domblr

This time last week, you may have noticed something different about 7 News, a new, unrecognisable theme song. 

Yes, in their sudden panic to heal the wounds of Nine News' extended hour-long bulletins stealing the ratings, Seven seem to have panicked, and in doing so, have lost their identity. 

As many have already noted, consistency is vital for a television news audience, as the demographic is older, and their habits, harder to break. Therefore changes need to be incremental, and Seven's dumping of their longtime theme, "The Mission" was not. 

The social media response was highly negative, but not because it was a new theme, instead because it simply didn't fit the rest of the package. It sounded more like something you'd hear in the opening credits of a Steven Spielberg film, or playing in the background of a royal wedding rather than in the intro to the six o'clock news. 

Sure, changing anything in TV news is bound to ruffle some feathers, but the worst part of this incident was there seemed to be no broader concept behind the switch in theme song, other than "if we change it, they'll come". There was also, evidently, no belief in it as a mere four days later, it was scrapped with "The Mission" returning once more.

To some, the changing of music may seem insignificant, but to me it represents something bigger. 

Seven's news has been consistently losing ground across the country for the last few years, seeing Nine snatching back its lead in Sydney and Melbourne, and most recently itching out the network in Brisbane for the first time in almost a decade. Melbourne, is by far the biggest problem, experiencing nightly losses at the behest of Nine's Peter Hitchener led bulletin. The team over at GTV have a fantastic bond, and managed to stay intact during Seven's reign as number 1 in the mid-00s. As a contrast in just the last twelve months, Melbourne's Seven News has dumped weather presenter David Brown in favour of Giaan Rooney, and sports reader Sandy Roberts has left for Fox Sports, replaced by weekend sports reader and Essendon legend Tim Watson. Consistency is one thing, but trying to at least pretend your news service has some stability is the name of the game during a ratings crisis. 

Since their last makeover, the look and feel of Seven News has become cold and stark. Lots of cold blues, whites and silvers in the colour scheme, which is a huge departure from the warm browns, rich reds and blues from the previous package. The presenters seem less friendly, perhaps a little tired, and overall, there's a certain spark missing, that was heavily present during the 2005-7 era when everything was coming up 7! 

So, what can the network do? 

"...a complete relaunch indicates something bigger. A change in direction, a shift in style, a refreshed mission. 

They need to start by making a clear decision. Is it time to change graphics, presenters or theme songs? Or do they continue to chip away at what is a relatively strong brand by toying with decisions publicly. Viewers in this arena need consistency, it's true. But they also need clarity. Is this the news service I watched yesterday? If it is, then why have you changed? What does this signify? New music with the same graphical theme indicates indecision and brand fragmentation. Whereas a complete relaunch indicates something bigger. A change in direction, a shift in style, a refreshed mission. This strategy will instead make the viewer more curious, rather than dismissive. What's new? What's different about the way you're doing news this time?

So, if you’re among the many to have seen “The Wolf of Wall Street”(WOWS), you may notice something startling about it. It’s not the cinematography, or the abrupt jump-cutting, nor is it the nudity. It’s the blatant honesty, a trait that was mostly missing from the Steve Jobs pic, “Jobs”.

Yeah, remember “Jobs”? No? Well you’re probably not alone. 

I made the effort to go and see it when it was at the cinemas, which, here in Australia, had a seemingly brief release. I can’t remember if I expected it to be any good, but, it wasn’t. Anyone who knows me is aware that I have a keen obsession with Steve Jobs, so anything that focuses on his life, be it a shitty YouTube documentary, a poorly executed TV movie, or an unauthorised, mis-informed novel/exposé, I am eager to consume it! “Jobs” was grossly inaccurate, revoltingly patriotic and averagely acted. But as bad as it was, it felt like a guilty pleasure, almost like eating from Donut King, where that jam doughnut with strawberry icing you buy looks terrible, tastes terrible, and is in no way good for you, but upon eating it feels like a small victory. Like a “fuck you” to the dieticians who tell you it’s not healthy, or Choice Magazine who say Donut King’s a rip-off, or to your parents who instead offer you a piece of fruit! “Jobs” is that jam doughnut with strawberry icing! It looks yummy, but it’s nauseatingly sweet.

Having read the Walter Isaacson authorised biography, “Steve Jobs”, it was disappointing to see that the writers of this film, purposefully skipped over and rewrote actual events to some how feed this notion that Jobs was more innovative than he was. Why are you skipping over Pixar, and instead spending four minutes on a scene in the HP car park where Jobs tells Woz how useful his operating system could be to the average consumer? Woz knows Kutcher, he fucking invented it!

Where WOWS succeeds is in its brutal honest. It’s fast pace matches the intensity of Wall Street, and indeed the way Jordan Belfort lived his life, and the film doesn’t shy away from presenting Belfort in an unflattering light. As a money hungry, greed obsessed criminal, whose refusal to play by anyone’s rules led to his eventual downfall. 

It would be naive to think the pace of WOWS would suit a film about Jobs, considering his nature was to null on decisions for an inordinate amount of time, but so much of the film was dedicated to Ashton Kutcher indulging in impassioned speeches, that would lead to the iMac or the NExT or the iPod or whatever! Sure, WOWS was long, but I didn’t for a moment notice. Jobs on the other hand was a shorter film, but felt longer. And it only got up to the iPod! Such an odd spot to end a film. I don’t understand why it makes sense to anyone!!! The iPod is the beginning of Apple’s second coming, where it once again exploded into the stratosphere. It’s a beginning not an end. Is there gonna be a sequel? Is that why the film ended there? Someone tell me!!!

There are times where one could view this film as how Steve Jobs saw himself, however here’s hoping the next Jobs film, which will likely be the Aaron Sorkin penned adaption of Isaacson’s masterful book, will be more honest, faster paced, and just generally more interesting. 

Season 2 of LET'S BE HONEST With Dom Hennequin has officially launched with a new website, and a new episode covering how to behave at award shows. 

In the October 2013 event, Apple made OS X Mavericks a free upgrade, and made iWork and iLife free downloads for new Mac and iOS devices. Dom Hennequin asks Mathew Blair why Apple have done this. How does this fit into their long term strategy?

Subscribe to the channel

Tweet us: @LetsBeTechy

Camera: Mathew Blair

Apple's October 2013 event saw the introduction of the iPad Air, iPad Mini 2 and an update to the Retina 13" Macbook Pro. Host, Dom Hennequin, speaks to contributor Mathew Blair about Apple's strategy with these products and the future of the company.

Press the 'Like' button if you enjoy this video, and 'Subscribe' to see more. You can tweet us @LetsBeTechy.

Camera: Mathew Blair