Sky News presentation - New studio onwards

[quote="mapperuo" pid="1042253"]

Vanity shot of the "Look at our new office building isn't it impressive?" type. Jus

All the more ironic considering in this forum over the past two years people have been shot down for moaning that the presentation style of Sky has become less flashy and more basic and were always told that the quality of the journalism should always come above some nice graphics and flashy elements and show-off camera pans and no blue and red elements are not needed.

We now have on a weekly basis more and more background lighting being put in and on Friday and today another blue and red panel like on the left has also been installed on the right, but according to some people on here that would never happen because of the fact it was already fine as it was and would constitute presentation tweaks for presentations tweaks sake and the new more basic way is better.

Now in one of the most important interviews of the year for Sky, they have decided that it's perfectly acceptable to cut off a presenter in said interview, because being flashy and showing off does indeed appear to be more important than actually letting the news do the talking and finishing an interview and the first show in a proper and dignified way.

This constant trophy showing off of the glass box is getting pretty pathetic especially when now it is being deemed more important than the actual content of the channel, for all the moaning on this forum about "over the top presentation." in the past, they never ever decided to cut someone off just to do a nice animation or a nice shot.

And if Fox end up taking over Sky, it really will be curtains to a channel that is dying a slow death.

Because if there is anything Fox hate it's news channels.

Sky News may not be a cash cow but it's not going anywhere - Murdoch likes to set the news agenda or at least be seen to be doing so and even with the parameters UK news channels have to operate in Sky News is a valuable asset to the Murdoch empire, whether that is through BSkyB or Fox.

You are talking directly out of an unmentionable orifice. Sky News will not be closed if 21st Century Fox is successful in its takeover bid for Sky. Don't be melodramatic just because the most-superficial facets didn't go perfectly on this occasion. The fact of the matter is that there are so many news lines to emerge from that interview, I can barely keep track!

Yes, the close of the show did not go as it should have, but I can assure you the plan wasn't explicitly to cut the PM off JUST so the jib shot could be taken. Sophy had finished her interview (which needed to be allowed to over-run), the top of the hour had already been passed, and it was down to a technical error, rather than a deliberate presentational decision, that the programme ended as it did. (The plan would have been to gradually fade up the music under Sophy, let her say goodbye, and the let the music go at full volume. Nothing wrong with that at all.)

Take your blinkers off and realise that while it's true that it went awry pres-wise in the final few seconds, that's not what anyone else other than in spaces like this will be talking about. It's perfectly fine to raise it, but to suggest that it's indicative of the ultimate downfall of the channel is utterly laughable.

EDIT: Just so you know, Brekkie, my remarks weren't directed at you. You had posted in the meantime and I didn't feel like quoting the entire preceding screed!

I think the obsession with the glass box as a Sky trophy/way to show off begins and ends in this forum. A few months into not just another bog standard studio, but a totally new concept, and all that's been added is a couple of coloured exterior panels. I'd call that pretty minor (although definitely needed, I don't disagree that the box was echoing and a tad sparse at first).

Sophy Ridge did a good job today IMO. The star attraction was TM's interview which she handled excellently, and got some great headlines. Of course, she needs more polish on the presentation but that will come over time.

I know a lot have been saying the glass box needs colour, and I agree, but now the splashes of colour are the brightest shades of red and blue possible, and mixed with the bright yellow breaking news ticker, it looks ghastly.

I get the old GMTV feel with the use of the bright primary colours but without any warmth. The colours need toning down. Quite franky I think I preferred just the white.

As for the show, SROS, its ok for what it is, but it's lost any form of grandeur it once had, and quite frankly pales in comparison to the era under Adam Boulton's reign. Another Sky slot that's gone lightweight.

Sorry but that's my feeling.

From all the tweets I monitored about the show, most were either about her not questioning the PM on social issues, the NHS or daring to question May on Donald Trump than the abrupt cut off just after 11am.

Overall, the fact there are some pre-recorded segments, such as the Tom Watson interview in a cafe and Sophy visiting Boston, Lincs helped to make it distinctive from Marr and Peston.

Those in the Westminster bubble and some viewers praised the new show. Ridge is far from being the final product, but I remember when Faizal Islam joined and we all thought he was wooden, come Brexit and he came out of his shell.

Even if it was a presentation decision I doubt anyone from Sky is going to admit it. Through my 25 year working life history has told me when something goes wrong the reasons for it given will always be what is least damaging. That's basic PR. I'm not saying that this happened here, what you say I have no reason to doubt is right, but companies will always choose the least damaging explanation when something goes wrong.



Apologies, what was the title of this thread? Are you saying we should be posting off-topic rather than on-topic? I didn't realise you were the moderator. It's pretty strange you come on this forum, then start to moan at people for actually talking about things that the forum is for.

By the way, for the record I never said that alone SROS and what happened today or the purchase by 21st Century Fox will bring down the channel, so please stop putting words into my mouth because it is not very nice and is taking my quotes totally out of context in the way that the Daily Mail would for instance.

My issue with Sky is the extremely poor Sunrise team of SJM and JS who lack any kind of chemistry, the poor sound and new studio, the departure of key presenters, the over-promotion of people into roles they are not ready for, the general state of presentation to the point where everyday presentation has been cut back but vanity shots have been increased and the general cost cutting nature of the channel over the past 12-18 months.

They are only one more departure away from real trouble. If any one of Anna Botting, Dermot Murnaghan or Kay Burley (extremely unlikely) left unless they get someone like Mark Austin, then the channel will be in real trouble based on the fact that way too many people have gone, I watch less and less Sky News these days and more and more BBC, and I'm sure I'm not the only one.

[quote="IsleOfIreland" pid="1042262"]
Really? I doubt Sky will pull Sky News off the air if Fox take over. There's media plurality issues that Fox have to consider - and Sky's heart is clearly into the channel, compared to say, ITV plc's overzealous multichannel expansion which eventually killed their NC and the cuts facing the BBC News Channel.

I said it was perfectly fine to talk about the error. It is, however, nothing short of idiotic to suggest it will have have wider implications.


As for your suggestion that it was a deliberate decision and my explanation is "PR", company policy prohibits me from sharing internal scripts and running orders, so you'll just have to take my word for it. In the meantime, I suggest you get a less-active imagination and/or a healthier hobby.

I don't mean death in a literal sense that the channel will not exist.

I just believe that it will simply accelerate it's decline to a point where the channel will be a shadow of it's former self. If I think back to where Sky News was 12 months ago, it was certainly better then, 6 months ago maybe not as good as it was a year ago but still better than it is now.

I just don't trust Fox or Murdoch ownership in full to run the channel to the same values that Sky has in the past, of course there are rules on neutrality but at the same time it doesn't mean that owners can't influence the agenda or the running order for instance which can seem to give a different political slant on things for example.

If you want to call me an idiot or make insults really that is your choice, but quite frankly I'm not going to get involved in schoolyard arguments because I'm more mature than that. Happy to discuss your point of view but no need to make it personal.

By the way, I never said that it was the case I was just suggesting that these things happen all of the time in every industry, it's the cornerstone of good PR and I'd be disappointed if my PR firm didn't tell me to go to damage limitation mode!

The fact of the matter is those headlines would have been equally generated or, like the ratings, multiplied had the PM's interview been conducted by Marr or Peston.