BBC Countdowns Compilation [UPDATED]

Over the years I have received many emails and comments to produce an updated version of this project. Almost 10 years on and here it is! Completely recreated in 1080p with higher quality sources. It’s also much longer – over 12 minutes now thanks to the additional countdowns that have been created since then.

If you happen to have any higher quality sources than what you see here, please get in touch.

There is also a high quality audio version:

 

This new revised version features the following countdowns:

Original 1999 BBC News 24 90 Second Countdown (with 2002 visual refresh)
Original 1999 BBC World 10 second countdown
2002 BBC World 60 second countdown
2003 BBC News 24 70 second countdown
2003 BBC World 60 second “ribbon around the world” countdown
2005 BBC World 60 second first “News gathering” countdown
2006 BBC News 24 60 second countdown “news gathering” countdown (with 2007 visual refresh)
2007 BBC World 60 second countdown
2008 BBC News Channel / World News 90 second countdown
2010 BBC News Channel 60 second countdown (with London Olympics visuals refresh)
2013 BBC News Channel / World News 90 second “orchestral” countdown (with 2016 / 2017 visual refreshes)

 

Here’s the rest of this page from the original version:


Way back in 2007, I created a very popular “mock” video, where I mixed all of the BBC top of the hour countdowns together, into one continues piece of music. Then on 19/7/2011, my popular YouTube video BBC Countdowns Compilation was removed due to a copyright claim by ‘United Artists’.

The video had been available on YouTube since March 2008, and had even been previously Content ID’d as containing material from the ‘BBC Motion Gallery’ but had not been removed, the BBC instead choosing to receive the ad revenue from YouTube.

The composer David Lowe had also been aware of the video, and had been in contact with me to say how much he liked it. He is also a member of the Facebook Fan Page I created for the countdown.

I have no idea who United Artists are, but they have caused the removal of the video from YouTube, and put my account into ‘bad standing’ because of copyright infringement.

Anyway, you can view the original here:

11 thoughts on “BBC Countdowns Compilation [UPDATED]

  1. Hi. United Artists is a US film studio, and therefore has no say in what is or isn’t BBC copyright. Anyway, the compilation looks much better on here. Thanks for making it.

  2. Great video of the various countdowns of BBC News 24 (now BBC News) and BBC World (now BBC World News) from 1999 to 2007, and much better graphics too but l am a bit disappointed that the video had to be removed from YouTube as l used to view it several times. But apart from that, the compilation looks even better when viewed here on this website. Anyway, thanx 4 making the compilation. truly a great effort

  3. Good video, but you know where i can find a video with the “globe and red labes rotating” animation used by the BBC news programmes between 2007 and 2008? i will preciate so much. Thanks

  4. Some of the commenters here are meatheads. First, “Rob” points out that the bullying by United Artists is groundless as they have no claim to the works in question. Then, “Sacto1654” suggests putting it on iTunes? Isn’t that like jumping out of the frying pan and into the fire?

    When are people going to wake up and realize that “big music” and its countless legions of lawyers is one of the greatest crimes against humanity and culture of our time? Musicians and Music Lovers unite… against the likes of “United” Artists. They do little if anything for most of “their artists” while enriching lawyers and the corrupted system they play in. What we’re seeing is the dinosaurs trying to scorch the earth on their way down. They reason if they can’t have all your money, then NO ONE will have money. Or music.

    When “tribute” artists and creators are persecuted for their loves, who is served but the lawyers and the corruption?

  5. concerning channel and content suspension :
    I am and would be in total agreement with a future should-be regulation and ruling concerning a “suspension of content channels” (be it either text or music or whatever content or media) that suspending a channel can and should only be legally claimed by those who either directly own the works or have the (provable!) aquired rights and copyrights on that works in question. Another virtual or real or juristically defined person can only indicate possible – and to be further investigated first after such an indication has been made – infringements but not cause or request a suspension to be immediately effective. So, the content presenters such as e.g. YT will not and can not and should not be further entitled to take immediate action by preliminary suspension but first should be obliged to investigate or initiate legal investigation for who is the current owner or rightsholder. Thirdparty possible or claiming-to-be-affiliates can therefor not count as “owners” or “rightsholders” and are not to be consulted or taken regard of in the first row. These persons should then be consulted if that is currently the case (or is still the case as of a current standpoint or date as of when the respective copyright infringement has been noted). If the owners or rightholding persons or companies do not see issues arising by themselves, from their own standpoint, a suspension is illegal from that point on (equal how many copyright infringement notifications even will arise from the wild thereafter!). As there can be cases where content is put “free of individual rights” or “allowed to be re-published if the author is given proper mentioning and crediting to be the author of what is used in the works” meanwhile. An immediate suspension can and should only be possible to be lawfully requested by authorities, judges, final court rulings or if the works itself shows prohibited content or any kind of abusive and socially damaging content or dangerous for society action. As long as the content is only in-question and still progressing to be investigated about its source and legally proven resp. documented ownership, it may not be removed otherwise. Any other kind of policy reversing or submarining the proceedings of notification, investigation-handling, back-referencing and consequential legal action must be considered as “disallowed censorship” because then this is violating the codes of legal and lawful conduct of handling emerging issues of legal impact.

Leave a Reply to NigelDanh(TamagotchiNSFW) Cancel reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: