Very strange happenings on Sky News this morning,why have they randomly got 2 presenters?
I dont think there is anything special happening today,although when i press the information button on my sky box it says "full live coverage of Tony Blairs resignation..."
And it also says that its Live At 5 With Colin Brazier.
Don't be fooled by the two presenters thing - it's all part of John Ryley's 'cost-cutting' And nice to see Mr Holmes working on a Friday as well, even if he did forget he was on air at 9.30!
What time do we expect Tony Blair to resign by the way? I'll tune in
Well on holidays it is usual from them to show News Sport and Weather from 2-5 anyway so it's no surprise that Afternoon Live isn't on, but why two presenters I don't know. What shocked me was the good impression that the channel gives off with two at the helm, especially in the TOTH. I 'd forgotten that actually.
Why, though? Surely it is days like these when the 'summary presneter' and 'main presenter' system COULD work, as generally speaking there's not much going on. Then again though, I'm not complaining, it's nice they've done it.
It was sooo much more watchable that the single presenter 15 minute rolling format.
I spent a lot longer watching than I normally do, Surely it's better to keep viewers watching as long as possible...
Smack me if im wrong, but i always thought the idea of a news channel was to get news when you want? Not to sit hours on end watching the same thing (on a slow news day)
It was sooo much more watchable that the single presenter 15 minute rolling format.
I spent a lot longer watching than I normally do, Surely it's better to keep viewers watching as long as possible...
Smack me if im wrong, but i always thought the idea of a news channel was to get news when you want? Not to sit hours on end watching the same thing (on a slow news day)
You are both right to an extent really, but surely the sensible who want news when they want would go to either sky news active or online, not necessarily to tv. But where does that leave the actual tv station? They have to attempt to keep the viewers for as long as possible to attract advertisers, and whilst the 15 minutes sh*te may do this in the valuable prime time slot (a slot it has to be said that sky have never managed to get right) it is at best only contradiciting the considerably more versatile options offered on active and online - which they then insist on plugging to their hearts content.
I'm not saying that the 15 minutes format has no place at sky, as it is obviously ver popular (ratings prove this), but consider...
In January News at Tern returned, the ratings suggested that they were (in the beginning at least) attracting new viewers, which the News at 10.30 had struggled to tap. This surely at the very least shows that people DO want to give the news a try, if not regularly watch it. And this is where the 15 minutes has it pitfalls, as the format is very formulaic, and sometimes can seem as if you are wading through treacle as the presenter has ,understandably, long since lost interest.
