Sky News

Interesting point SN2005 about how the old smaller studio kind of forced them into making maximum use of the minimum space, while now they kind of take the new studio for granted.


I think though until it's future on Freeview either one way or the other is confirmed I can't see them progressing much. Losing it's slot on Freeview would be a massive blow to the station, and one I think it would struggle to recover from, especially as it's still unavailable on Cable too.

Sky of course will argue it's survived for over a decade without Freeview, but the landscape has changed somewhat since then and IMO having Sky News and Sky Sports News especially on Freeview can do far more for Sky as a whole than their proposed "picnic" service ever would.


Presentation wise - just as for a partnership to work a duo needs to have chemistry, when you're relying on single-anchored bulletins the presenters do have to have personality too - and really come across as communicating with, rather than too, the viewers. However much personality someone might have though, a four hour slot is far too long, so reintroducing Lunchtime Live to fill two hours is a must IMO.


Evenings is the biggest problem - the 15-minute news does it's job, but isn't exactly "appointment to view" programming (though neither was World News Tonight). I think there is a massive opportunity to put out a bulletin at 9pm before the big guys fight it out at 10pm, and as I've said before using a "Live at Nine" brand as a spin-off from Live at Five would IMO be the best starting point.

That leaves 6-9pm for a new evening programming, which could incorporate those 15-minute news bulletins on the hour and half-hour for example, but then use the :15 and :45 for extended slots and features

What would the make up of your 'Live at Nine' proposal be? Would it be more innovative than what they have conjured up for evenings so far? What would you propose for the 8pm hour?

Extended slots and features sound good but what would they be based on Lindsay Lohan's exploits, Britney's latest problems or would you suggest indepth reports from Darfur, New Orleans, Beijing etc?

I also wonder how different having 15 minutes headlines would differ from the current set up? Why would they not be able to run a broadcast like Sky Today or Afternoon Live in the evening? Would a 'Evening Live' programme with Anna Botting not work well, with a similar format to the Kay Burley show?

I also hear that Anna Botting is called Anna Jones weekdays lol.

So much for having presenters on regular slots...I mean why include a presenter's name to a slot if she/he is hardly on air? The EPG looks daft.

If Anna B has any sense she will using her ample time off to look for a job with a news broadcaster.

Firstly, Live at Nine would take alot from Live at Five, and just like the 5pm edition is Sky's flagship early-evening "bulletin", the 9pm version would seek to be their flagship later bulletin - perhaps taking elements from the Sky Report and World News Tonight. It should be aimed at an audience who want an evening news bulletin, but don't want to wait until 10pm.


I do agree that some sort of "Evening Live" format would be best - I think currently early evening is Sky's weakest point in the schedule. The reason I suggest the 15-minute bulletins on the hour and half hour is mainly cost, and the fact there is an audience for them. For the other 15-minute slots in each half hour it would be a mixture of extented business, sport and entertainment reports, with perhaps additional focus on the "top story". Also the slots could be used for 15-minute versions of sky.com/news and that tech programme.

Do you know I hope that someone at Sky News reads this suggestion as I think it sounds great Brekkie...I hope I have not come across as being awkward with my questioning!

I am really finding it hard to watch Sky News as I really loved that channel before it all went wrong when they moved premises. It may sound over the top but I could cry when seeing how things have slipped there.

I for one hope that Sky News goes full circle and become the innovator and leader of journalism it once was!

The main issue that i have with Brekkie's suggestion, which in the main is very sound is that, what area of the audience are you going to be going after?

The beauty of the 15 minutes slots is that they can still get the viewers in (because people know what to expect), even though the big broadcasters are doing their feature programs.

If you are going to have a Live at Nine then you'd have to make that decision - do you got after the trashy 'celeb' loving mob and make it like at five news affair, or do you go high-brow, which Sky News just simply doesn't have the money or resources to really consistently pull off. Alternatively you could aim it somewhere in the middle and then leave everybody feeling as if they haven't got what they came for and making the situation even worse.

There is the danger with branding it 'Evening Live' that it becomes too similar to Kay's prog, which is all very nice in itself but then I think you'd be falling into the trap of just making everything the same, and that would be wrong.

Personally I think the way to go would be to have a refreshed Live at 5 from 5 (obviously), through until 6:30. Sportslines following that, as it always worked very well having Jon with JT during Live at 5, sort of building up to that 1/2 hour. Then from 7-11 I have a double headed slot, with Dermot and somebody else, who get on really well and have the experience and know how to carry something like that off well. As brekkie suggested i'd have 15 minutes of news at the top and bottom of the hour and then separate features in the others. Obviously sport, business, health (make use of Thomas Moore a bit better), crime, foregin affairs as well.

At ten I see they are trying to imitate the Ten O'Clock news hour increasingly, minus the business, so this set up could easily be translated across to that hour as well. 11 I'd hand over to the overnight team, keeping the press review at 11:30.

If you're then talking about the rest of the day, I'd have Sunrise from 6-9 with Eamonn and Charlotte (in a bigger role, more as a co-host), Martin and Anna Botting on from 9-12, with a 'Lunchtime' Live spectacualr from 12-2, Colin and Anna Jones then go from 2-5.

For long has Sky News at Ten had a 'News at Ten' logo (with the web address and a sky news logo underneath) shown on the desk's screen? I saw it last night with Steve Dixon. TBH it looked OK.

the fantasy schedules are coming back I see.
Why are the two of you missing the point that one of the biggest reasons for single headers, 15 minute bulletins, and less use of the studio, was because of the substantial cut backs implemented over the last two years?

As for the cost-cutting issue, I thought I'd address that myself in why the 15-minute bulletins are kept between 6-9pm, but it's just not every 15-minutes, but every half hour instead.


Cost wise I don't think my proposal would need anymore people than used currently, certainly on a presentation front. The 9-12am and 2-5pm slots could remain single headed (for now), with a secondary news reader perhaps in to cover both. Kay would return to Lunchtime Live and host alone, with perhaps Anna Botting in at 2pm. To be honest though I think this would be an improvement, it's the evenings which are the main priority.


Live at Five and Live at Nine would both be hosted by JT, while I think Martin Stanfield could front the 6-9pm slot, though whether this should be single or duel headed I don't know. I think I'm kind of thinking of it as an evening version of Breakfast / Sunrise, where it's targetted at people who'd catch half an hour or so of the programme as they're returning from work etc. and perhaps want something a bit more informal than the terrestrial bulletins.


Live at Nine would be news driven, rather than celebrity driven, and probably have more of a world focus than Live at Five. Considering it also airs at a time when Champions League matches and other midweek football is heading towards the final whistle, they'd be some emphasis on sport too in the latter half of the hour.

Woah, are you suggesting that it costs money to use another area of the studio? Come, come, you're fooling nobody with that tripe.

Maybe building the studio around the newsroom, maybe it would have been better to have built 4 smaller studios that they could have used. If Fox News can afford to have lots of studios, surely Sky can too?

Didn't they have a separate area for the Sky Report which wasn't directly in the main studio?

Yea they use that for Afternoon Live sometimes i think.

Are you talking about the shoebox?

http://www.tvnewsroom.co.uk/images/skynews/programmes/skyreport/1024194508_75.jpg
image:tvnewsroom

If so that is directly opposite the newsdesk.

Something else I'd like to see them try is standing infront of the desk, like they did on the Sky Report,
e.g.
http://www.tvnewsroom.co.uk/images/skynews/programmes/skyreport/1027195038_86.jpg
http://www.tvnewsroom.co.uk/images/skynews/programmes/skyreport/0307190606_54.jpg