TV
Indeed, it may not be accurate to describe this as a 'suspension'. The wording regarding all of them has been they will be 'off air' during that time – there's a good chance they will continue to be paid, and perhaps have other duties that aren't public-facing to attend to.
It might seem pedantic, but a suspension would be a clear statement of wrongdoing by the staff member that was in some way in conflict with their contractual obligations. This seems more akin to saying both sides agree these journalists cannot appear impartial and credible in reporting on COVID-19 and the law around its restrictions given recent events. Notably, six months from now there is a hope the nature of COVID restrictions will have changed considerably (for the better).
I'm fine with the use of suspension here. Her job is to be on air, she's been taken off air. That's very similar to a suspension. However, I do get your point - using the word 'suspension' could potentially be misleading. I also doubt it's a scenario of 'if Burley said no then Sky would keep her on' - I reckon if she declined to be off air they wouldn't have it. However, no-one here (as I'm aware of) is that close to the situation, so it's difficult to comment on.
Doesn’t seem much of a punishment to be taken off air for a ‘period of time’. Depends if it’s paid or unpaid.... though it wouldn’t be appropriate to know that.
I would assume the breakfast show will go back to being known as ‘Sunrise’ rather than the name of someone who has been suspended from the company. I can’t see it being called ‘Kay Burley’ again.... that’s probably a crushing blow enough for her.
I would assume the breakfast show will go back to being known as ‘Sunrise’ rather than the name of someone who has been suspended from the company. I can’t see it being called ‘Kay Burley’ again.... that’s probably a crushing blow enough for her.
Indeed, it may not be accurate to describe this as a 'suspension'. The wording regarding all of them has been they will be 'off air' during that time – there's a good chance they will continue to be paid, and perhaps have other duties that aren't public-facing to attend to.
It might seem pedantic, but a suspension would be a clear statement of wrongdoing by the staff member that was in some way in conflict with their contractual obligations. This seems more akin to saying both sides agree these journalists cannot appear impartial and credible in reporting on COVID-19 and the law around its restrictions given recent events. Notably, six months from now there is a hope the nature of COVID restrictions will have changed considerably (for the better).
I'm fine with the use of suspension here. Her job is to be on air, she's been taken off air. That's very similar to a suspension. However, I do get your point - using the word 'suspension' could potentially be misleading. I also doubt it's a scenario of 'if Burley said no then Sky would keep her on' - I reckon if she declined to be off air they wouldn't have it. However, no-one here (as I'm aware of) is that close to the situation, so it's difficult to comment on.