DU
Yep, Sky have been painfully slow on this one, as they were on Hurricane Katrina. Bizarrely they went major on Hurricane Rita before it struck- and people moved on quite quickly from that one.
Partly bad luck, partly no doubt due to their major relaunch in 2 weeks time.
I'm sure things will improve for them then.
Partly bad luck, partly no doubt due to their major relaunch in 2 weeks time.
I'm sure things will improve for them then.
W1
I'm not sure luck comes into it - the BBC made the right decisions early on, committed to them and got the people and kit moving within a few hours of the story breaking. ITN got a few people moving. Sky apparently didn't.
The news channels tend to look at 1700 as the most important hour of the day. There was an embarrassing gulf between News24 and Sky today - I don't think I've ever seen the BBC trounce Sky so comprehensively in response to a breaking story. Sky had one taped report from a reporter on the spot - the rest was done in London from agency footage. News24 was presented from the very centre of things, two on-the-ground reporter items, two local interviews and Lyse Doucet doing a nighttime walk-and-talk around some of the damage.
Sky might have a relaunch coming (with a gestation period resembling an elephant's), but that's no excuse for cocking up a story on this scale, or Katrina. Live on-air output is always more important than a pilot. It would have been a strategically sounder decision to throw everything at Katrina and this earthquake, and have to relaunch a week or two later - rather than miss out twice. Their hard-fought-for and well-deserved reputation is ebbing away - for the last couple of months they've been weak, and haven't provided the kind of coverage they're capable of. People who want decent news coverage are increasingly landing on News24 and Sky will have a big fight to win them back. It takes far less time to lose a good reputation than to gain one....
Dunedin posted:
Yep, Sky have been painfully slow on this one, as they were on Hurricane Katrina. Bizarrely they went major on Hurricane Rita before it struck- and people moved on quite quickly from that one.
Partly bad luck, partly no doubt due to their major relaunch in 2 weeks time.
I'm sure things will improve for them then.
Partly bad luck, partly no doubt due to their major relaunch in 2 weeks time.
I'm sure things will improve for them then.
I'm not sure luck comes into it - the BBC made the right decisions early on, committed to them and got the people and kit moving within a few hours of the story breaking. ITN got a few people moving. Sky apparently didn't.
The news channels tend to look at 1700 as the most important hour of the day. There was an embarrassing gulf between News24 and Sky today - I don't think I've ever seen the BBC trounce Sky so comprehensively in response to a breaking story. Sky had one taped report from a reporter on the spot - the rest was done in London from agency footage. News24 was presented from the very centre of things, two on-the-ground reporter items, two local interviews and Lyse Doucet doing a nighttime walk-and-talk around some of the damage.
Sky might have a relaunch coming (with a gestation period resembling an elephant's), but that's no excuse for cocking up a story on this scale, or Katrina. Live on-air output is always more important than a pilot. It would have been a strategically sounder decision to throw everything at Katrina and this earthquake, and have to relaunch a week or two later - rather than miss out twice. Their hard-fought-for and well-deserved reputation is ebbing away - for the last couple of months they've been weak, and haven't provided the kind of coverage they're capable of. People who want decent news coverage are increasingly landing on News24 and Sky will have a big fight to win them back. It takes far less time to lose a good reputation than to gain one....
DU
I'm not sure luck comes into it - the BBC made the right decisions early on, committed to them and got the people and kit moving within a few hours of the story breaking. ITN got a few people moving. Sky apparently didn't.
The news channels tend to look at 1700 as the most important hour of the day. There was an embarrassing gulf between News24 and Sky today - I don't think I've ever seen the BBC trounce Sky so comprehensively in response to a breaking story. Sky had one taped report from a reporter on the spot - the rest was done in London from agency footage. News24 was presented from the very centre of things, two on-the-ground reporter items, two local interviews and Lyse Doucet doing a nighttime walk-and-talk around some of the damage.
Sky might have a relaunch coming (with a gestation period resembling an elephant's), but that's no excuse for cocking up a story on this scale, or Katrina. Live on-air output is always more important than a pilot. It would have been a strategically sounder decision to throw everything at Katrina and this earthquake, and have to relaunch a week or two later - rather than miss out twice. Their hard-fought-for and well-deserved reputation is ebbing away - for the last couple of months they've been weak, and haven't provided the kind of coverage they're capable of. People who want decent news coverage are increasingly landing on News24 and Sky will have a big fight to win them back. It takes far less time to lose a good reputation than to gain one....
All good points and I agree with you largely.
Sky did mess up Katrina and tried to make up for it by preempting Rita- that was a mistake and a waste of money.
But I think you're being a bit harsh on the relaunch effect- this is the biggest relaunch in Sky News' history...a simply massive logistical and technical operation that utterly dwarfs the rebuilding of News 24 a couple of years ago. And that managed to make News 24 look a presentational mess for weeks on end (working out of the CSO studio), often simulcasting with World and therefore providing an inferior service than usual.
But once the relaunch happened, the masses were wooed and they've stayed with the channel ever since. Sky's new studio will wow the masses and it will win back a large chunk of News 24's audience. Of that I have little doubt.
The real test for Sky is whether they can truly justify the relaunch cost and shift away from rolling news to programming by breaking out of the ratings box that has limited 24 hour news channels in this country since Sky started. Can Sky's presenter led hours draw in a regular viewership beyond the status quo of a small channel-skipping audience looking for a quick news fix?
I have serious doubts on this point- I feel the relaunch will take Sky back ahead of News 24 and back to audience share levels seen before News 24's recent resurgence. But I don't think it'll break out of that ratings box...and this I personally feel will lead to a return to the current style rolling news within a year (but with better presentation from the new studio).
Sorry for that ramble- I've gone completely off topic!
w12 posted:
Dunedin posted:
Yep, Sky have been painfully slow on this one, as they were on Hurricane Katrina. Bizarrely they went major on Hurricane Rita before it struck- and people moved on quite quickly from that one.
Partly bad luck, partly no doubt due to their major relaunch in 2 weeks time.
I'm sure things will improve for them then.
Partly bad luck, partly no doubt due to their major relaunch in 2 weeks time.
I'm sure things will improve for them then.
I'm not sure luck comes into it - the BBC made the right decisions early on, committed to them and got the people and kit moving within a few hours of the story breaking. ITN got a few people moving. Sky apparently didn't.
The news channels tend to look at 1700 as the most important hour of the day. There was an embarrassing gulf between News24 and Sky today - I don't think I've ever seen the BBC trounce Sky so comprehensively in response to a breaking story. Sky had one taped report from a reporter on the spot - the rest was done in London from agency footage. News24 was presented from the very centre of things, two on-the-ground reporter items, two local interviews and Lyse Doucet doing a nighttime walk-and-talk around some of the damage.
Sky might have a relaunch coming (with a gestation period resembling an elephant's), but that's no excuse for cocking up a story on this scale, or Katrina. Live on-air output is always more important than a pilot. It would have been a strategically sounder decision to throw everything at Katrina and this earthquake, and have to relaunch a week or two later - rather than miss out twice. Their hard-fought-for and well-deserved reputation is ebbing away - for the last couple of months they've been weak, and haven't provided the kind of coverage they're capable of. People who want decent news coverage are increasingly landing on News24 and Sky will have a big fight to win them back. It takes far less time to lose a good reputation than to gain one....
All good points and I agree with you largely.
Sky did mess up Katrina and tried to make up for it by preempting Rita- that was a mistake and a waste of money.
But I think you're being a bit harsh on the relaunch effect- this is the biggest relaunch in Sky News' history...a simply massive logistical and technical operation that utterly dwarfs the rebuilding of News 24 a couple of years ago. And that managed to make News 24 look a presentational mess for weeks on end (working out of the CSO studio), often simulcasting with World and therefore providing an inferior service than usual.
But once the relaunch happened, the masses were wooed and they've stayed with the channel ever since. Sky's new studio will wow the masses and it will win back a large chunk of News 24's audience. Of that I have little doubt.
The real test for Sky is whether they can truly justify the relaunch cost and shift away from rolling news to programming by breaking out of the ratings box that has limited 24 hour news channels in this country since Sky started. Can Sky's presenter led hours draw in a regular viewership beyond the status quo of a small channel-skipping audience looking for a quick news fix?
I have serious doubts on this point- I feel the relaunch will take Sky back ahead of News 24 and back to audience share levels seen before News 24's recent resurgence. But I don't think it'll break out of that ratings box...and this I personally feel will lead to a return to the current style rolling news within a year (but with better presentation from the new studio).
Sorry for that ramble- I've gone completely off topic!
W1
Dunedin - we'll see! I think Sky's ratings performance will go up after the relaunch. It's not certain though - and as you say, it depends on what kind of audience is out there. The "news" audience tends to get turned off by "built" programming - Littlejohn being a prime example. They want to turn the TV on, find out what's happened, and then do something less boring instead. If Sky can attract a new audience, then they'll do well. I may be wrong, but I'm not sure that audience is there. Rolling news in 12 months time - maybe! And as for whether they'll get their old lead back..... no way am I committing on that!
Strangely though, News24's viewer numbers went UP when they were in that dreadful CSO studio....
Strangely though, News24's viewer numbers went UP when they were in that dreadful CSO studio....
ST
Steve
Founding member
Who actually have Sky got out there now then?
I was watching off and on for much of the day and am not sure I saw a report filed from the region - though I may just have not been tuning in at the right times.
Think Sian on the BBC is proving what a star she is - hopefully she'll get some more of the recognition deserved... can you really see Ms Kaplinsky doing the same with the same standard?
Am surprised ITV still in Islamabad when BBC have been up the road for two days now - that's not to knock them though, at least they're there!
I was watching off and on for much of the day and am not sure I saw a report filed from the region - though I may just have not been tuning in at the right times.
Think Sian on the BBC is proving what a star she is - hopefully she'll get some more of the recognition deserved... can you really see Ms Kaplinsky doing the same with the same standard?
Am surprised ITV still in Islamabad when BBC have been up the road for two days now - that's not to knock them though, at least they're there!
JO
Richard Bestic and Stuart Ramsay for Sky
.
ITV: Mark Austin in Islamabad, John Irvine in Muzaffarabad, and Bill Neely in Balakot.
Steve posted:
Who actually have Sky got out there now then?
I was watching off and on for much of the day and am not sure I saw a report filed from the region - though I may just have not been tuning in at the right times.
Think Sian on the BBC is proving what a star she is - hopefully she'll get some more of the recognition deserved... can you really see Ms Kaplinsky doing the same with the same standard?
Am surprised ITV still in Islamabad when BBC have been up the road for two days now - that's not to knock them though, at least they're there!
I was watching off and on for much of the day and am not sure I saw a report filed from the region - though I may just have not been tuning in at the right times.
Think Sian on the BBC is proving what a star she is - hopefully she'll get some more of the recognition deserved... can you really see Ms Kaplinsky doing the same with the same standard?
Am surprised ITV still in Islamabad when BBC have been up the road for two days now - that's not to knock them though, at least they're there!
Richard Bestic and Stuart Ramsay for Sky
.
ITV: Mark Austin in Islamabad, John Irvine in Muzaffarabad, and Bill Neely in Balakot.
LO
ITV also have Central News's Eric Macinnes and Tom Parmenter in Islamabad, filing packages for many of the ITV regions.
[Eric (and Tom?) also went to Phuket after the Tsunami to cover the story for the regional network]
Johnnie posted:
ITV: Mark Austin in Islamabad, John Irvine in Muzaffarabad, and Bill Neely in Balakot.
ITV also have Central News's Eric Macinnes and Tom Parmenter in Islamabad, filing packages for many of the ITV regions.
[Eric (and Tom?) also went to Phuket after the Tsunami to cover the story for the regional network]
CA
I'm not sure luck comes into it - the BBC made the right decisions early on, committed to them and got the people and kit moving within a few hours of the story breaking. ITN got a few people moving. Sky apparently didn't.
The news channels tend to look at 1700 as the most important hour of the day. There was an embarrassing gulf between News24 and Sky today - I don't think I've ever seen the BBC trounce Sky so comprehensively in response to a breaking story. Sky had one taped report from a reporter on the spot - the rest was done in London from agency footage. News24 was presented from the very centre of things, two on-the-ground reporter items, two local interviews and Lyse Doucet doing a nighttime walk-and-talk around some of the damage.
Sky might have a relaunch coming (with a gestation period resembling an elephant's), but that's no excuse for cocking up a story on this scale, or Katrina. Live on-air output is always more important than a pilot. It would have been a strategically sounder decision to throw everything at Katrina and this earthquake, and have to relaunch a week or two later - rather than miss out twice. Their hard-fought-for and well-deserved reputation is ebbing away - for the last couple of months they've been weak, and haven't provided the kind of coverage they're capable of. People who want decent news coverage are increasingly landing on News24 and Sky will have a big fight to win them back. It takes far less time to lose a good reputation than to gain one....
All good points and I agree with you largely.
Sky did mess up Katrina and tried to make up for it by preempting Rita- that was a mistake and a waste of money.
But I think you're being a bit harsh on the relaunch effect- this is the biggest relaunch in Sky News' history...a simply massive logistical and technical operation that utterly dwarfs the rebuilding of News 24 a couple of years ago. And that managed to make News 24 look a presentational mess for weeks on end (working out of the CSO studio), often simulcasting with World and therefore providing an inferior service than usual.
But once the relaunch happened, the masses were wooed and they've stayed with the channel ever since. Sky's new studio will wow the masses and it will win back a large chunk of News 24's audience. Of that I have little doubt.
The real test for Sky is whether they can truly justify the relaunch cost and shift away from rolling news to programming by breaking out of the ratings box that has limited 24 hour news channels in this country since Sky started. Can Sky's presenter led hours draw in a regular viewership beyond the status quo of a small channel-skipping audience looking for a quick news fix?
I have serious doubts on this point- I feel the relaunch will take Sky back ahead of News 24 and back to audience share levels seen before News 24's recent resurgence. But I don't think it'll break out of that ratings box...and this I personally feel will lead to a return to the current style rolling news within a year (but with better presentation from the new studio).
Sorry for that ramble- I've gone completely off topic!
I'd be surprised if they were back to rolling news in a year. You've got to remember that it took Fox at least 3 years before people really started to pick up the scent of their evening line up and stick with it, and that's in a country that's well used to watching cable news channels for a long period.
That said, the one thing Sky don't have is patience. What I would expect is that the existing audience will remain, and that they'll stay watching for a longer period. Plus, having just looked at the monthly figures for July, Sky were marginally ahead of News 24 anyway, so let us be realistic... News 24 haven't run miles away into the lead by any stretch.
The earthquake, as has been said, hasn't really come at a good time for them. Given that Islamabad is a very easy place to get to from the UK, if they were sending presenters they'd have been there by now. But credit to the Beeb, they managed to mobilise people very quickly, though why they send out Lyse Doucet is a mystery to me. She may be talented, but her voice lends a level of unenthusiasm to a situation that is unrivalled by anyone.
Dunedin posted:
w12 posted:
Dunedin posted:
Yep, Sky have been painfully slow on this one, as they were on Hurricane Katrina. Bizarrely they went major on Hurricane Rita before it struck- and people moved on quite quickly from that one.
Partly bad luck, partly no doubt due to their major relaunch in 2 weeks time.
I'm sure things will improve for them then.
Partly bad luck, partly no doubt due to their major relaunch in 2 weeks time.
I'm sure things will improve for them then.
I'm not sure luck comes into it - the BBC made the right decisions early on, committed to them and got the people and kit moving within a few hours of the story breaking. ITN got a few people moving. Sky apparently didn't.
The news channels tend to look at 1700 as the most important hour of the day. There was an embarrassing gulf between News24 and Sky today - I don't think I've ever seen the BBC trounce Sky so comprehensively in response to a breaking story. Sky had one taped report from a reporter on the spot - the rest was done in London from agency footage. News24 was presented from the very centre of things, two on-the-ground reporter items, two local interviews and Lyse Doucet doing a nighttime walk-and-talk around some of the damage.
Sky might have a relaunch coming (with a gestation period resembling an elephant's), but that's no excuse for cocking up a story on this scale, or Katrina. Live on-air output is always more important than a pilot. It would have been a strategically sounder decision to throw everything at Katrina and this earthquake, and have to relaunch a week or two later - rather than miss out twice. Their hard-fought-for and well-deserved reputation is ebbing away - for the last couple of months they've been weak, and haven't provided the kind of coverage they're capable of. People who want decent news coverage are increasingly landing on News24 and Sky will have a big fight to win them back. It takes far less time to lose a good reputation than to gain one....
All good points and I agree with you largely.
Sky did mess up Katrina and tried to make up for it by preempting Rita- that was a mistake and a waste of money.
But I think you're being a bit harsh on the relaunch effect- this is the biggest relaunch in Sky News' history...a simply massive logistical and technical operation that utterly dwarfs the rebuilding of News 24 a couple of years ago. And that managed to make News 24 look a presentational mess for weeks on end (working out of the CSO studio), often simulcasting with World and therefore providing an inferior service than usual.
But once the relaunch happened, the masses were wooed and they've stayed with the channel ever since. Sky's new studio will wow the masses and it will win back a large chunk of News 24's audience. Of that I have little doubt.
The real test for Sky is whether they can truly justify the relaunch cost and shift away from rolling news to programming by breaking out of the ratings box that has limited 24 hour news channels in this country since Sky started. Can Sky's presenter led hours draw in a regular viewership beyond the status quo of a small channel-skipping audience looking for a quick news fix?
I have serious doubts on this point- I feel the relaunch will take Sky back ahead of News 24 and back to audience share levels seen before News 24's recent resurgence. But I don't think it'll break out of that ratings box...and this I personally feel will lead to a return to the current style rolling news within a year (but with better presentation from the new studio).
Sorry for that ramble- I've gone completely off topic!
I'd be surprised if they were back to rolling news in a year. You've got to remember that it took Fox at least 3 years before people really started to pick up the scent of their evening line up and stick with it, and that's in a country that's well used to watching cable news channels for a long period.
That said, the one thing Sky don't have is patience. What I would expect is that the existing audience will remain, and that they'll stay watching for a longer period. Plus, having just looked at the monthly figures for July, Sky were marginally ahead of News 24 anyway, so let us be realistic... News 24 haven't run miles away into the lead by any stretch.
The earthquake, as has been said, hasn't really come at a good time for them. Given that Islamabad is a very easy place to get to from the UK, if they were sending presenters they'd have been there by now. But credit to the Beeb, they managed to mobilise people very quickly, though why they send out Lyse Doucet is a mystery to me. She may be talented, but her voice lends a level of unenthusiasm to a situation that is unrivalled by anyone.
W1
I don't have the figures to hand, but I think News 24 were ahead on numbers watching during July, Sky were ahead on share. And - at the risk of wading in to the whole multi-channel ratings mire.... News 24 vs Sky ratings are always slightly tricky. I understand the technology used to measure on some platforms (Freeview?) can't really cope when the same content is on two channels simultaneously, and awards almost all the audience to the one with more viewers. So, if News 24 is simulcast with BBC1, the viewers who've selected News 24 on their set-top boxes get credited to BBC1 - News 24's numbers look meagre. This happens every day when Breakfast is on air, when Weekend24 is on air and every time N24 gets put onto BBC1.
The effect of this? It's at its most extreme on days like July 7th, when News 24 goes onto BBC1 for hours on end - its audience figures will always suffer against Sky's on those occasions. And you can bet that Sky will be trumpeting a "ratings victory" shortly afterwards - never mind that they might reach 500,000 at a peak whilst News24 (via BBC1) will be at 7-8 million. It happens to a lesser extent during Breakfast every day - Sky will get numbers in the range of 30-90,000 whilst News24 will get less than 10,000 (because it's a BBC1 simulcast). That's been a banker for Sky for years, and it's distorted the ratings. If you look at 0900 - 0200 (the ratings measurement period - there are separate numbers for overnight - breakfast) when News 24 is operating on its own, it's well out in front. The lead varies through the day and sometimes Sky pull out in front - they traditionally do well mid-morning and mid-afternoon, whilst News 24 is very strong in the evenings. But on the 1/4 hour audience breakdown, News 24 is usually ahead most 1/4s. So in July - which was a massive month for news channels - News 24's audience didn't really register at the most crucial times. Nonetheless, Sky still didn't whip the channel over the course of the month. And when big news was breaking and News 24 wasn't on network, it often had a lead of 2:1 over Sky - sometimes as high as 3:1.
Now that was waaaaay off topic......
Pakistan - easy to get to (2 direct flights a day from London to Islamabad?) but a b*gger to get a visa for (see Krishnan Guru-Murthy got rejected?). Sky may have had their visa requests turned down (Asia-based correspondents probably have visas anyway), or maybe they couldn't get enough granted. And - linked slightly - I wouldn't be surprised if that was one of the reasons Lyse Doucet was sent. I hear she has superb contacts in Pakistan and knows the country intimately. And she's properly famous there - opens all kinds of doors. Also, it's a joint News24/BBC World job, and sometimes World presenters get sent (usually either Lyse or Nik Gowing).
cat posted:
Plus, having just looked at the monthly figures for July, Sky were marginally ahead of News 24 anyway, so let us be realistic... News 24 haven't run miles away into the lead by any stretch.
Given that Islamabad is a very easy place to get to from the UK, if they were sending presenters they'd have been there by now. But credit to the Beeb, they managed to mobilise people very quickly, though why they send out Lyse Doucet is a mystery to me. She may be talented, but her voice lends a level of unenthusiasm to a situation that is unrivalled by anyone.
Given that Islamabad is a very easy place to get to from the UK, if they were sending presenters they'd have been there by now. But credit to the Beeb, they managed to mobilise people very quickly, though why they send out Lyse Doucet is a mystery to me. She may be talented, but her voice lends a level of unenthusiasm to a situation that is unrivalled by anyone.
I don't have the figures to hand, but I think News 24 were ahead on numbers watching during July, Sky were ahead on share. And - at the risk of wading in to the whole multi-channel ratings mire.... News 24 vs Sky ratings are always slightly tricky. I understand the technology used to measure on some platforms (Freeview?) can't really cope when the same content is on two channels simultaneously, and awards almost all the audience to the one with more viewers. So, if News 24 is simulcast with BBC1, the viewers who've selected News 24 on their set-top boxes get credited to BBC1 - News 24's numbers look meagre. This happens every day when Breakfast is on air, when Weekend24 is on air and every time N24 gets put onto BBC1.
The effect of this? It's at its most extreme on days like July 7th, when News 24 goes onto BBC1 for hours on end - its audience figures will always suffer against Sky's on those occasions. And you can bet that Sky will be trumpeting a "ratings victory" shortly afterwards - never mind that they might reach 500,000 at a peak whilst News24 (via BBC1) will be at 7-8 million. It happens to a lesser extent during Breakfast every day - Sky will get numbers in the range of 30-90,000 whilst News24 will get less than 10,000 (because it's a BBC1 simulcast). That's been a banker for Sky for years, and it's distorted the ratings. If you look at 0900 - 0200 (the ratings measurement period - there are separate numbers for overnight - breakfast) when News 24 is operating on its own, it's well out in front. The lead varies through the day and sometimes Sky pull out in front - they traditionally do well mid-morning and mid-afternoon, whilst News 24 is very strong in the evenings. But on the 1/4 hour audience breakdown, News 24 is usually ahead most 1/4s. So in July - which was a massive month for news channels - News 24's audience didn't really register at the most crucial times. Nonetheless, Sky still didn't whip the channel over the course of the month. And when big news was breaking and News 24 wasn't on network, it often had a lead of 2:1 over Sky - sometimes as high as 3:1.
Now that was waaaaay off topic......
Pakistan - easy to get to (2 direct flights a day from London to Islamabad?) but a b*gger to get a visa for (see Krishnan Guru-Murthy got rejected?). Sky may have had their visa requests turned down (Asia-based correspondents probably have visas anyway), or maybe they couldn't get enough granted. And - linked slightly - I wouldn't be surprised if that was one of the reasons Lyse Doucet was sent. I hear she has superb contacts in Pakistan and knows the country intimately. And she's properly famous there - opens all kinds of doors. Also, it's a joint News24/BBC World job, and sometimes World presenters get sent (usually either Lyse or Nik Gowing).
