• Get involved.
    We want your input!
    Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.

    After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
    If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.

    After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
    https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/

    Thanks in advance and have fun!
    RadioDiscussions Administrators

CTV branding

> It was actually as far back as 1998 that the generic
> branding began. At that time, all four markets were running
> split opens, but branded the news partially as 'CTV News'
> and the stations as 'CTV Saskatchewan'.
>
> By 2000, all four stations were using the 'CTV News' brand,
> and were identifying as CTV on air.
-----------
Where do you work?<P ID="signature">______________
From WNBC-TV New York this is Liiiiive at Fiiiiive!</P>
 
> > It was actually as far back as 1998 that the generic
> > branding began. At that time, all four markets were
> running
> > split opens, but branded the news partially as 'CTV News'
> > and the stations as 'CTV Saskatchewan'.
> >
> > By 2000, all four stations were using the 'CTV News'
> brand,
> > and were identifying as CTV on air.
> -----------
> Where do you work?
>

Not at CTV if that's what you're implying.

I grew up in Saskatchewan during the late 90s when the changes were happening.
 
Re: CFCN Calgary

> Why is CFCN the last station to switch over?
>

My guess: I noticed that CFCN had their outdoor advertising early in August... so they probably already spent the money for their fall advertising blitz, and probably didn't want to change it to "CTV News" right in the middle of it.

That or it probably has to do with the fact Calgary is becoming a metered market soon... but Toronto and Vancouver are also metered markets and both CTV stations are generic there.

I'm predicting they'll probably change over during the February sweeps.
 
Re: MCTV and ATV are next

> According to next week's program listings on CTV.ca, CTV's
> next targets for generic branding are MCTV and ATV, two
> regional systems each with four stations. The change takes
> effect on Tuesday, October 11th. CFCN is being left for
> now.
>
> MCTV | 1980-2005
> ATV | 1972-2005
> CFCN | 1961-probably 2005
>
> P.S. Speaking of Live at Five, ATV is keeping that name for
> their 5 PM broadcast.
>

ATV did change over yesterday...however, the ATV bug still appears during the morning news updates for Breakfast Television and Canada AM as of this morning- the news update open is the generic one.
 
Re: MCTV and ATV are next

>
> Speaking of Live at Five, ATV is keeping that name for
> their 5 PM broadcast.
>
Good thing -- it'll be funny for them to call it "CTV News at Five", when there's very little news on the show (other than teasers for the 6PM newscast).
 
Re: MCTV and ATV are next

> ATV did change over yesterday...however, the ATV bug still
> appears during the morning news updates for Breakfast
> Television and Canada AM as of this morning- the news update
> open is the generic one.
-----------
The CKCO logo is still occasionally appearing in advertising, with the occasional mention of calls. So it's not gone COMPLETELY :D
<P ID="signature">______________
From WNBC-TV New York this is Liiiiive at Fiiiiive!</P>
 
Re: CFCN now CTV

> www.cfcn.ca now ID's as CTV. Have they changed their on air
> graphics and bug?
>

Yes. The news today was "CTV News", or as Ian White called it - CTV Calgary News.

Bus ads were also changed to "CTV News - Calgary's News", however there are still CFCN billboards across the city.
 
Here's a sign that something is amyss with the branding campaign. A "CTV News at Noon" ad just aired on CKCO. I asked my father who was watching the ad if that is a national newscast or a local newscast. He replied that he didn't know. And, he knows CKCO - he used to watch Sunday AM, and he has commented before about how they had red jackets.

So you see Canadian RadioDude, the average joe doesn't understand what is going on.<P ID="signature">______________
From WNBC-TV New York this is Liiiiive at Fiiiiive!</P>
 
Fine, you've baited me... hurrah.

My only comment - the average joe doesn't CARE. End of story.

> Here's a sign that something is amyss with the branding
> campaign. A "CTV News at Noon" ad just aired on CKCO. I
> asked my father who was watching the ad if that is a
> national newscast or a local newscast. He replied that he
> didn't know. And, he knows CKCO - he used to watch Sunday
> AM, and he has commented before about how they had red
> jackets.
>
> So you see Canadian RadioDude, the average joe doesn't
> understand what is going on.
>
 
> > You must work for CBC, CTV, Global, or CHUM. This sounds
> > very much like what the PR machines are spitting out. You
>
> > seem to have no respect for heritage.
>
> Nope... sorry.
>
> This has nothing to do with 'respect' for heritage. (A
> flimsy argument to begin with... the only people who care
> about 'heritage' are us online media geeks.) In the current
> age of new media, I think it's an incredibly wise thing for
> broadcasters to try and consolidate their brand as much as
> possible. It provides a strong unified front in a world
> filled with media outposts.
>
> >
> > Do you not understand the confusion created by this?
>
> No, I do not. I tend to give average viewers a lot more
> credit for being smart than the other online media geeks do.
> Viewers are resiliant. They do not build true loyalties to
> TV stations. They go where their favourite shows are and
> watch them. Changing the *name* of a TV station means
> nothing. If anything, the more detrimental thing that could
> happen to a TV station is changing where it lives on the
> cable dial. *That's* how most people associate with their
> channels (and trust me... I know... I worked for nearly half
> a decade in cable.) The names mean nothing. If the shows
> are on as they always have been, the viewer will find them
> and watch.
>
> As for consolidated brands in the States... it hasn't worked
> because it's never been aggressively implemented. The
> better example is the UK. Most people today couldn't give a
> care if they're watching Westcountry, or Central, or Tyne
> Tees... they're watching ITV (which has consolidated its
> brand save for two hold outs.) IMHO, the only losers in the
> ITV network branding are the stations who've chosen to hold
> the line with local identities, not getting any benefit from
> potential national advertising that's taking place.
>
ITV1 does air local news and each name is unique to the local region. Granted all sets look rather similar and the titles/music all match but the names aren't 'ITV1 -region- News'. ITV plc however have renamed all stations 'ITV1'.
Regional news programs consist of Granada Reports(Northwest England), Lookaround(Border, South Scotland, Isle of Man), North East Tonight(Tyne Tees, Northeast England), Calendar(Yorkshire, just below Northeast England), Central News(Central region, the midlands), Anglia Tonight(Anglia, east midlands), Westcountry Live(Westcountry region, Southwest England), Meridian Tonight(Meridian, South England), London Tonight(Carlton/LWT which were both scrapped in 2002 for the name 'ITV1 London').
However Wales is/was the first casualty of generic branding. HTV News became 'ITV West News'.

(Channel isn't owned by ITV plc but oddly enough have adopted the generic ITV1 regional news look.
UTV in Northern Ireland also keep their own look for their news and block all mention of ITV. Scottish Media Group who own Scottish TV and Grampian TV use their own look for their newscasts. The onair look is comprised of recycled ITV1 idents.)<P ID="signature">______________

Canada TV and College Radio</P>
 
> Fine, you've baited me... hurrah.
>
> My only comment - the average joe doesn't CARE. End of
> story.
----------
But then why does my father care? He's not an online media geek, and he's not all THAT old. But he noticed. People DO refer to stations by their call letters or local brand, and they can differentiate from the national brand. People associate CTV with Lloyd Robertson, Craig Oliver, and Sandie Renaldo - not Ken Shaw, Brent Hanson, Max Keeping, Bill Houghland, or Steve Murphy. I hear the CKCO call letters quite often in public. One of the posters from the Maritimes has told me off the board that average people know ATV. There is very high demand for local programming (just look at the BBM figures), but when you can't tell if the broadcast is a local or national newscast, then you'll think the news at six is a national CTV newscast. People will turn away and look elsewhere, even if it means giving up television as a source of news. Why is Max Keeping still there? For all people know, he could be a national anchor. Other average people off these boards HAVE noticed and don't like it.

CFTO took a hit in the ratings after they changed, from what I understand. Toronto viewers apparently moved to Global (which has had the same name for 32 years), in enough force that even CITY-TV fell to third place.

You don't build a strong brand for 40 or 50 years then just dump it without warning. What if Coca-Cola changed their name? What if the Toronto Star changed its name? People aren't stupid enough to believe that a name change is JUST a name change. The change of CKVR to A-Channel was not just a name change, despite what the CHUM PR folks kept cramming down our throats throughout the spring and summer of 2005. It was an abandonment of Barrie, one of the fastest-growing cities in Canada, where VR News had very high local ratings after CHUM worked hard to build itself a local station over the past 10 years, cutting into the old powerhouses of CFTO and Global. Now it's just another Toronto broadcaster, albeit the channel three tower is still in Barrie.

New Orleans Mayor Ray Nagin said it best in his now famous interview on WWL Radio - "I don't want to see anybody do anymore (GD) press conferences. Put a moratorium on press conferences. Don't do another press conference until the resources are in this city." People don't believe PR junk anymore. The press releases and such about "it's just a name change" is bogus. We have already witnesses that fallacy at CKVR - and the CTV stations are soon to follow. A national CFTO is just a few years away, and by branding the stations as CTV now, the executives at BGM think that viewers will notice less when their local news programmes are cut. This did happen a few years ago with MCTV - the four stations were already branded the same, so it was apparently easier to consolidate to Sudbury - but people DID notice. My grandparents - who are not online media geeks - used to complain all the time about how CKNY/CHNB local news in North Bay was continually being cut, and finally was amalgamated with Sudbury. Just weeks before the change the North Bay section of CTV.ca stressed that CTV was committed to having separate local newscats on each of the four MCTV stations. Nice try, BGM.<P ID="signature">______________
From WNBC-TV New York this is Liiiiive at Fiiiiive!</P>
 
> People are still calling the station
> Channel 10 or TV-London though. People ARE resistant to
> change. People outside the online
> media geek world still call CJOH's newscast "Newsline", and
> CFTO's newscast "World Beat News".
>
> Yes, people do associate programs with cable channels. However, with
> increasing satellite penetration, there
> needs to be a way for people to differentiate between all
> the CTV stations shown. "CTV Southwestern Ontario" doesn't
> cut it, because it is such a long and cumbersome name,
> compared with the simple CKCO.
>
> You see, in all these cases, there must be a way of
> differentiating a station in one region from a station in
> another region. If you live in Belleville, you get CFTO and
> CJOH on cable. Do you watch CTV or CTV? If you
> know that one station is CJOH broadcasting from Deseronto
> (rebroadcasting Ottawa), then it's pretty simple.
----------
Notice that Canadian RadioDude has nothing to say to refute this very strong argument. Are you surrendering to the facts of the average viewer's point of view (like I said, my father isn't an online media geek but an average viewer), or is there more corporate PR from wherever you're from to vainly challenge these arguments? :D<P ID="signature">______________
From WNBC-TV New York this is Liiiiive at Fiiiiive!</P>
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom