I'm a bit concerned at comments that BBC News 24 only transmits for 14 hours a day....if so wouldn't it be named BBC News 14?
Yes I disagree with the concept of having the 1, 6 and 10 on both N24 and BBC1, that was something which just stunk of money-saving cheapness on the ITV NC. But to disparage the half-hour themed shows like Reporters, WBR, Click, HardTalk, Straight Talk, Dateline London, The Record and Talking Movies as not being news is talking nonsense. In any event, when major breaking news occurs these are always the first to go.
I actually took out the 1, 6, 10, Breakfast and the overnight simulcast with World. The half hour themed programmes are fine as they are often quickly removed for breaking news. The N6 bulletins, Breakfast and the graveyard World shift are not dropped.
That's just not true. The amount of domestic breaking news is very little overnight and actually News 24 provides a much better service between 0100 and 0500 than Sky ever do. How many live correspondents do Sky have on during that time - very very very few. You can't say that for overnights on News 24. Sky is basically a re-run hour after hour.
Nicky - there's just been a major train crash. Sky New is covering it live, News 24 (sorry BBC World) is talking to someone in Washington DC. Proves you're talking rubbish.
No wonder New 24 didn't win anything at the RTS!
God, News 24 are now doing something about the Olympics! Not even a proper news story! Sky are still live in Cumbria.
I'm a bit concerned at comments that BBC News 24 only transmits for 14 hours a day....if so wouldn't it be named BBC News 14?
Yes I disagree with the concept of having the 1, 6 and 10 on both N24 and BBC1, that was something which just stunk of money-saving cheapness on the ITV NC. But to disparage the half-hour themed shows like Reporters, WBR, Click, HardTalk, Straight Talk, Dateline London, The Record and Talking Movies as not being news is talking nonsense. In any event, when major breaking news occurs these are always the first to go.
I actually took out the 1, 6, 10, Breakfast and the overnight simulcast with World. The half hour themed programmes are fine as they are often quickly removed for breaking news. The N6 bulletins, Breakfast and the graveyard World shift are not dropped.
That's just not true. The amount of domestic breaking news is very little overnight and actually News 24 provides a much better service between 0100 and 0500 than Sky ever do. How many live correspondents do Sky have on during that time - very very very few. You can't say that for overnights on News 24. Sky is basically a re-run hour after hour.
Nicky - there's just been a major train crash. Sky New is covering it live, News 24 (sorry BBC World) is talking to someone in Washington DC. Proves you're talking rubbish.
No wonder New 24 didn't win anything at the RTS!
God, News 24 are now doing something about the Olympics! Not even a proper news story! Sky are still live in Cumbria.
But nothing new is being reported. What's the point in rolling with a story and repeating the same old information if there's nothing new to report? The simulcast started with the train crash, and stuck with it for five minutes, including a live two-way from the scene. Within that five minutes, the full information available was explained, from the location of the crash to the type of train involved, to the number of people on board, to the breakdown of injuries and fatalities, to the range of possible causes.
Why is one news service better than the other for sticking with a story where no new information is available, and where the same details are being rehashed in new and increasingly ignorant ways to make it sound more interesting?
I would personally prefer a short briefing on the information, and for the bulletin to then move on other stories. Yes, it is deeply tragic that a person has died in this accident, but the world does go on, and other equally pressing incidents around the world have occurred, and also deserve airtime. Why should they go ignored just so that the news channels can try to make a bigger deal out of an already horrible accident? What's the point with treading the same ground over and over again in the distant hope that some news will come in at some point about the crash, and how can this possibly make Sky better than News 24?
If any major news came through, it would be reported on News 24. If it was announced that another person had died, then it would be mentioned during the bulletin, or it would be presented as an on-screen graphic during the back half-hour. If it was a significant enough development, News 24 would likely interrupt the recorded programme to bring the news in vision. Either way, the news would be reported and communicated to the view.
You do not need to roll with a story constantly until every last shred of interest in that story has died in order to effectively cover it. That just smacks of artifically trying to inflate the significance of the story, which is frankly pretty wrong, and is something that all news channels are guilty of in varying degrees.
You may argue that the simulcast undermines News 24's ability to effectively present coverage of a significant story in the UK; the reality is that the same information can be, and is being, provided effectively and appropriately without the need to flog the story to death and, in a rather macabre fashion, prey over the story in the hope that some new juicy, gory details will come in that you'll be able to break before your competitor.
That may be a point BBC LDN, but that won't stop News 24 - as soon as it goes its separate ways with BBC World - from carrying on with rolling coverage.
They didn't stop rolling because there was no further information, they stopped because they were compromised by a simulcast with BBC World.
That may be a point BBC LDN, but that won't stop News 24 - as soon as it goes its separate ways with BBC World - from carrying on with rolling coverage.
They didn't stop rolling because there was no further information, they stopped because they were compromised by a simulcast with BBC World.
And yet, strangely they're the better for it as the quality of their output increased when they weren't hacking the story to pieces. So the BBC World simulcast is clearly a good thing.