CA
I'm not. I'm just concerned as to a) why you'd use it, and b) how you know it.
Have a look back at onetrickpony's posts over the thread and I think even you (whoever you are) would be capable of agreeing that his contributions have been, with no exceptions, atrociously written, and that he should either learn how to write coherently or stop posting.
Have a look back at onetrickpony's posts over the thread and I think even you (whoever you are) would be capable of agreeing that his contributions have been, with no exceptions, atrociously written, and that he should either learn how to write coherently or stop posting.
JA
I know it because I've seen you called Tom over on Metropol.
And I'm James Hall.
Besides which, he may have an atrocious writing style and quite a few of his posts may be pointless, but as far as I could tell that post was fine and I understood it. I will agree he needs to smarten up his act though.
Just don't jump down his throat that's all. None of the mods seem to give a toss, so if we just ignore these cretins maybe they'll go away?
cat posted:
I'm not. I'm just concerned as to a) why you'd use it, and b) how you know it.
Have a look back at onetrickpony's posts over the thread and I think even you (whoever you are) would be capable of agreeing that his contributions have been, with no exceptions, atrociously written, and that he should either learn how to write coherently or stop posting.
Have a look back at onetrickpony's posts over the thread and I think even you (whoever you are) would be capable of agreeing that his contributions have been, with no exceptions, atrociously written, and that he should either learn how to write coherently or stop posting.
I know it because I've seen you called Tom over on Metropol.
And I'm James Hall.
Besides which, he may have an atrocious writing style and quite a few of his posts may be pointless, but as far as I could tell that post was fine and I understood it. I will agree he needs to smarten up his act though.
Just don't jump down his throat that's all. None of the mods seem to give a toss, so if we just ignore these cretins maybe they'll go away?
CA
Well, I've not paid any attention to you and you're still here, so demonstrably that idea doesn't work.
Joking aside, the mods do not care about anyone who posts on here unless it offends one of them. You're more likely to be banned for attacking the moderators than posting endless sh-te day after day.
As for Metropol, I requested to close my account over there the other day, and I only read it about once a month anyway. It constantly seems to be full of racists and people asking for help with Windows.
James Hall posted:
if we just ignore these cretins maybe they'll go away?
Well, I've not paid any attention to you and you're still here, so demonstrably that idea doesn't work.
Joking aside, the mods do not care about anyone who posts on here unless it offends one of them. You're more likely to be banned for attacking the moderators than posting endless sh-te day after day.
As for Metropol, I requested to close my account over there the other day, and I only read it about once a month anyway. It constantly seems to be full of racists and people asking for help with Windows.
PH
At the moment Five simulcast Sky's Sunrise programme on a saturday and sunday morning, which is presented by Emma Crosby and Steve Gaisford (might not be Emma on a sunday, but that does not matter). On the SKy EPG, it describes the programme as being fronted by Steve Dixon and Paula Fenech. Fair enough with Steve, obviously hadnt been updated, but who the hell is Paula Fenech- does she even exist?!
LO
Paula Middlehurst's maiden name.
phil-g posted:
At the moment Five simulcast Sky's Sunrise programme on a saturday and sunday morning, which is presented by Emma Crosby and Steve Gaisford (might not be Emma on a sunday, but that does not matter). On the SKy EPG, it describes the programme as being fronted by Steve Dixon and Paula Fenech. Fair enough with Steve, obviously hadnt been updated, but who the hell is Paula Fenech- does she even exist?!
Paula Middlehurst's maiden name.
ST
Steve
Founding member
Okay, a few weeks in and having watched bits and pieces from all over the new schedule, there's many things that are vastly better than before - Sunrise / Paper Preview / Studio, but there are some major problems.
I don't feel like I'm on top of everything that's happening - before I'd feel I could tune in, find out what was going on, get all the breaking news as it happens. Now they still do breaking news and the news is still there but it's diluted with these longer interviews / the inane chat.
Now I've been watching quite a bit of Sky News Today this afternoon and whilst I like Steve Dixon and Mark Longhurst generally - as a three-some with Ginny Buckley (who really is quite bad - you can tell the instructions going in her ear piece, taking time to be calculated, and then coming out). Don't get me wrong, I know it is immensely difficult - but the old Sky News had vastly more talented people at doing live, breaking news. She may get better, but you do feel she's there because she's easy on the eye.
This afternoon isn't the best on the news agenda front - but there's decent stories. They have two reporters on the school trip death story - yet are going there for 1 minute spots once an hour, no debate on school trips, no more on the story - I feel like I'm not getting the full picture. Also, where's the interviews you would have got on the old Sky News - with experts, analysts, people who know what they're talking about.
SNT on a Friday PM is the worst - why on earth do the picture of the week and walk along the newswall pointing and making silly comments.
It is very different from the morning SNT - I think there they have three genuinely good, competent and intelligent presenters who don't waffle too much, know what they're talking about and can handle breaking news. Plus there seems to be more of the 'old' Sky News Today that was good!
I'm not a fan of the evening schedule - BUT I like the way they're trying something different, and it should be given time to grow. Though maybe not James Rubin... He needs if nothing else a co-presenter who can do breaking/current news.
As for 9-midnight - I like Chris Roberts, though I can see why he's not liked by some. But why Gillian Joseph? She can't ad-lib, she doesn't come across as warm. A perfectly competent newsreader, but again there were far better women in that slot before.
I appreciate that's very long and you're all probably now asleep - but those are my thoughts!
I don't feel like I'm on top of everything that's happening - before I'd feel I could tune in, find out what was going on, get all the breaking news as it happens. Now they still do breaking news and the news is still there but it's diluted with these longer interviews / the inane chat.
Now I've been watching quite a bit of Sky News Today this afternoon and whilst I like Steve Dixon and Mark Longhurst generally - as a three-some with Ginny Buckley (who really is quite bad - you can tell the instructions going in her ear piece, taking time to be calculated, and then coming out). Don't get me wrong, I know it is immensely difficult - but the old Sky News had vastly more talented people at doing live, breaking news. She may get better, but you do feel she's there because she's easy on the eye.
This afternoon isn't the best on the news agenda front - but there's decent stories. They have two reporters on the school trip death story - yet are going there for 1 minute spots once an hour, no debate on school trips, no more on the story - I feel like I'm not getting the full picture. Also, where's the interviews you would have got on the old Sky News - with experts, analysts, people who know what they're talking about.
SNT on a Friday PM is the worst - why on earth do the picture of the week and walk along the newswall pointing and making silly comments.
It is very different from the morning SNT - I think there they have three genuinely good, competent and intelligent presenters who don't waffle too much, know what they're talking about and can handle breaking news. Plus there seems to be more of the 'old' Sky News Today that was good!
I'm not a fan of the evening schedule - BUT I like the way they're trying something different, and it should be given time to grow. Though maybe not James Rubin... He needs if nothing else a co-presenter who can do breaking/current news.
As for 9-midnight - I like Chris Roberts, though I can see why he's not liked by some. But why Gillian Joseph? She can't ad-lib, she doesn't come across as warm. A perfectly competent newsreader, but again there were far better women in that slot before.
I appreciate that's very long and you're all probably now asleep - but those are my thoughts!
JA
Like many on this forum, I eagerly awaited the Sky News Relaunch and decided to give it a couple of weeks before passing judgment. On the whole, I think much of the content has improved (i.e. Sunrise, Sky News Today (morning) and Kay Burley's lunchtime programme). However, I have to agree with all those who find the afternoon programming something of a disappointment.
Whereas the three-presenter format works well on the morning slot (the two Annas and Martin really interact well and present the news in an intelligent and entertaining way, without resorting to innane chatter), I've stopped watching the 2-5pm slot because I do not want to hear gimmicky, innane babble which has very little to do with the news. There is absolutely no chemistry between the three presenters and they seem to think that cracking unfunny jokes will fool the audience (assuming they have any left) into thinking otherwise. What's more, Ginny Buckley has not got any better at reading the autocue since she managed to "kill off" Harold Pinter when all the poor man had done was win the Nobel Prize for Literature. I don't think I've ever seen a presenter look as out-of-place as she does.
I'm not surprised to hear that Sky's audience figures have dropped rapidly since the (expensive) relaunch when this sort of afternoon programming is going out. It's a shame because the 2-5pm slot could be used to cover some interesting topics and raise some real debate in between the breaking news rather than this dreadful sub-standard Hello Magazine type presentation which is just an insult to the audience's intelligence.
Whereas the three-presenter format works well on the morning slot (the two Annas and Martin really interact well and present the news in an intelligent and entertaining way, without resorting to innane chatter), I've stopped watching the 2-5pm slot because I do not want to hear gimmicky, innane babble which has very little to do with the news. There is absolutely no chemistry between the three presenters and they seem to think that cracking unfunny jokes will fool the audience (assuming they have any left) into thinking otherwise. What's more, Ginny Buckley has not got any better at reading the autocue since she managed to "kill off" Harold Pinter when all the poor man had done was win the Nobel Prize for Literature. I don't think I've ever seen a presenter look as out-of-place as she does.
I'm not surprised to hear that Sky's audience figures have dropped rapidly since the (expensive) relaunch when this sort of afternoon programming is going out. It's a shame because the 2-5pm slot could be used to cover some interesting topics and raise some real debate in between the breaking news rather than this dreadful sub-standard Hello Magazine type presentation which is just an insult to the audience's intelligence.
JW
Agree with the comments pertaining to SNT's Afternoon Slot. It is hideous.
The correspondent above hit the nail on the head - the morning edition with Martin, Anna and Jonesie is excellent!!
The correspondent above hit the nail on the head - the morning edition with Martin, Anna and Jonesie is excellent!!
TW
Shame; today you missed Mark having ago about Steve's website, to which there was laughter and stupid comments going into the break.
Jazzabelle posted:
I've stopped watching the 2-5pm slot because I do not want to hear gimmicky, innane babble which has very little to do with the news. There is absolutely no chemistry between the three presenters and they seem to think that cracking unfunny jokes will fool the audience (assuming they have any left) into thinking otherwise.
Shame; today you missed Mark having ago about Steve's website, to which there was laughter and stupid comments going into the break.
:-(
I emailed Media Guardian yesterday over there article about Sky Vs BBC in which they claimed that Nick Robinson BBC broke the news that Blunkett was to resign when infact it was Sky News with Adam Boulton who did first, i sent them a copy of the video which i recorded, and they sent me this email :
Dear Sir,
Thank you for your comments. Please note that we have amended our copy on
this point.
Kind regards,
Media Guardian
http://media.putfile.com/Blunkett-Resigns
Dear Sir,
Thank you for your comments. Please note that we have amended our copy on
this point.
Kind regards,
Media Guardian
http://media.putfile.com/Blunkett-Resigns