TV Schedule

Current:News


  3. embed code
  4. CurrentNewsTeam
  5. ajcowley
  6. pstuart
  7. mischabarrett
  8. more credits
  9. related topics
CurrentNewsTeam

17 responses // Current:News

  • Very cool!
    WOW!
    CarolynGillis
  • love it. mazel tov.
    saskia
  • OUTSTANDING! Let's go!
    WorldPeaceTV
  • woah!!
    MornRail
  • sweet!
    Taigster
  • The idea is cool - and will come into it's own when breaking news occurs that can be covered hour by hour, updating with user journalism.
    matt512
  • hmmm...Sorry guys...I'm not really raving about this - the "computer voice" of the news reader gets on my wick a bit - it's like listerning to one of those horrid BT text messages on your landline. Not liking that. :-(

    Am I right in thinking too that some of the up coming stories won't get air if they aren't voted for? What if something catches your eye and it's not aired? Can you see it elsewhere?

    Good idea though (not to be too down on you Current chaps and chapesess!) What I do like is the short and snappy style of the news format and the ID of the person who did it is good promo for budding tv-ites! Which is good.
    On balance not bad, in keeping with Current themes/brand and informative for the short information span generation - cos we like it in bitesizes! But get rid of "Computer Suzie's" voice pls!! ;-)
    Freya
    x
    www.freyasykes.com
    FDB
    • FDB
    • 5 months ago
  • Yes, yes, I like this...!
    globalfaction
  • I second the notion that the computer-genrated voice is annoying.

    I am also a bit less than enthusiastic about this because it doesn't really represent 'current' news. The stories pretty much mirror the yesterday's top stories on CNN (oil prices, autism insurance).

    The question is this - with all of the critisms about today's media rehashing itself, does Current really want to do this, is this format? It would be great it these were little heard stories, but regurgitating the AP wire? I think the stories should be screened a little better. There's a lot of information available today from press releases from cancer research groups to good old fashioned gum shoe journalism, and Current could do such a service by giving these voices a forum. Why pull the status quo?
    CatzEye
  • One thing I have thought of actually - is that to vote the items onto the show, one has to have already read or at least acknowledged the item - making the show less effective, because you may have already seen the content..!
    The user generated additions are a great idea though, especially comments... Be interesting to see how this goes anyway..
    matt512
  • catzEye..I get what you are saying but I disagree somewhat.
    Here is the exciting opportunity for YOU to go to the PR wire and get those important articles.
    That's what is great about Current News!
    We are not relying on a someone like Murdoch or Huffington to decide what is important...
    I love going to BBC or other resources and puling out articles that are important to the public...that have not been filtered by the Sponsors.
    I have put in many articles that fade right away from view in our papers...and put them in several times. Fox News knows that you need to keep putting things through.
    Also you can tell the good old fashioned gum shoe journalists and ask them to sign up!
    Great stuff..I am not sure about the voice but might get used to it.
    CarolynGillis
  • In regards to the techvoice: This is a new Current feature, they are probably going to rework things a bit. They have some really awesome hosts that could do the voice overs, but it's probablly easier and quicker to have a robot do it. PLUS they're not paying a voice talent.... Heck, I'll do it for cheap =)
    organized_chaos
  • Pretty cool innovations Current's working out!
    Konstantino
  • Ha! Organizing Chaos... how about
    "Will voice over for food"
    CatzEye
  • Carolyn,

    I'm not criticizing Current as a whole. I love a place where you can create your own stories, focusing on things you think is important. That's why I think this feature is a little off -- Why have current contributers go through the WSJ online, and other traditional sources? First of all, it goes against the original notion of Current, which is to create your own "news." Second, CNN, Fox, etc. already do this -- they go on the web and see what others (usually the other big outlets) are saying. Shouldn't Current lead instead of follow?
    CatzEye
  • Wow, you would think Actors especially celebrities would check all aspects of the brand or the name and ensure it is utilized correctly.
    ronlee
  • I'm with CatzEye here in that I'm not knocking Current in the main...it is good to great generally, I like the Vanguard pieces and the really odd out there pieces too that you just don't get anywhere else. I like the Google currents and the tart sarcastic sense of humour from Grahame and Elain's gorgeous Welsh accent...i like all this stuff and applaude Current when they try to do something new to keep it all fresh...but kinda gotta agree with CatzEye here...I can't go singing their praises on something that I feel is at best mediocre and needs work on it.
    Sorry guys! but hopefully the feedback will help the current guys to improve on their idea.

    :-)
    Freya
    x
    www.freyasykes.com
    FDB
    • FDB
    • 5 months ago

Add your response

Login/Registration is required to add a response.