Sky News presentation - New studio onwards

It now is the point, how is that figured I'm intrigued.

I would believe it. AJE, BBC World, CNN, TV5, France 24, DW-TV et al. all cite high 200+ million viewers, though that figure is usually based on households with carriage of said channel. Do 200 million people watch Sky News worldwide everyday, or any other news channel available worldwide? God no. Just because a channel is "available in 200 million homes" does not mean that 200 million people watch it at any given time. But availability is the best metric for reach. Ratings methodology varies too much from country to country or is unavailable in many places, so there's no reliable way to really calculate worldwide ratings, i.e. how many people actually watch Sky News (or any channel) at any given time all across the world.

On the TV front, those who consume the channel's TV content for at least either 10 or 15 minutes (I honestly forget which, but either way, it's that sort of thumbnail), plus those who consume the digital/mobile content, etc.


Bottom line: Do I buy that a relatively modest 3.5% of the world's population engage with Sky News content on a weekly basis? Yes, I very much do.

I am sorry that I am not a native speaker ( I am one of those "quarter-of-a-billion" international viewers) and that I do not have the ability to use every word completely appropriately. As this is a presentation forum, I tried to express that I prefer the blue lighting and I don´t like that it has been changed to white again. Now you said I am regarding the change of lighting as a personal insult. This is what I would consider as completely inappropriately.

Then I would politely urge you to think carefully about your use of adjectives before posting. You may not have intended it as such, but your post came across as though lighting were somehow a "moral issue", and as such, it looked a bit "hair-on-fire".

The quarter of a billion grew slightly larger (a few million) when Sky finally entered the Canadian market in June. Mostly in predominantly French-speaking Quebec though. It was available through the now defunct Livestation app and site. Unfortunately it's geo-blocked on YouTube.
http://blog.fagstein.com/2017/06/08/mnd-radio-ratings-dutrizac-replaced-qcna-awards/
The need for Sky was demonstrated during Grenfell. BBC World News decided at some point during the disaster everyone wanted an inordinate amount of time for more Donald Trump allegations and speculation. If we wanted more than five or so minutes of that we could have gone to CNN for that where it's the only thing they cover.

I don't believe that for one moment. I could believe a small bit more than 3.5% of the UK population consume Sky News content on a weakly basis, but not that much more.

I know its early so my maths may be way out... not had a cuppa tea yet too but...

3.5% of 7.5 billion = 262,500,000 people

http://www.skynewsinternational.com/advertise



Putting the best spin on data Sky News themselves only come up with 102 million people - about 1.4% of the worlds population.

The metric you're citing is homes; the metric I'm citing is people. Usually, more than one person over the age of 16 lives in a household, ergo my assertion is not that far out.

Not weakly figures at all! From the latest Ofcom news consumption report published last month (figures for 2016).

Q. Thinking specifically about television, which of the following do you use for news nowadays?

Sky News 21%.

You would think Sky would use the assertion as a basis to sell advertising space to twice as many people, but they don't... wonder why?

Why? Because - given there are different numbers of people in each household, they can't make educated guesses in official literature, which is what I'm doing in this informal conversation with weapons-grade pedants.