TI
From the front page of the latest Broadcast - 11/11/2005
News looks bad for Sky relaunch.
Paul Revoir.
You could say it has been a bad couple of weeks for the commercial news channels in the UK.
Sky News' long awaited relaunch of the channel, with its state of the art set and new presenting line-up, two weeks ago has seen the channel's ratings drop off alarmingly.
Then last week it was confirmed that ITV News Channel was going to be hauled off Freeview for half of the day so lads channel Men and Motors could keep its 24 hour slot.
While commercial rivals face big question marks, BBC News 24 has been given a new vote of confidence by BBC head of TV News Peter Horrocks, who has indicated that the BBC's newsgathering will be targeted more towards News 24.
Latest Barb figures revealed Sky News' ratings have fallen by 7.7% since the relaunch, with BBC News 24 up by about 10% and ITV News Channel up by 8.3% in this period.
Sky News head Nick Pollard told Broadcast: "My view is that when you launch new output you are bound to have ups and downs. I'm very relaxed about the figures - two weeks in ratings terms is a very short period." He added Sky News was still ahead of News 24 over the year.
But while Sky is saying that it is early days for the new service, which has cost millions to relaunch, there will doubtedly be some concern at the viewers' initial response to the broadcaster's decision to move to a more "informal" and "flexible" approach.
This has seen Sky News introduce presenter-led programming with new names such as Eamonn Holmes and former Bill Clinton aide James Rubin in an attempt to create "appointment to view" shows. Rubin's show World News Tonight at 8pm has reportedly sunk as low as 1,000 viewers. It has even been beaten by ITV News Channel, even after ITV News was pulled off Freeview and there have been question marks over his presenting style.
Pollard said: "It is a brand new show and is bound to take a little time to settle down," before lashing out at News 24, describing parts of its programming as "stodgy" and "rather tedious". Horrocks said News 24 was now comprehensively beating Sky News.
BBC figures, based on three minute weekly reach show that since the Sky News relaunch, News 24 has 5.1 million and Sky News 4.2 million viewers. BBC data shows Sky News is down 21% on the same week last year.
BBC sources claimed their gains have been most marked at 5pm and 7pm - despite the fact that some of Sky's most established faces, such as Jeremy Thompson and Julie Etchingham, are on air then. They are also claiming big increases at weekends.
Rivals have expressed surprise that the new line-up has not been more heavily promoted. One said: "They have spent a huge amount on Eamonn Holmes and don't appear to be promoting it."
Sources at both ITV and BBC suggested that the new approach has seen Sky News take its eye of the ball for breaking news, the thing that has undoubtedly been its major strength over the years.
ITV has been cashing in on the uncertainty of the viewing public, with a ratings boost since the Sky relaunch.
But this good news has been overshadowed by the fact that the channel has been reduced to 12 hours a day on the digital terrestrial platform with the launch of ITV4 last week.
ITV News will continue to broadcast on DTT when ITV4 is off air but in February the channel will face the axe when ITV's new kids offering launches in the space it is currently using.
Despite an impressive list of scoops this year the channel, which has an annual programme budget of £3.5m, continues to lose money for ITV. Once the channel loses DTT capacity, the platform on which it performs most strongly, the reasons for its continued existence become harder to back up.
Staff understand this and according to sources morale has been dented and they are beginning express concerns about job security. The National Union of Journalists told Broadcast that it was monitoring the situation adding it would be concerned if news was seen to be less of a priority for ITV than an entertainment channel (Men and Motors).
News looks bad for Sky relaunch.
Paul Revoir.
You could say it has been a bad couple of weeks for the commercial news channels in the UK.
Sky News' long awaited relaunch of the channel, with its state of the art set and new presenting line-up, two weeks ago has seen the channel's ratings drop off alarmingly.
Then last week it was confirmed that ITV News Channel was going to be hauled off Freeview for half of the day so lads channel Men and Motors could keep its 24 hour slot.
While commercial rivals face big question marks, BBC News 24 has been given a new vote of confidence by BBC head of TV News Peter Horrocks, who has indicated that the BBC's newsgathering will be targeted more towards News 24.
Latest Barb figures revealed Sky News' ratings have fallen by 7.7% since the relaunch, with BBC News 24 up by about 10% and ITV News Channel up by 8.3% in this period.
Sky News head Nick Pollard told Broadcast: "My view is that when you launch new output you are bound to have ups and downs. I'm very relaxed about the figures - two weeks in ratings terms is a very short period." He added Sky News was still ahead of News 24 over the year.
But while Sky is saying that it is early days for the new service, which has cost millions to relaunch, there will doubtedly be some concern at the viewers' initial response to the broadcaster's decision to move to a more "informal" and "flexible" approach.
This has seen Sky News introduce presenter-led programming with new names such as Eamonn Holmes and former Bill Clinton aide James Rubin in an attempt to create "appointment to view" shows. Rubin's show World News Tonight at 8pm has reportedly sunk as low as 1,000 viewers. It has even been beaten by ITV News Channel, even after ITV News was pulled off Freeview and there have been question marks over his presenting style.
Pollard said: "It is a brand new show and is bound to take a little time to settle down," before lashing out at News 24, describing parts of its programming as "stodgy" and "rather tedious". Horrocks said News 24 was now comprehensively beating Sky News.
BBC figures, based on three minute weekly reach show that since the Sky News relaunch, News 24 has 5.1 million and Sky News 4.2 million viewers. BBC data shows Sky News is down 21% on the same week last year.
BBC sources claimed their gains have been most marked at 5pm and 7pm - despite the fact that some of Sky's most established faces, such as Jeremy Thompson and Julie Etchingham, are on air then. They are also claiming big increases at weekends.
Rivals have expressed surprise that the new line-up has not been more heavily promoted. One said: "They have spent a huge amount on Eamonn Holmes and don't appear to be promoting it."
Sources at both ITV and BBC suggested that the new approach has seen Sky News take its eye of the ball for breaking news, the thing that has undoubtedly been its major strength over the years.
ITV has been cashing in on the uncertainty of the viewing public, with a ratings boost since the Sky relaunch.
But this good news has been overshadowed by the fact that the channel has been reduced to 12 hours a day on the digital terrestrial platform with the launch of ITV4 last week.
ITV News will continue to broadcast on DTT when ITV4 is off air but in February the channel will face the axe when ITV's new kids offering launches in the space it is currently using.
Despite an impressive list of scoops this year the channel, which has an annual programme budget of £3.5m, continues to lose money for ITV. Once the channel loses DTT capacity, the platform on which it performs most strongly, the reasons for its continued existence become harder to back up.
Staff understand this and according to sources morale has been dented and they are beginning express concerns about job security. The National Union of Journalists told Broadcast that it was monitoring the situation adding it would be concerned if news was seen to be less of a priority for ITV than an entertainment channel (Men and Motors).
CA
That it is down 21% for the past couple of weeks compared to this time in 2004 is hardly shocking.
The first two weeks of November 2004 saw the US Presidential election result and Yasser Arafat die. Hardly a 'regular' week to compare it to.
That said, I bet they're privately cr-pping their pants.
The first two weeks of November 2004 saw the US Presidential election result and Yasser Arafat die. Hardly a 'regular' week to compare it to.
That said, I bet they're privately cr-pping their pants.
BL
The snipes aside, quite a telling incident this morning when Sky News was removed off the company-wide ring-main, to be replaced by N24, because the powers that be have decided Sky News has 'lost it', and N24 is where 'the real journalism happens'. No Cat, I don't work at the BBC, and I've always been treated well by Sky News.
I have to agree with my current bosses... it's no longer a breaking news channel, has mediocre ATV formats and presenters who can't read autocue. Add that to the reliance on on-screen gimmicks rather than journalism or editorial gravitas.
I give it two months, three tops. The formats will revert back, the expensive presenters will go, as will the head of Sky News. That's even before Al Jazeera Int launch in March. And for those that haven't been following proceedings. They're spending more on their London bureau alone, than Sky does in a year. Different league, which N24 will be joining shortly.
I have to agree with my current bosses... it's no longer a breaking news channel, has mediocre ATV formats and presenters who can't read autocue. Add that to the reliance on on-screen gimmicks rather than journalism or editorial gravitas.
I give it two months, three tops. The formats will revert back, the expensive presenters will go, as will the head of Sky News. That's even before Al Jazeera Int launch in March. And for those that haven't been following proceedings. They're spending more on their London bureau alone, than Sky does in a year. Different league, which N24 will be joining shortly.
AQ
He is going to say that. Whilst he does, he is hoping and praying for the ratings to improve, and for him to be proved right. I have to say, if it had been a rip-roaring success, they would have been trumpetting the great ratings from the rooftops after just 1 night. (Thought: is Alistair Campbell doing more for them than appearing on air?
)
Relying on pre-revamp rating to save his job. Now there's integrity for you. Don't rely on past success - rely on what you have currently created.
Attacking the opposition to distract from your own issues. He really must be worried. There must be some truth in the ratings figures, but I for one don't know what figures to believe.
timmy posted:
Sky News head Nick Pollard told Broadcast: "My view is that when you launch new output you are bound to have ups and downs. I'm very relaxed about the figures - two weeks in ratings terms is a very short period."
He is going to say that. Whilst he does, he is hoping and praying for the ratings to improve, and for him to be proved right. I have to say, if it had been a rip-roaring success, they would have been trumpetting the great ratings from the rooftops after just 1 night. (Thought: is Alistair Campbell doing more for them than appearing on air?
)
timmy posted:
He added Sky News was still ahead of News 24 over the year.
Relying on pre-revamp rating to save his job. Now there's integrity for you. Don't rely on past success - rely on what you have currently created.
timmy posted:
Pollard said: "It is a brand new show and is bound to take a little time to settle down," before lashing out at News 24, describing parts of its programming as "stodgy" and "rather tedious". Horrocks said News 24 was now comprehensively beating Sky News.
Attacking the opposition to distract from your own issues. He really must be worried. There must be some truth in the ratings figures, but I for one don't know what figures to believe.
BL
Nope. SN are paying guests (non-politicos anyway) like money is going out of fashion to keep the ATV shows packed with names. Trying to tempt guests away from other broadcasters (who don't pay). If I was Pollard or Ryley, I'd do the same to grab headlines and PA wire inches. Campbell is happily taking the money like everyone else.
Delenn posted:
(Thought: is Alistair Campbell doing more for them than appearing on air?
Nope. SN are paying guests (non-politicos anyway) like money is going out of fashion to keep the ATV shows packed with names. Trying to tempt guests away from other broadcasters (who don't pay). If I was Pollard or Ryley, I'd do the same to grab headlines and PA wire inches. Campbell is happily taking the money like everyone else.
AQ
Really? Are you joking? I had no idea. What have they come to?
And as for Campbell, if I was him, and someone offered easy money, I'd know what I would do....
theblokewhatwritesthenews posted:
Nope. SN are paying guests (non-politicos anyway) like money is going out of fashion to keep the ATV shows packed with names. Trying to tempt guests away from other broadcasters (who don't pay). If I was Pollard or Ryley, I'd do the same to grab headlines and PA wire inches. Campbell is happily taking the money like everyone else.
Really? Are you joking? I had no idea. What have they come to?
And as for Campbell, if I was him, and someone offered easy money, I'd know what I would do....
BL
I kid you not. it's most irritating. But I'm glad we're not rising to it and trying to outbid them.
When guests come back to us and say we can't do you because SN are offering cash for 'an exclusive appearance', we say good luck to you.
Some (especially those with a commercial agenda) realise that the best they are going to get is 14,000 viewers and and 3 minute interview with Ruben talking about 'inner-nesh-nal noos' - they soon come knocking with cherries on top, trust me.
Delenn posted:
Really? Are you joking? I had no idea.
I kid you not. it's most irritating. But I'm glad we're not rising to it and trying to outbid them.
When guests come back to us and say we can't do you because SN are offering cash for 'an exclusive appearance', we say good luck to you.
Some (especially those with a commercial agenda) realise that the best they are going to get is 14,000 viewers and and 3 minute interview with Ruben talking about 'inner-nesh-nal noos' - they soon come knocking with cherries on top, trust me.
RI
I kid you not. it's most irritating. But I'm glad we're not rising to it and trying to outbid them.
When guests come back to us and say we can't do you because SN are offering cash for 'an exclusive appearance', we say good luck to you.
Some (especially those with a commercial agenda) realise that the best they are going to get is 14,000 viewers and and 3 minute interview with Ruben talking about 'inner-nesh-nal noos' - they soon come knocking with cherries on top, trust me.
**** OFF SS BBC
theblokewhatwritesthenews posted:
Delenn posted:
Really? Are you joking? I had no idea.
I kid you not. it's most irritating. But I'm glad we're not rising to it and trying to outbid them.
When guests come back to us and say we can't do you because SN are offering cash for 'an exclusive appearance', we say good luck to you.
Some (especially those with a commercial agenda) realise that the best they are going to get is 14,000 viewers and and 3 minute interview with Ruben talking about 'inner-nesh-nal noos' - they soon come knocking with cherries on top, trust me.
**** OFF SS BBC
MA
Moz, what an uttery, utterly imbecilic comparison. Has it not entered your thick skull THAT A SUICIDE BOMBER BLEW HIMSELF UP METRES AWAY FROM HER? How does this compare to a doctor seeing someone collapse? Has it not occured to you that she may have needed time before she went on air? To get over shock? To help the injured? To check friends were allright? In your sad little world, a news channel may have been the priority. In the real world, it wouldn't be. And to top off the galaxies of stupidity, you suggest reporters in this region put the story before their safety. What complete nonsense. Perhaps, in your eyes, she should be fired for not running up to the bomber and asking for an interview. If they didn't put safety as a number one priority, she'd be long dead, along with everyone else who covers Iraq.
As I said, God almighty. Get out more!
As I said, God almighty. Get out more!
HA
harshy
Founding member
Well Sunrise does need to go back to the old format of 45 minute news and 15 min fluff, they don't even do business news from Bloomberg any more 
The strange thing is, Sky's operation overnight is not bad at all, they actually are meant to be doing what they are suppose to be during during the day and that's giving us the important news with analysis, the ATV shows need to be reduced to the half hour I think, and James Rubin is a good analyser, but simply not cut out to present, he looks stiff and very uncomfortable looking at the camera.
The strange thing is, Sky's operation overnight is not bad at all, they actually are meant to be doing what they are suppose to be during during the day and that's giving us the important news with analysis, the ATV shows need to be reduced to the half hour I think, and James Rubin is a good analyser, but simply not cut out to present, he looks stiff and very uncomfortable looking at the camera.
CA
I kid you not. it's most irritating. But I'm glad we're not rising to it and trying to outbid them.
When guests come back to us and say we can't do you because SN are offering cash for 'an exclusive appearance', we say good luck to you.
Some (especially those with a commercial agenda) realise that the best they are going to get is 14,000 viewers and and 3 minute interview with Ruben talking about 'inner-nesh-nal noos' - they soon come knocking with cherries on top, trust me.
Right, so working from what you've said before, I'm guessing that you work for Channel 4. Can't see Five taking Sky off their cctv service, you don't work for the BBC, ITV bosses saying ''News 24 is where the real journalism happens'' would kind of be a kick in the (few remaining) teeth for their own service, so by deduction it's Four. Do tell me if I'm wrong.
You are, of course, forgetting Sky's international viewers, which probably take it higher than Channel 4 every day. But still.
So assuming you are at Four, you're saying they've taken Sky off. Find it hard to believe, frankly. The idea that they are no longer a breaking news service is remarkably stupid - indeed, watching a few minutes ago I saw they were about ten minutes ahead on a statement from that Witchalls woman.
No offence to your bosses, but if they genuinely believe that Sky have stopped covering breaking news then they shouldn't really be in the business.
theblokewhatwritesthenews posted:
Delenn posted:
Really? Are you joking? I had no idea.
I kid you not. it's most irritating. But I'm glad we're not rising to it and trying to outbid them.
When guests come back to us and say we can't do you because SN are offering cash for 'an exclusive appearance', we say good luck to you.
Some (especially those with a commercial agenda) realise that the best they are going to get is 14,000 viewers and and 3 minute interview with Ruben talking about 'inner-nesh-nal noos' - they soon come knocking with cherries on top, trust me.
Right, so working from what you've said before, I'm guessing that you work for Channel 4. Can't see Five taking Sky off their cctv service, you don't work for the BBC, ITV bosses saying ''News 24 is where the real journalism happens'' would kind of be a kick in the (few remaining) teeth for their own service, so by deduction it's Four. Do tell me if I'm wrong.
You are, of course, forgetting Sky's international viewers, which probably take it higher than Channel 4 every day. But still.
So assuming you are at Four, you're saying they've taken Sky off. Find it hard to believe, frankly. The idea that they are no longer a breaking news service is remarkably stupid - indeed, watching a few minutes ago I saw they were about ten minutes ahead on a statement from that Witchalls woman.
No offence to your bosses, but if they genuinely believe that Sky have stopped covering breaking news then they shouldn't really be in the business.