I agree, I find it pointless they poached so many presenters (Gillian, Anna) and they are now just shunted to News, Sport & Weather or worse short news summaries. I'm sure there mad, along with Steve/ Mark - when you think about it they've gone from 3 hours in the afternoon to Sunrise on Fridays or bulletins on weekends.
Also, Kay seems to be calling her programme "Afternoon Live" less and less, and seems to be just opting for "Sky News" Interesting start to the weather there aswell, for the first few seconds we saw it just full screen (like it was being done from the CSO) but then it switched to Francis at the newswall.
What a waste of time it was poaching Gillian Joseph from the BBC when she has been shunted to weekends, and Sunrise of all shows. Bet she is gutted.
Gillian Joseph should be shunted completely off Sky News, she's dreadful.
Got to agree...along with Anna Jones as well. Rabbit caught in headlights....
Anna is an example of somebody who falls foul of the single-headed presentation thing IMO. She really needs a co-host to relax her a bit and make her seem a bit more personable.
Gillian was a mistake in the first place. She had a weekday slot for 2 years, too much for me.
Anna Jones is one of my favorites at Sky but she should have stayed in the morning slot.
And what about Martin Stanford. I t feels like he left the channel since they started this new schedule.
It's a sad channel.
In fact it has to be said that the new schedule for Sky News is just dreadful! Thank god Virgin don't carry the channel anymore. I had thought that when John Ryley took over it would be back to the good old days, but alas no. The choice of presenters is just dire!
IMO - Sky News always worked better when the hours were double headed. One presenter leading the show with the other doing summaries and 'lame' stories is a waste of time, and distracting. There is nothing better than a bit of banter between a good pairing, and Sky seem to have abandoned this altogether.
News Channel of the year maybe, LEAST watched News Channel - let it continue.
Interesting start to the weather there aswell, for the first few seconds we saw it just full screen (like it was being done from the CSO) but then it switched to Francis at the newswall.
Sounds like they simply accidentally put the feed to the newswall up on screen.
Interesting start to the weather there aswell, for the first few seconds we saw it just full screen (like it was being done from the CSO) but then it switched to Francis at the newswall.
Sounds like they simply accidentally put the feed to the newswall up on screen.
That is exactly what happened. They cut back rather abruptly.
To be fair, i don't know whether they were expecting to go to the weather or not really as they were very late going to the break (56 minutes) and didn't come back 'til just before 59.
In fact it has to be said that the new schedule for Sky News is just dreadful! Thank god Virgin don't carry the channel anymore. I had thought that when John Ryley took over it would be back to the good old days, but alas no. The choice of presenters is just dire!
IMO - Sky News always worked better when the hours were double headed. One presenter leading the show with the other doing summaries and 'lame' stories is a waste of time, and distracting. There is nothing better than a bit of banter between a good pairing, and Sky seem to have abandoned this altogether.
News Channel of the year maybe, LEAST watched News Channel - let it continue.
News 24 though are still stuck on 0.7% with sky on 0.5%, people only watch on average for another 2-3 mihutes at a time.
Given all the fuss that been made about this virgin thing, and all those people that were
SO
happy to see the back of sky news you'd think News 24 was the best thing since sliced bread - and that they'd be doing a lot better in the ratings.
I think Dermot will help bring the channel back up, I just didn't feel Julie could handle working single-handedly to be honest - just to boring!
Afternoon Live would and could work if only they would find new stories - it seems like Kay focuses on the same 3 items for 4 hours with 8 other stories being rushed through five minutes!
The 'Live at Five' brand should end after five - why is it still continuing at 6? Surely sky could have come up with a new show such as 'Pix as Six' (which would be dreadful, like 'sky.com news' is, but it's better than a repeat of the last hour).
Anna Botting doesn't work at night if you ask me - when she's done Afternoon Live or Sky Today it's been much better! Sunrise is a thousand miles behind Breakfast, and News, Sport and Weather is just a waste of time. When you make a big deal about repeating the same news, sport and weather every 15 minutes and condensing it all down to just 15 minutes, you're effectively killing any ties with your viewers past that 15 minutes!
The only time in the week I really appreciate Sky is at weekends - Chris Rogers is great (but sadly Andrew Wilson and Steve Dixon both annoy the livin sh!t out of me) and the 'Weekend Live' brand works very well.
I actually think moving Botting to mornings, Kay to just 3 hours, Chris Rogers to evenings and Colin Brazier to a more high profile role would work best! And Live at Five should be more like, say, the Ten O'Clock News or Newsnight, but at five, with more political and financial stories, analysis and interviews.
: