Sky News

Always looks stupid on the EPG when you have:

18.00 Live at Five


I think when it was 5-6.30pm, then the sportsline programme (which IMO deserves an early evening slot far more than sky.com/news) they got away with it - but not so much now.



One thing though would be to extend the brand so Jeremy finishes at six, but returns later in the evening with say "Live at Nine", with a new evening programme then from 6-9pm.


I like the idea of the 15-minute news but it's questionable as a 2-3 hour block within a 24 hour news channel. Might be better to say that on the hour (or half-hour) every hour during the evening they'll be a full 15 minute round up of news, and then use the rest of the hour for more extended coverage of stories.



Talking of evening programmes, is the World News Tonight bloke still with Sky News?

I've always though that the 5-7 slot is great, in terms of what it offers, it firstly needs a bit of sexing up, why don't they use studio b? That was supposed to be for Live at 5 to use wasn't it? Secondly they need a more general name to brand the program with. Something like 'Prime News' used in the US by Headline News.

I'd also have this return at 10pm for an hour with the same presenter.

I think James has now gone - we haven't had any of his specials for ages.

Why not Evening Live? Keep it more in line with the other branding and less American?

As for Mr Rubin, he was on the Daily Politics a few weeks ago, and mentioned that hes back off to the US to become a fellow at a University there.

Other branding? Stuff that, would you really want to associate a rejuvinated evening program with a program that is losing viewers by the day? No.

That too is the type of name that got us into this slippery slope. Before you know it we'll have 'Breakfast Live', 'Morning Live', '15 minutes Live' etc

What did we think of Sky News leading with the Britney story all day yesterday?

I think it was a low point.

I do not think the name is the problem but the content and as breaking news says the story the lead with that causes the problems with their credibility.

Morning Live, Evening Live and Graveyard Shift Live would work with better journalism and bringing us a real alternative to News 24. At the moment, the evening line up offers nothing much new really. Sky.com news is at least a brave attempt to try something different. What about indepth reports and more specials in the evening line up.

There does not seem to be any imagination and real direction at Sky News at all. Bringing in Dermott will not bring them much more viewers...why does Sky think he is so good anyway?

At the TOTH, why is the VT playing in the 'cube' that spins around before the headlines, moving more and more away from being the top story?

I've just seen some kid skating, before the headlines come on and lead with the unrest in Kenya.

Didn't seem very appropriate at all.

I think it's sad that her downnfall has to be played out in the news at all. The poor girl is having a breakdown. Give the girl a break. She didn't ask for this, her pushy mother took her down this route. The news organisations have a morbid fascination with these sort of stories.
Its like going back to the days when Mr Nick was a kid and they used to go to circuses to look at the bearded lady for entertainment.

This is a good example of a child being a direct reflection upon their parents.

Exactly - they go on about how low she's sunk - but she's not as low as the people camped outside her front door ready to document events.

I agree, poor Britney is distroyed by paparazzi and the media.
I'm suprised Sky didn't send Kay to camp in front of Britney's house.

I felt it was a new low for Sky News to lead with that story. Shockingly irrelevant story that traditional news watchers are not interested in.

Perhaps they feel the masses are more bothered about Britney (who I do feel sorry for) than what happens in Kenya, Pakistan and even who the next most powerful man is in the world?