* and other graffitti :-(

( I thought you'd have guessed when I mentioned in my post the fact children
are being programmed into expecting a DOG all the time onscreen thanks to
CITV,Cbeebies and so on)

Strange these dogs only arrived as Satellite TV came about,So we know who to
blame..O-K it was originally intended to *let the viewer know which channel
they were on* but in these days of EPG's, There's certainly no need for them
anymore.
Add to that the voice-over jerk who can't wait to start talking over end
credits about what's coming on next and the fancy graphics guy doing the
split screen,All amounts to third rate TV

The Wizard wrote:
"Wolfgang Wildeblood" wrote in message
oups.com...
Dave wrote:
For those on here who go on about logos on TV channels in the UK and
Australia I'm currently in the USA and have a 'taste of the
future' and it is not looking good.

We don't often get British newsgroups cross-posted into aus.tv so I
need to ask, what are these "DOGs" that several of you have disparaged?

Logos Such as Sky One, UK Gold etc.

I think the most annoying is when they put up things under the Logo like
*Starting next week* and other graffitti :-(

You just mean the ordinary watermark style channel logo that's on
constantly? Do you have the animated logos over there yet?

Seven network here have this great new animated monstrosity: instead of
just a glassy, see-through 7 in a circle, they have a red and white
animated cartoon TV set, showing the 7 on its screen, JUMPING UP AND
DOWN and waving its arms to get your attention. Jumps around for about
30 seconds before it changes to the usual watermark.

It comes on after ad breaks (along with a banner advertising Desperate
Housewives or Lost, that together cover the bottom quarter of the
screen) but also comes on without warning during dramatic climaxes -
right at the moment someone gets shot, usually.

Do you get that sort of nonsense on UK TV?

Wolfgang Wildeblood wrote:

The Wizard wrote:
"Wolfgang Wildeblood" wrote in message
oups.com...
Dave wrote:
For those on here who go on about logos on TV channels in the UK and
Australia I'm currently in the USA and have a 'taste of the
future' and it is not looking good.

We don't often get British newsgroups cross-posted into aus.tv so I
need to ask, what are these "DOGs" that several of you have disparaged?

Logos Such as Sky One, UK Gold etc.

I think the most annoying is when they put up things under the Logo like
*Starting next week* and other graffitti :-(

You just mean the ordinary watermark style channel logo that's on
constantly? Do you have the animated logos over there yet?

Seven network here have this great new animated monstrosity: instead of
just a glassy, see-through 7 in a circle, they have a red and white
animated cartoon TV set, showing the 7 on its screen, JUMPING UP AND
DOWN and waving its arms to get your attention. Jumps around for about
30 seconds before it changes to the usual watermark.

It comes on after ad breaks (along with a banner advertising Desperate
Housewives or Lost, that together cover the bottom quarter of the
screen) but also comes on without warning during dramatic climaxes -
right at the moment someone gets shot, usually.

Do you get that sort of nonsense on UK TV?

heh, I was ****ed off last night because I was filming the Italian Job
on BBC3 and didn't know they're testing a new thing called 'catch up'
so half way through my pristine copy of this old gem I now have a
small but colourful icon for this catch up in the top right corner. It
looks, against a classic movie like this, incongruous and far too eye
catching.

The Dysney channel don't need theirs to jump around. You have a
transparent Mickey's head which fills the lower left quarter of the
screen and a big f*off red button with PRESS HERE!!!! or something
attached to it taking the top left up. You can miss action behind
those two! :O)

--
Paul (Sometimes my mind plays tricks on me)
-------------------------------------------------------
Stop and Look
http://www.geocities.com/dreamst8me/

"Wolfgang Wildeblood" wrote:

We don't often get British newsgroups cross-posted into aus.tv so I
need to ask, what are these "DOGs" that several of you have disparaged?

Logos Such as Sky One, UK Gold etc.

You just mean the ordinary watermark style channel logo that's on
constantly? Do you have the animated logos over there yet?

Yes, and not yet. Stands for Digital Onscreen Graphic.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_On-screen_Graphic

If you don't have a term for them like the UK's "DOG" or the US's "bug"
in Australia, then maybe it's time you had one that suitably captured
their essence. I suggest "Station Hallmark Insignia Token" or "Picture
Imprint Screen Symbol".

--
Dave Farrance

"Dave Farrance" wrote in message
...
"Wolfgang Wildeblood" wrote:

We don't often get British newsgroups cross-posted into aus.tv so I
need to ask, what are these "DOGs" that several of you have
disparaged?

Logos Such as Sky One, UK Gold etc.

You just mean the ordinary watermark style channel logo that's on
constantly? Do you have the animated logos over there yet?

Yes, and not yet. Stands for Digital Onscreen Graphic.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_On-screen_Graphic

If you don't have a term for them like the UK's "DOG" or the US's "bug"
in Australia, then maybe it's time you had one that suitably captured
their essence. I suggest "Station Hallmark Insignia Token" or "Picture
Imprint Screen Symbol".

**** and ****?? Surely that's the stuff showing UNDER the dogs? ;-)

Speaking of animated dogs, I remember the complaints over the spinning
doughnut on Sky One (something to do with the Simpletons)

Was'nt there a site that showed some of the most annoying on screen
graffitti though for the OP to check out?
LogofreeTV I think?

T.W.

Luckily the advertising in this country is regulated, so at the moment
this
isn't possible - at least on the mainstream channels.

But then programme sponsorship never used to be allowed until the
commercial
operators put pressure on the regulators to change that.

Can someone explain the difference between Leerdammer paying for
advertisements
& paying for sponsorship of 'Midsomer Murders'?

Well it used to be the case that programmes couldn't, in any way whatsoever,
however tenuous, be linked to any company that is advertising a product.
There had to be a clear signpost where one ended and the other began. With
programme sponsorship, this is no longer the case as the sponsorship is
quite clearly linked to the programme. There are still limitations of what
can and can't be done with sponsorship. For example, religious, news and
current affairs programmes can't be sponsored, and there is a restriction on
duration.

Incidently, I wasn't saying that I necessarily object to sponsorship in this
form but that the rules were changed, after pressure from the broadcasters,
to allow it. There's no reason to suppose that sponsorship within programmes
couldn't, one day, also be allowed.