Well I'd look at all programming and have serious think again about it. Not all is good, not all of it is bad. But it needs to be looked at again.
Also, they have this nice big area for presenting, but they seem to use the same positions at the same times. I'd have two newsreaders on at most, not three. Obviously, I'd have a seperate sports geezer.
Maybe I'd have a slight graphics rethink. Tweaking the ticker, stuff like that.
Also, the actual news content needs looking at. I'll expand on this in another post.
In simple terms all they have to do is take advantage of their space and use the newswall, podiums and other areas more - certainly at the top of the hour.
I'd reinstate the early evening edition of Sportsline at 6.30pm, put Martin Stanford on an hour earlier at 7pm and bring back the Sky Report at 9pm. The Sky Report would be more in-depth, with Sky News at Ten being more of a quick round up of the day's news.
Agree completley with all points raised here, especially with your proposed schedule - it seems to me that scheduling as above would maximise audience figures.
Sky's biggest mistake - I reckon - was when they decided to change everything just because they had fell behind News 24. Inconsistency will only lose viewers, as you would have already lost the viewers to N24 who disliked the relaunch, so why change and risk losing even more? Furthermore, with so much space in the so-called 'warehouse' why plonk your anchors at a desk all day - especially when it's Brazier for 6 hours; I don't dislike the guy, but why not give someone else a chance?
Basically use more of the studio. Stand up infront of the newswall for the top story use the desk also but not all the time. Sort out the graphics - give them a slight tweak.
I'll expand on my views about the presenters also in another post.
weren't most of the post-relaunch changes made for cost-cutting purposes, i.e i'm sure I read on here that Brazier is on all day because he's cheaper than the two guys they had on before.
i really don't see how moving the presenters around the studio will enhance viewing figures. They did that at first when they were showing off their new toy, there is no need for that anymore.
i really don't see how moving the presenters around the studio will enhance viewing figures. They did that at first when they were showing off their new toy, there is no need for that anymore.
So how does sitting them behind a desk all day increase ratings then?
But I certainly haven't seen News Flash or anything too Fox News like on Sky, so I think you are mistaken there.
I'm sure it was used before the relaunch (the first one, when they swirched to 16:9 etc), in the red box at the bottom left hand corner. It said "SKY NEWS" at the top, with "FLASH" written in large bold letters beneath it.
But I certainly haven't seen News Flash or anything too Fox News like on Sky, so I think you are mistaken there.
I'm sure it was used before the relaunch (the first one, when they swirched to 16:9 etc), in the red box at the bottom left hand corner. It said "SKY NEWS" at the top, with "FLASH" written in large bold letters beneath it.
And they got rid of it. I thought that you would consider that a good thing.
i really don't see how moving the presenters around the studio will enhance viewing figures. They did that at first when they were showing off their new toy, there is no need for that anymore.
So how does sitting them behind a desk all day increase ratings then?
Of course, neither do in themselves. It is about a whole package of things that go to make up a channel's 'feel' and style. I would have thought that Sky have been seen to lose ground journalistically, particularly after the relaunch. Secondly, I'm sure the huge increase in multi-channel receivers and therefore the penetration of the BBC as a trusted brand has helped to make News 24 an increasing success.
I concur with getting them back in the Newsroom. Sky News Today was so good pre-launch, but one thing that has always irritated me when watching SNT was the way they would be in mid-story and just cut straight to some footage of another story in a supposed event (that some of the time was not really even important!)
My schedule would be:
0500 - Sunrise [Alison Bell (why did they ever sack her?) and Steve Dixon (send Eamonn back to the sofa!)]
Same Format, in direct competition with CNN Today! Yeahh!
0800 - Day Shift [Julie Etchingham, Mark Longhurst]
More from the Newsroom, more interviews and more news stories
1100 - International Financial Report [Juliette Foster]
Business News and Stocks from Asia
1200 - Lunchtime Live [Kay Burley]
Same Format
1400 - The Day Shift [Emma Crosby, Colin Brazier]
Same as 0800, different pres.
1700 - Live At Five [Jeremy Thompson]
Same format
1800 - International Financial Report [Anna Jones]
Business News and Stocks from Europe
1900 - The View [James Rubin, Lorna Dunkley]
In-depth look at stories, head to head with Insight
2000 - The World Tonight [Martin Stanford, Anna Botting]
World News from a British/European perspective
2300 - International Finance Report [Chris Roberts]
Business News and Stocks from The Americas
0000 - Paper Review
[B]0100 - CBS News
0130 - As SKY NEWS AU
[B]0200 - The Night Shift [Gillian Joseph][B]
Includes news and views and an insight into the next news day
But I certainly haven't seen News Flash or anything too Fox News like on Sky, so I think you are mistaken there.
I'm sure it was used before the relaunch (the first one, when they swirched to 16:9 etc), in the red box at the bottom left hand corner. It said "SKY NEWS" at the top, with "FLASH" written in large bold letters beneath it.
And they got rid of it. I thought that you would consider that a good thing.
But I certainly haven't seen News Flash or anything too Fox News like on Sky, so I think you are mistaken there.
I'm sure it was used before the relaunch (the first one, when they swirched to 16:9 etc), in the red box at the bottom left hand corner. It said "SKY NEWS" at the top, with "FLASH" written in large bold letters beneath it.
And they got rid of it. I thought that you would consider that a good thing.
I did.
So you would say Sky is getting less tabloidy? Because in your orgional post that didn't come across. Not being pedantic, just want to be clear, because you seem to be contradicting yourself.