Sky News

With the greatest of respect, Cat, my information was not guesswork in any way, shape or form. The information I got came from quite senior places in the Sky Newsroom.

I think my past record of information that I've placed on this site speaks for itself. You can take it as red what I've told you it what was told me. I trust that information, and thanks to the wonders of anonimity, I've passed it on here.

I'm not going about a campaign of trying to discredit you, just simply saying that anything on here is open to question and, more often than not, things that people post on TVF turn out to be rubbish.

I am saying that Sky probably don't have a fixed date for launch, and even if they did, the chances of it being conformed to when it's anything up to 6 months away are highly unlikely. Anything could go wrong... the last studio relaunch was rushed forward because of September 11, for instance.

It just isn't worth guessing about things, regardless of what your source is.

But my point is, Cat, I'm NOT GUESSING!

How many times do I have to say that?

Are you talking about a May Election or a February one?

There is one slight area of doubt, however Bruce.
The General Election doesn't HAVE to be called this Spring - it is only 'sources' that have led journalists to believe it will be either Feb or May 2005... Blair technically has until mid-2006 to call it.
Now if it IS Feb or May 2005, then you are right - my sources at Sky News also tell me that they will wait until AFTER the election to move.
(And whoever suggested they would move on the night of the election results is also WRONG).
However if suddenly it is on the cards for an Autumn 2005 Election, then Sky would almost certainly move in March/April/May.

Indeed Chromakey, my conversation - about a month ago - was based on either a February or May date.

Emma Crosby really does not belong on Sky. Send her back to CNBC, please.

After stumbling over her lines - as per usual - she was talking to Laurence Lee in Kiev, who outlined why people were protesting and what the situation was, saying that there were lines of riot police with helmets and that he could see them from where he was.

Her followup question: So can you see any riot police?

After saying that he'd already said he could see them, Crosby followed with 'So what do these protesters want?'

Explaining again that they want 'the other guy' in charge - having done so about 40 second earlier in the conversation - he started to sound a bit pissed off.

Honestly, what is she doing on TV if she doesn't know what she's doing? I don't know her, I'm sure she's a really lovely person, but seriously, she can't present, she can't interview, she can't read... why is this woman on television?

Just been watching the RealPlayer clips of the 2001 "new" Sky News look, with the introduction of the news wall....

I know the wall is 3 years old now, but I really think that the camera shots which were used in 2001 showed the set off much better than the current very "static" ones - especially since the set has had a mini "revamp" since then !

I particularly like the fact that the bulletin opens with a wide shot which slowly zooms in on the presenters as they start to read the opening story - kinda shows the studio off better I think.

When exactly did Sky change to the "open with side-on shot then cut straight to static shot of presenter(s)" style ?

Enough screens?
http://www.rp-networkservices.com/tvforum/uploads/sky_news_screens.jpg

Wonderful effort. The site is 100% accessible. It's been written in XHTML. Well done to Sky.

Good grief! Almost as many as Bail has in his bedroom! All the presenter needs now is to be holding a big pussy for that truely sinister look.

Media Monkey's report on the Sky News Christmas press lunch...