Sky News: Presentation Discussion

Sky News with Lorna Dunkley at 2pm is at the main desk

If the 'Sunrise' name can remain I don't see why 'Live at Five' can't...if indeed it does go. As has already been stated, what harm can a twenty-two year old brand, like 'Live at Five', possibly do to Sky News? Absolutely nothing.

I know it's early days but this new schedule and set up is just ridiculous. It's only been a few hours and it already seems stale. If it is to continue from the desk I really think they need to make the move back to double headed presentation. It just makes it more varied and allows for that little bit of banter for the less serious stories. Given how successful sunrise is at the moment, Maybe even a sunrise style format for the rest of the day but presented from the desk?

Not sure why they would want to remove any trace of the newswall or standing up presentation from the daytime schedule. It may be gimmicky on some stations but on Sky it adds a sense of energy and differentiates them from the competition. In addition the close head shot on the presenters is very, very bland - they might aswell have a studio like the BBC NC if the only time we are going to see it is on the wide shots at the TOTH. How do these changes today improve the afternoon coverage (2-5pm) in anyway?

The most disappointing aspect is that Sky News have been so good in the last few weeks with their coverage from Libya, Egypt and Japan. There was a real sense of them getting back the energy and the distinct feel that Sky News built its reputation on. Obviously presenting from a desk all day has no impact on the quality of the journalism, which as I say has been very good in recent weeks, but presentation wise it is a big step backwards.

Taking the business bulletins as an example, in recent months they have made great use of the newswall for these updates with the jib camera swinging all over the place. The newswall was very effective in illustrating the markets and other business data. They used the jib effectively, floating it from the island to the newswall - allowing the presenter and the business reporter to interact. Now it is just another down the line affair, although admittedly there is the possibility that Joel Hills is just in the Gherkin for today.

As it is there is zero interaction and zero personality on display. I don't have any major issue with the name changes (except Live at 5's demise) but the presentation changes are bizarre.

Edit: In addition while I like the gallery backdrop, it seems way to dark to use at 9am in the morning for The Live Desk (i.e 'Sky News with Charlotte Hawkins'). Surely they would want a bit of continuity between Sunrise and The Live Desk considering Charlotte's involvement?

'Live at Five with Jeremy' will need to change his name to 'Sky News at Five with Jeremy' now, won't he?

I've never liked Afternoon Live at the desk. It seems to lose a lot of the pace sitting down, whilst when the presenter is on the Island, they talk to people through the Newswall split-screen and talk about a major headline with graphics behind them. It just seems more like a standard news-wrap. I'd like to hope that this is being trialled, but the fact that the day of the Royal Wedding is even billed as 'Sky News at Five with Jeremy Thompson' makes me lose hope.

another round of cost cutting? I dread to think how much the Libya and Japan coverage took out of their budget.

I wonder what Sky News executives have in their tea at the moment? This is farcical. The reason people tuned into Sky News and not BBC News 24 was because they didn't just sit down and read the news 99% of the time. Shows such as The Live Desk, Saturday Live, Afternoon Live and Live at Five were praised because they demonstrated the uniqueness of Sky News schedule. I have no problem with Sky implementing these changes on SNT, NSW or NaT because these shows already have this presentation format already.

I don't see how not presenting from the Island would detract from programming or budgeting. There are other ways Sky could make cutbacks if they needed to save money. They could sell there Gherkin studio, have one Washington Correspondent instead of three, they could cutback on reporters (eg theres no need for two correspondent in Northern Ireland or Scotland...one would suffice), they could cutback on presenters, they could get their sports coverage from SSN during Sportsline and SNT, NSW (however this one should be last resort). Implementing these changes instead of the stringent ones they have opted for would ensure quality news coverage rather than hour after hour of the gallery backdrop and the same old drab.

Im sure viewing figures will suffer as a result of the changes Sky are bringing in which is only going to affect Sky further because advertising revenues will fall as a result. In brining in these changes Sky News are happy to be satisfied with playing second fiddle to BBC News. They no longer will offer something different like Afternoon Live or The Live Desk which was what differentiated Sky. This is a major setback and im sure many of the presenters will not be happy with this new format. I can't imagine Kay Burley will want to present hour after hour from the main desk or Jeremy Thompson will lose his Live at Five slogan (I'm particularly bitter over that one!).

and also sportsline won´t be presented from the isle anymore

Can someone please explain to me why this post has got me a warning because it was "diverting from the natural flow of the topic" when the programme from today is now called Sky News with Lorna Dunkley and was presented from the main desk instead of the island as Afternoon Live used to be at the same time of day

I will probably get banned now for "diverting from the natural flow of the topic" so before I do I don't like the afternoon programme at the main desk as said above it feels less pacy, So now we are stuck with hour after hour of Sky News which I'm finidng boring to watch today, Why have that nice newswall and only use it for 5 seconds at the top of each hour?

I still don't like the weather without a presenter and I do like the business being presented from the newswall, The new Sky News at 9 is good but they should let Martin Stanford do more than the updates during Jeff Randall Live and the 8-9pm hour

Also today the headlines at the start of the programme seem to only be taking 40ish seconds instead of the usual minute but that might just be today rather than something new

Isn't this showing how Sky News want to throw money down the drain? Think of the cost it entailed to install the (now missing) Island, and other pieces of equipment - only for them to be removed after a years use AGAIN. Sky News seem to have been slipping into what BBC News used to do which is fiddle with their studio constantly!

The channel is just as stale as the BBC News channel and I have to ask why? Will we see the BBC News channel now standing up as a reversal - perhaps not.

I think the factors to the presentation/studio revamp are these:

:: BBC do everything from the desk, although Sky are 'News channel of the Year', BBC NC have the viewers - maybe their on a 'lets try and copy them' (without it being double headed), but will turn out to be an epic fail for the younger audience that Sky News attacted.

:: Cost cutting - although I'm sure cutbacks could have been acted upon elsewhere... although Sky News does/did operate at a loss to produce the dynamic presentation they did (or so I was told).

- Why have the business from the Gherkin and not the studio - surely this is expensive in staffing and other areas.

:: The selling of the channel from News Corp. Maybe this is part of the restructuring from some new management?

It's A big shame, I somehow doubt Sky News will be news channel of the year this time - next year.

As much as I find Afternoon Live slightly frustrating when Kay Burley is presenting it, it was a lot better from the island than the news desk. As others have said, the entire schedule is now very bland and there's very little differentiating each programme - after Sunrise ends, all there is now is just hours of repetition with a presenter sitting at a desk.
Considering how many people here have called for more movement and fluid, flowing programmes, Sky seem to have gone in completely the opposite direction to what people wanted to see.

way OTT. this is a channel already a distant second to BBC News which most people have on mute in a gym/office during the day. won't make an iota of difference to ratings because those outside this forum won't notice any difference.