Reply from BBC BBC3 DOG

In article , wowfabgroovy
writes
Clem Dye went:

a quick press of the 'select' button brings-up the now & next
display, so you can work it out from that.

if they wrote press select to see which channel you are watching in
the corner of the screen it would just confuse freeview users who
don't have a select button.

More than they are already? Then again I do have a 'select' button, no
EPG, but since it is inaccurate I am not loosing anything.

--
Ian G8ILZ

"Kennedy McEwen" wrote in message

If I recall, the only successful use of DOGs to *increase* audience
figures was the red triangle on C4, some years ago. Since this only
successful scheme was subsequently discontinued, it seems obvious that the
DOG has nothing whatsoever to do with informing the viewer of what they
are watching.

Indeed so, but see it from the point of view of those who 'work' in the
marketing and branding dept, it's more of an existential thing.

On 09 Aug 2005, Kennedy McEwen wrote

If I recall, the only successful use of DOGs to *increase*
audience figures was the red triangle on C4, some years ago.
Since this only successful scheme was subsequently discontinued,
it seems obvious that the DOG has nothing whatsoever to do with
informing the viewer of what they are watching.

Apples and oranges, susrely: increasing audience figures is an
entirely differing thing to informing the viewer of what channel
they're looking at.

I can well imagine people saying "I wouldn't be drawn to watch your
channel because of a DOG, but I *do* want to be told -- one way or
another -- which channel is currently on screen".

--
Cheers,
Harvey

"Harvey Van Sickle" wrote in message
...
On 09 Aug 2005, Kennedy McEwen wrote

If I recall, the only successful use of DOGs to *increase*
audience figures was the red triangle on C4, some years ago.
Since this only successful scheme was subsequently discontinued,
it seems obvious that the DOG has nothing whatsoever to do with
informing the viewer of what they are watching.

Apples and oranges, susrely: increasing audience figures is an
entirely differing thing to informing the viewer of what channel
they're looking at.

It goes hand in glove, a channel that treats its viewers with such contempt
with patronising gimmicks surely has nothing worth watching anyway.


I can well imagine people saying "I wouldn't be drawn to watch your
channel because of a DOG, but I *do* want to be told -- one way or
another -- which channel is currently on screen".

That's why we have EPG's and boxes capable of rendering wonderful on screen
menu's that provide 10x as much information on demand, every box out there
in fact.

If you're incapable of remembering which channel you're watching then BBC
Three is obviously the place to be, on every level.

In message
"Gripper" wrote:

quote:

Dear *********

Thank you for your e-mail.

I understand that you find the new BBC THREE identifier distracting.

Viewers' feedback is important to us so we have taken on board the concerns
and will be reducing its intrusiveness immediately.


Ho Hum


We use identifiers in common with other broadcasters because, as the number
of digital channels continues to grow, we believe it is important to ensure
that viewers can quickly identify when they are watching a BBC service.

The channel identifier is at the top left-hand part of the picture to avoid
clashing with subtitles or captions, and this area of the screen rarely
contains sensitive material which it might obscure or interfere.

Please be assured that your concerns have been registered for the attention
of our programme makers and senior management.

Finally, I have attached an invitation, from our Head of Customer Services,
asking you to participate in our customer survey. We would welcome your
views on our service.

Thank you again for taking the time to contact the BBC.

Regards

Terry Coyle
BBC Information

end quote

Interesting bit:

"Viewers' feedback is important to us so we have taken on board the concerns
and will be reducing its intrusiveness immediately."

Gripper


Exactly why I inserted a Ho Hum but watching BBC3 last night I noticed
a somewhat less intrusive DOG though the expanding THREE is still OTT.

I guess this change was somewhat imminent rather than a result of your
communication but that does not mean we should keep pressurising for
total removal of these intrusive ***** unless we are provided with an
E-doggy Bag.

BBC4 seems to choose which programmes require a DOG but I have not yet
worked out their logic for this.

itv2 & itv3 have relatively small DOGs but I'd rather cull them.

The standard 'excuse' of informing the viewer which channel they are
watching is total nonsense. Just in case you may have forgotten there
is an info button which will tell you the time, channel and what you
are watching plus how long it goes on for etc.

The only reason for a DOG apart from making illegal DVDs detectable,
which has been negated elsewhere in this thread, is as an advert for
the channel in pubs etc.

Although I would like all DOGs eradicated it would seem that BBC3 is
the biggest culprit so far with it's patronising and oversize
creations. It just makes me wonder about the type audience they are
trying to cater for which would need such blatance...


--
Richard Watkinson

Treasurer Sheffield Folk Festival

http://www.sheffieldfolkfestival.org/

A kitten is for life...

In article , Aztech
writes
"Kennedy McEwen" wrote in message

If I recall, the only successful use of DOGs to *increase* audience
figures was the red triangle on C4, some years ago. Since this only
successful scheme was subsequently discontinued, it seems obvious that the
DOG has nothing whatsoever to do with informing the viewer of what they
are watching.

Indeed so, but see it from the point of view of those who 'work' in the
marketing and branding dept, it's more of an existential thing.

Are you suggesting that the BBC's marketing and branding department is
unable to justify its own existence without DOGs? If so, just get rid
of all three and save a million license fees!
--
Kennedy
Yes, Socrates himself is particularly missed;
A lovely little thinker, but a bugger when he's ****ed.
Python Philosophers (replace 'nospam' with 'kennedym' when replying)

"Kennedy McEwen" wrote in message
...
In article , Aztech
writes
"Kennedy McEwen" wrote in message

If I recall, the only successful use of DOGs to *increase* audience
figures was the red triangle on C4, some years ago. Since this only
successful scheme was subsequently discontinued, it seems obvious that
the
DOG has nothing whatsoever to do with informing the viewer of what they
are watching.

Indeed so, but see it from the point of view of those who 'work' in the
marketing and branding dept, it's more of an existential thing.

Are you suggesting that the BBC's marketing and branding department is
unable to justify its own existence without DOGs? If so, just get rid of
all three and save a million license fees!

What else would a branding person do, go back to burning numbers on the back
of cattle, isn't that what 'branding' is all about?

In article , Aztech
writes
"Kennedy McEwen" wrote in message
...
In article , Aztech
writes
"Kennedy McEwen" wrote in message

If I recall, the only successful use of DOGs to *increase* audience
figures was the red triangle on C4, some years ago. Since this only
successful scheme was subsequently discontinued, it seems obvious that
the
DOG has nothing whatsoever to do with informing the viewer of what they
are watching.

Indeed so, but see it from the point of view of those who 'work' in the
marketing and branding dept, it's more of an existential thing.

Are you suggesting that the BBC's marketing and branding department is
unable to justify its own existence without DOGs? If so, just get rid of
all three and save a million license fees!

What else would a branding person do, go back to burning numbers on the back
of cattle, isn't that what 'branding' is all about?

Presumably, they could be alternatively occupied branding "THREE" in
enormous 3D letters on the backsides of the BBC executives who employed
them in the first place. ;-)
--
Kennedy
Yes, Socrates himself is particularly missed;
A lovely little thinker, but a bugger when he's ****ed.
Python Philosophers (replace 'nospam' with 'kennedym' when replying)

I just noticed this bit...

Gripper wrote:
quote:
We use identifiers in common with other broadcasters

Don't you love that justification from the BBC? "Other broadcasters do
it, so don't go moaning to us about it - other people do it too".

They've really grasped the concept of being "distinctive", haven't
they?

Cheers,
David.

If the BBC want to follow what other broadcasters are doing, maybe
they should look at the DOG on Men and Motors, a reddish, subtle
double M in the top right corner, the least intrusive one I've seen.

Steve

"
wrote:

I just noticed this bit...

Gripper wrote:
quote:
We use identifiers in common with other broadcasters

Don't you love that justification from the BBC? "Other broadcasters do
it, so don't go moaning to us about it - other people do it too".

They've really grasped the concept of being "distinctive", haven't
they?

Cheers,
David.