SO
Well at least Studio 6 might see more action now unless its going to be a cheap green screen job 
BF
There's still though the main channel broadcasting as normal should people want their Brexit fix.
And I don't think you can accuse the news channels of not covering Brexit enough - that's probably part of the fatigue some viewers have about it. There's only so many talking heads discussions you can have and often you can end up coming out of a Brexit segment knowing less than you did before it started (hello vox pops - is it really that essential that we know what Brenda from Stoke reckons about Brexit).
It's a gimmick for sure but you do see people saying Brexit coverage has meant other very important stories aren't covered enough so a channel that actually covers other topics does maybe cater to that niche.
I know it is just a marketing gimmick to get people talking about Sky News (see, we are all talking about it).
But it's also a stupid gimmick.
Would they have launched 'Troubles Free' in the 80s, for people fed up of hearing about Northern Ireland?
Or 'Fallujah Free' in the 00's for viewers bored of Iraq?
Their challenge should be to make it interesting and accessible to all, not just to switch it off. Actually I think they do better than most other broadcasters on that and it's an insult to their journalists who are covering it.
Brexit it is a really serious issue and this feeds into the idea that it's sort of ok to not pay attention or understand it. That is partly why we are in the mess we're in.
And the timing couldn't be worse. They launch a Brexit free channel just as it's potentially reaching a deal stage.
It's not responsible journalism to say: we know you're bored of it and it's hard to understand. We feel the same so we're not going to bother covering it.
Idiotic.
But it's also a stupid gimmick.
Would they have launched 'Troubles Free' in the 80s, for people fed up of hearing about Northern Ireland?
Or 'Fallujah Free' in the 00's for viewers bored of Iraq?
Their challenge should be to make it interesting and accessible to all, not just to switch it off. Actually I think they do better than most other broadcasters on that and it's an insult to their journalists who are covering it.
Brexit it is a really serious issue and this feeds into the idea that it's sort of ok to not pay attention or understand it. That is partly why we are in the mess we're in.
And the timing couldn't be worse. They launch a Brexit free channel just as it's potentially reaching a deal stage.
It's not responsible journalism to say: we know you're bored of it and it's hard to understand. We feel the same so we're not going to bother covering it.
Idiotic.
There's still though the main channel broadcasting as normal should people want their Brexit fix.
And I don't think you can accuse the news channels of not covering Brexit enough - that's probably part of the fatigue some viewers have about it. There's only so many talking heads discussions you can have and often you can end up coming out of a Brexit segment knowing less than you did before it started (hello vox pops - is it really that essential that we know what Brenda from Stoke reckons about Brexit).
It's a gimmick for sure but you do see people saying Brexit coverage has meant other very important stories aren't covered enough so a channel that actually covers other topics does maybe cater to that niche.
BF
The usual DS soap forum argument about sports then 'I don't like it, so it shouldn't be covered'.
Often major news stories come from sport and the two overlap - the incidents during the Bulgaria/England game last night for example were quite rightly considered important news but would they just be ignored with your scenario?
And sports stories are often one of the more enjoyable parts of news broadcasts IMO - stories about say the 2012 Olympics are often among the more positive news items and so make a change from the often grim news that often dominates bulletins. And let's be honest - it's not as if it's premium content that makes way for sports stories. Often rolling news can be quite heavy on vox-pops or on interviews with 'pundits' like Owen Jones, Isabel Oakeshott, Brendan O'Neill etc and losing those segments is no great loss to viewers.
I’d prefer Sky News Sports-Free to be honest.
The usual DS soap forum argument about sports then 'I don't like it, so it shouldn't be covered'.
Often major news stories come from sport and the two overlap - the incidents during the Bulgaria/England game last night for example were quite rightly considered important news but would they just be ignored with your scenario?
And sports stories are often one of the more enjoyable parts of news broadcasts IMO - stories about say the 2012 Olympics are often among the more positive news items and so make a change from the often grim news that often dominates bulletins. And let's be honest - it's not as if it's premium content that makes way for sports stories. Often rolling news can be quite heavy on vox-pops or on interviews with 'pundits' like Owen Jones, Isabel Oakeshott, Brendan O'Neill etc and losing those segments is no great loss to viewers.
WO
Semi-regular overnight face Barry Weir looks to be one of the hosts:
He's also one of Sky News Radio/IRN's regular newsreaders.
Any ideas of who will be presenting the I assume single 5 hour slot each day?
Semi-regular overnight face Barry Weir looks to be one of the hosts:
I’m presenting on this tomorrow - to say I’m excited wouldn’t quite cover it! https://t.co/lobgBTUKgY
— Barry Weir (@BarryWeirSky) October 15, 2019
He's also one of Sky News Radio/IRN's regular newsreaders.
JB
Semi-regular overnight face Barry Weir looks to be one of the hosts:
He's also one of Sky News Radio/IRN's regular newsreaders.
I often hear his bulletins as the hospital radio station i volunteer at takes Sky News/IRN at the top of the hour.
Any ideas of who will be presenting the I assume single 5 hour slot each day?
Semi-regular overnight face Barry Weir looks to be one of the hosts:
I’m presenting on this tomorrow - to say I’m excited wouldn’t quite cover it! https://t.co/lobgBTUKgY
— Barry Weir (@BarryWeirSky) October 15, 2019
He's also one of Sky News Radio/IRN's regular newsreaders.
I often hear his bulletins as the hospital radio station i volunteer at takes Sky News/IRN at the top of the hour.
LL
London Lite
Founding member
I'd speculate it'll be one five hour pres shift for whoever is on with breaks for some of Sky's environmental or other doc filler.
GI
What's the difference?
Well at least Studio 6 might see more action now unless its going to be a cheap green screen job
What's the difference?
AN
The usual DS soap forum argument about sports then 'I don't like it, so it shouldn't be covered'.
Often major news stories come from sport and the two overlap - the incidents during the Bulgaria/England game last night for example were quite rightly considered important news but would they just be ignored with your scenario?
And sports stories are often one of the more enjoyable parts of news broadcasts IMO - stories about say the 2012 Olympics are often among the more positive news items and so make a change from the often grim news that often dominates bulletins. And let's be honest - it's not as if it's premium content that makes way for sports stories. Often rolling news can be quite heavy on vox-pops or on interviews with 'pundits' like Owen Jones, Isabel Oakeshott, Brendan O'Neill etc and losing those segments is no great loss to viewers.
Well not really. I think sport is about as newsworthy as Strictly, but you don’t see news channels going over to their special Strictly studio for a ten minute update.
I’d prefer Sky News Sports-Free to be honest.
The usual DS soap forum argument about sports then 'I don't like it, so it shouldn't be covered'.
Often major news stories come from sport and the two overlap - the incidents during the Bulgaria/England game last night for example were quite rightly considered important news but would they just be ignored with your scenario?
And sports stories are often one of the more enjoyable parts of news broadcasts IMO - stories about say the 2012 Olympics are often among the more positive news items and so make a change from the often grim news that often dominates bulletins. And let's be honest - it's not as if it's premium content that makes way for sports stories. Often rolling news can be quite heavy on vox-pops or on interviews with 'pundits' like Owen Jones, Isabel Oakeshott, Brendan O'Neill etc and losing those segments is no great loss to viewers.
Well not really. I think sport is about as newsworthy as Strictly, but you don’t see news channels going over to their special Strictly studio for a ten minute update.
AN
I don’t think it’s fair to use the word arrogant. We all have different opinions and I respect yours even if I don’t agree with it.
You don't watch BBC news on a Friday then.
Sport is news that is important to many people and there is a place for news that isn't bad too. It's the same with the Royals - I've no interest in their travels it wouldn't be arrogant enough to say covering them isn't "news".
Sport is news that is important to many people and there is a place for news that isn't bad too. It's the same with the Royals - I've no interest in their travels it wouldn't be arrogant enough to say covering them isn't "news".
I don’t think it’s fair to use the word arrogant. We all have different opinions and I respect yours even if I don’t agree with it.
LL
London Lite
Founding member
Yesterday's England football match with the racist Bulgarian 'fans' is a classic reason why sport and mainstream news combine.
Football in particular sells well overseas, so also counts as business news. Think big money transfers or a football club going into administration.
Bar Sportsline at the weekend, bulletins are usually short and those which do crossover are newsworthy.
Football in particular sells well overseas, so also counts as business news. Think big money transfers or a football club going into administration.
Bar Sportsline at the weekend, bulletins are usually short and those which do crossover are newsworthy.