I wonder if Andrew Wilson will be heading back to the studio now as well? I'd imagine Live at Five was due to be on location as well but they might be having a re-think after that.
He'll be in Westminster somewhere. A decision may be made that he may not be as heckleable (good word). Police may also have moved the hecklers along.
To be fair, I don't think Sky News has been horrendously biased one way or the other throughout the campaign. Their regular news coverage, Adam Boulton's analysis, and the commentary from the rest of the political team is generally very impartial.
However, the problem for them is two fold: -
1 - There's a perception that Sky = Murdoch & Murdoch = Tory. Anything they do is framed in that context.
2 - They don't help themselves with people like Jeff Randall, Kay Burley, and interviewing Nick Ferrari and James Whale all the time. In addition, articles like this one
... seem to reinforce the point people make. There's nothing inherently wrong with the article, but is now really the time to be publishing it? It sounds like the editor of the Times/Sun saying 'write me something negative about PR!'
The results of one poll (commissioned by the Sun, Sky News, and paid for by Rupert Murdoch) comes through, and Kay Burley goes to the politicians, and says "Well your/their guy won, what have you to say for yourself..."
Jeff Randall constantly saying the Markets go down when the Tories don't look like they are winning, is there a proven correlation, or is it just implied by Sky?
Steve Dixon reviewing the papers with a Tory supporter and a LibDem/hung parliament supporter, and siding with the Tory supporter to try to rubbish her views and opinions. Is that fair and balanced?
To be fair, I don't think Sky News has been horrendously biased one way or the other throughout the campaign. Their regular news coverage, Adam Boulton's analysis, and the commentary from the rest of the political team is generally very impartial. ...
... seem to reinforce the point people make. There's nothing inherently wrong with the article, but is now really the time to be publishing it? It sounds like the editor of the Times/Sun saying 'write me something negative about PR!'
I would not say its an overt bias, but there are editoral concerns, and it seems subvertive in its choice of guests, leaning towards the Conservatives, not even leaning to the right wing, just Pro Tory.
nok32uk posted:
Hear hear. Just look at mdta's twitter
You can rest assure, I will be returning to normal tweeting when the government has settled into place. I just want to do my small part in bringing in a coallition where the majority of voters are counted for. 36% of voters when for the Tories, leaving a majority of 64% who didn't...
The results of one poll (commissioned by the Sun, Sky News, and paid for by Rupert Murdoch) comes through, and Kay Burley goes to the politicians, and says "Well your/their guy won, what have you to say for yourself..."
Jeff Randall constantly saying the Markets go down when the Tories don't look like they are winning, is there a proven correlation, or is it just implied by Sky?
Steve Dixon reviewing the papers with a Tory supporter and a LibDem/hung parliament supporter, and siding with the Tory supporter to try to rubbish her views and opinions. Is that fair and balanced?
1. That's her job.
2. Randall is pro-Tory but he's the only on-air Sky News personality I can think of that is evident.
3. I have never seen any indication of political leanings from Dixon.
Her job is to question all sides of the argument with equal vigour, not to go hard on one side and not the other!
2. Randall is pro-Tory but he's the only on-air Sky News personality I can think of that is evident.
And throughout the campaign he has been in a high profile position, and being the face of economic coverage, there should be someone who is politically neutral!
3. I have never seen any indication of political leanings from Dixon.
Maybe not, but I called out one moment I got angry at the way he was acting, during the election campaign, with the 11:30pm Press Preview
Her job is to question all sides of the argument with equal vigour, not to go hard on one side and not the other!
Agreed but I have never thought that she goes soft on the Tories and hard on Labour. If anything, given her friendships with people in Westminster, I'd have said it was the other way round. In the instance you're quoting, from the leaders' debate coverage, she questioned the Tories afterwards on other issues. The nature of the beast is that it will always look like the media is pro-opposition; the government deserves tougher questions because they're the ones who run the country. The media will soon be harranguing David Cameron over every twist and turn.
