Sky News - better or worse now?

I know there's another thread going, but OVERALL do people think that Sky News is worse or better or the same since it's relaunch?

(If Asa thinks this is better as part of the original thread, then can it be edited to include this and can we all vote again)

Personally I think with this new studio it has the potential to be much better now, however, I haven't seen much change in terms of content as yet.

Nevertheless, with its new potential,I have voted better.

Voted worse.

Like Dave's said the studio has protential but until the content issues can be "sorted" (Cocky accent there) then I've a problem with it.

That and James Rubbin is utterly dreadful, never seen anything like it in my life. Makes Steven Cole look modest .

Anyway, we'll see how thing go in a few weeks.

Yes, 'Jamie' as Julie likes to call him is dreadful, not liking him much. was he given proper training before sitting in the chair, or just put their based on what he knows and used to do?

I find every hour is like the same as the previous hour (in the daytime), they may as well record 1 hour and play it for the rest of the day. The way they deal with 4:3 footage is quite good, looks as if it was 16:9.

You mean they keep getting their aspect ratios and ARCs wrong and squishing and squashing pictures all over the place? Hmm. A bit more practice required for Sky News yet.

I think it's fabulous.

"Live from the Sky news centre this is Chav News"

Pardon 'Chav News'?

I thought that was the ITV NC.

How can you say SKY news is 'chav news', what do you watch then?
Bet its BBC News 24, oh how last century!

Much better than watching Murdochs right wing facist view of the world - I prefere to get the most unbiased news available rather than his American rules the world rubbish. Sky news is for chavs and Sun readers - if it is possible to read the Sun.

Don't be so ignorant. Sky News cannot be biased because of regualtions in this country forbidding it. Therefore they have to be impartial. Perhaps you are confused, it seems like you have been watching Fox News.

Are you inferring all the people who awarded Sky News as news channel of the year for 4 years running as chavs, because you would be inferring that a large portion of the public are chavs, doubt they'll too pleased about that.

By the way, perhaps you don't realise that Murdoch is not American, but Australian.

Before you discuss ignorance you may want to check your facts. Rupert Murdoch is American. No foreigners are allowed to own American news organisations. He was born an Aussie but because he wanted to get his hands on more money he applied to be a Yank and because he was rich he got it.
The only properly accountable news channel in this country is the BBC and they self regulate. Unlike the old IBA, Ofcom will not investigate editorial policy unless there is a serious number of complaints and then they avoid challanging editorial decisions - they usually fudge it as they are a weak government department. This recently came to light in the Margaret Hassan case.
Who gave SKY News news channel of the year? did you vote did you get the oppertunity? Are you on the select Board of the Royal Television Society?
Sky News like News corporations papers are run by the Murdoch dynasty - James in CEO of British Sky Broadcasting and he does daddys bidding - for now anyway.
As for the demographic make up of Blairs Britian I will leave that to the trakkie wearing fake Burberry set which seem to run the country at the present time.