Sky News

http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Media/Pix/pictures/2010/5/5/1273067181754/Decision-Time-with-Adam-B-005.jpg

And here lies the hugest advantage of HD news - no safe areas. That looks great, but imagine just how squashed it will be in SD.

Sky seem to be using twitter as part of their election coverage. More additions include:

Chris Roberts : www.twitter.com/chrisrsky
Andrew Wilson: www.twitter.com/andrewwilsonsky

So from tonight Sky will start using the new logo/graphics and go back to the set permanently?

Wonder how that may be adapted for safe areas then. Perhaps it's because we're used to things being framed that way, but I'm not sure I'm liking things going right to the edge of the frame. Yes, long overdue the 4:3 safe area was ditched, but I think 14:9 is a good guide to keeping things relatively tidy and not cramming in everything possible.

Anyway - kinds of reminds me of the football scores - ridiculous really that Sky News is going HD whilst Sky Sports News remains 4:3.

Yeah, I'd agree that 14:9 would look better actually. A little white space at either side would make it easier to read probably, and like you say, fit with what we're used to. I just wish that digital channels like BBC News would shift to 14:9 safe areas..

Looks fantastic in my opinion, nice and simple. Big question I guess is how will the adapt it for SD?

Very unlikely - as Sky boxes don't output 14:9 letterbox - they only do 16:9 letterbox or 4:3 centre cut. If you ditched 4:3 text safe you could end up with all sorts of problems (imagine the "NOT" of "NOT GUILTY" being cropped...)

Anyone know what the "awaiting results" system actually is? Is it a common system across broadcasters?

Looks like Sky are rendering their graphics totally differently for the SD and HD channels - so I guess they can lay out the data totally differently for SD viewers, possibly showing less on-screen at any given time, but cycling differently?

Quite the opposite - there is huge competition between the BBC, ITN and Sky to get results on-screen first - so they all have people at every counts, and totally independent systems.

Historically some broadcasters' reporters have called seats early when the piles of votes have clearly indicated a particular result - but historically some have also got caught out.

I think the BBC usually wait to be absolutely sure - and so are sometimes seen as a bit behind. Personally for elections I don't care quite so much - as there isn't much you can do to change the result!

Yes.

The BBC don't use stringers at counts, which is why their individual constituency results are normally slower to be announced than other broadcasters.