SE
Square Eyes
Founding member
Yes, but the BBC has a duty to provide a service to terrestrial viewers, so the main Budget programme went out on BBC1. So, there would seem little point in duplicating the coverage on BBC News 24. I bet if News 24 took the coverage from BBC1 that you would have said it was limiting choice !! They just can't win as far as you are concerned.
They are playing a different game to Sky. Sky have it easy in comparison.
They are playing a different game to Sky. Sky have it easy in comparison.
CA
Sky certainly do not have it easy.
I want to see News 24 providing its own coverage, FiveLive does that and I would guess Fivelive would not like to be seen as part of the BBC anymore because they have such a fantastic brand.
Sky have had to establish themselves from scratch, News 24 was just bolted onto what is, a huge service. they did not have to create bureau they didn't have to find lots of new people.
Sky have had to create an entire news service in just 12 years, and a fantastic job they have done too! In 12 years they have created a large global network with excellent ability to cover news and winning awards when they are at it.
I think that even if you don't like them you should give them praise for that.
I want to see News 24 providing its own coverage, FiveLive does that and I would guess Fivelive would not like to be seen as part of the BBC anymore because they have such a fantastic brand.
Sky have had to establish themselves from scratch, News 24 was just bolted onto what is, a huge service. they did not have to create bureau they didn't have to find lots of new people.
Sky have had to create an entire news service in just 12 years, and a fantastic job they have done too! In 12 years they have created a large global network with excellent ability to cover news and winning awards when they are at it.
I think that even if you don't like them you should give them praise for that.
SE
Square Eyes
Founding member
Sky do have it easy because they don't have as many people to please or breathing down their necks. Once analogue is switched off Sky and the BBC will be playing the same game, until then the BBC is subject to so much regulation so a comparison just cannot be truthfully made.
BBC1 had to have the coverage, and if News 24 had done their own version I'm sure you would have been at the front of the queue accusing them of wasting licence payers money.
BBC1 had to have the coverage, and if News 24 had done their own version I'm sure you would have been at the front of the queue accusing them of wasting licence payers money.
BB
BBCPrime
I think in news presentation a bit of informality is a 'vital touch'...you know, where the presenters chit-chat for a bit, laugh about the last story or discuss something in front of the camera...it may be to kill a few seconds, but it's actually very pleasant to watch.
I recieve Sky News AND BBC World, and I feel Sky has achieved what has been said above, whilst BBC World is a much more serious 'here is the news, watch it and cry' type presentation.
I recieve Sky News AND BBC World, and I feel Sky has achieved what has been said above, whilst BBC World is a much more serious 'here is the news, watch it and cry' type presentation.
CA
I certainly would not, as I said I like FiveLive being seperate to the rest of the corp.
It doesn't matter, even when things aren't on BBC One they can't organise themselves with breaking news, as my examples have clearly shown.
The BBC have had it easy in creating News 24, they just stuck it onto the main BBC service and there you have it, a 24 hour channel.
Sky have started with nothing at all and yet still managed to batter the hell out of a 75+ year old corporation today!
That's worrying.
It doesn't matter, even when things aren't on BBC One they can't organise themselves with breaking news, as my examples have clearly shown.
The BBC have had it easy in creating News 24, they just stuck it onto the main BBC service and there you have it, a 24 hour channel.
Sky have started with nothing at all and yet still managed to batter the hell out of a 75+ year old corporation today!
That's worrying.
PE
Pete
Founding member
in relation to chesh_rant#1 the BBC simply put a small bit of wording celebrating the fact that they'd won an award.
they naturally were happy about this as they are a relitivly small news channel compared to sky.
and by the way
NEWS 24 | Half hour 4 second ident | Digital channel of the year superimposed.
SKY NEWS (from what i've seen | Just beofre the hour
LIVE NEWS
For 100 million people
IN 40 Countries
FOR OVER 10 years
THIS IS SKY NEWS
come on...
they naturally were happy about this as they are a relitivly small news channel compared to sky.
and by the way
NEWS 24 | Half hour 4 second ident | Digital channel of the year superimposed.
SKY NEWS (from what i've seen | Just beofre the hour
LIVE NEWS
For 100 million people
IN 40 Countries
FOR OVER 10 years
THIS IS SKY NEWS
come on...
CA
Agreed.
News 24 improves so much after 7pm.
The presenters are actually quite funny, they get the weather guy/lady, into the studio and the sports presenter and they do interact and interact well.
Sky used to have the weather presenter in the studio but not any more, which is a shame because the conversations between Francis and other presenters were fantastic.
But get the sports people in the studio, have a laugh and stop being the 6 o'clock news.
I have seen banter on News 24 between the business presenters but it normally isn't very funny, especially when not compared to Sky's.
I think that Sky is probably the only news channel in the world that gets the banter between presenters right. CNN does have a lot of banter but I was listening to CNN the other day and it just isn't very funny.
More humour please!
BBCPrime posted:
I think in news presentation a bit of informality is a 'vital touch'...you know, where the presenters chit-chat for a bit, laugh about the last story or discuss something in front of the camera...it may be to kill a few seconds, but it's actually very pleasant to watch.
I recieve Sky News AND BBC World, and I feel Sky has achieved what has been said above, whilst BBC World is a much more serious 'here is the news, watch it and cry' type presentation.
I recieve Sky News AND BBC World, and I feel Sky has achieved what has been said above, whilst BBC World is a much more serious 'here is the news, watch it and cry' type presentation.
Agreed.
News 24 improves so much after 7pm.
The presenters are actually quite funny, they get the weather guy/lady, into the studio and the sports presenter and they do interact and interact well.
Sky used to have the weather presenter in the studio but not any more, which is a shame because the conversations between Francis and other presenters were fantastic.
But get the sports people in the studio, have a laugh and stop being the 6 o'clock news.
I have seen banter on News 24 between the business presenters but it normally isn't very funny, especially when not compared to Sky's.
I think that Sky is probably the only news channel in the world that gets the banter between presenters right. CNN does have a lot of banter but I was listening to CNN the other day and it just isn't very funny.
More humour please!
CA
It's 80 million people actually and what's wrong with that?
Just because it's saying that isn't promoting the service in any way at all, whereas splashing your awards all over your idents is.
News 24 have had two of these idents now, I expect the Sky News ident may be changed anyway. Which is a shame because I really rather like it.
Hymagumba posted:
in relation to chesh_rant#1 the BBC simply put a small bit of wording celebrating the fact that they'd won an award.
they naturally were happy about this as they are a relitivly small news channel compared to sky.
and by the way
NEWS 24 | Half hour 4 second ident | Digital channel of the year superimposed.
SKY NEWS (from what i've seen | Just beofre the hour
LIVE NEWS
For 100 million people
IN 40 Countries
FOR OVER 10 years
THIS IS SKY NEWS
come on...
they naturally were happy about this as they are a relitivly small news channel compared to sky.
and by the way
NEWS 24 | Half hour 4 second ident | Digital channel of the year superimposed.
SKY NEWS (from what i've seen | Just beofre the hour
LIVE NEWS
For 100 million people
IN 40 Countries
FOR OVER 10 years
THIS IS SKY NEWS
come on...
It's 80 million people actually and what's wrong with that?
Just because it's saying that isn't promoting the service in any way at all, whereas splashing your awards all over your idents is.
News 24 have had two of these idents now, I expect the Sky News ident may be changed anyway. Which is a shame because I really rather like it.
SE
Square Eyes
Founding member
Cheshirec, when you were away from the forum I had a major rant about Sky News, I don't know if you saw it, but if not, I think it's worth repeating. So I've dug it out of the archive, let me know what you think 
Square Eyes - Gold
I hate Sky News, I hate everything about it. I know it is about to relaunch, but at the moment it is dreadful, and presentation wise it's a disaster. So here is my rant.
The music is awful, and not at all fitting to the channel or even a news programme. The attempt at a countdown at the top of the hour is just feeble. It's supposed to be the big build up towards the main headlines however it fails to generate any interest in what is about to arrive, unlike the funky BBC Countdown and dramatic thunder claps.
The screen graphics are dreadful, blocky, imposing and the text is HUGE. The astons don't fit in at all with the look of the channel. What is all that flashing and flickering with logo about at the top of the hour, it looks crap.
The presenters are awful, very 2nd rate. The camera is too close in, I don't want to see some of these people that close up. The female presenters aren't too bad, but the male presenters are the most wooden, dull, uninteresting people I have ever seen.
The weather is shocking, the worst graphics I have seen in my entire life on a weather map, you can't make out at all what they are actually trying to show ! They have endless arrows all over the place, and the weather presenters just don't really care. They clearly have no enthusiasm or interest for what they are presenting, so why should I. Also, Francis Wilson, sort the hair out for gods sake. The weather DOG during the breakfast time is a complete waste of time, the FTSE graphics are blocky and awful.
I hate the way they just fade in and out of the adverts without an ident or anything.
They don't cover nearly as many stories during the hour as BBC News 24, the business reporting is very poor.
The logo is unimaginative, the desk is the worst I have seen in TV News, too small, amateurish, very MFI. The sport presenter just wheels up a chair around an already cramped desk.
The studio is tiny, dark, dingy and depressing. Where as BBC have a large sweeeping desk, in very light, airy surroundings. I know where I'd rather present. They are really in desperate need of this relaunch.
I feel so much better for that.
Square Eyes - Gold
I hate Sky News, I hate everything about it. I know it is about to relaunch, but at the moment it is dreadful, and presentation wise it's a disaster. So here is my rant.
The music is awful, and not at all fitting to the channel or even a news programme. The attempt at a countdown at the top of the hour is just feeble. It's supposed to be the big build up towards the main headlines however it fails to generate any interest in what is about to arrive, unlike the funky BBC Countdown and dramatic thunder claps.
The screen graphics are dreadful, blocky, imposing and the text is HUGE. The astons don't fit in at all with the look of the channel. What is all that flashing and flickering with logo about at the top of the hour, it looks crap.
The presenters are awful, very 2nd rate. The camera is too close in, I don't want to see some of these people that close up. The female presenters aren't too bad, but the male presenters are the most wooden, dull, uninteresting people I have ever seen.
The weather is shocking, the worst graphics I have seen in my entire life on a weather map, you can't make out at all what they are actually trying to show ! They have endless arrows all over the place, and the weather presenters just don't really care. They clearly have no enthusiasm or interest for what they are presenting, so why should I. Also, Francis Wilson, sort the hair out for gods sake. The weather DOG during the breakfast time is a complete waste of time, the FTSE graphics are blocky and awful.
I hate the way they just fade in and out of the adverts without an ident or anything.
They don't cover nearly as many stories during the hour as BBC News 24, the business reporting is very poor.
The logo is unimaginative, the desk is the worst I have seen in TV News, too small, amateurish, very MFI. The sport presenter just wheels up a chair around an already cramped desk.
The studio is tiny, dark, dingy and depressing. Where as BBC have a large sweeeping desk, in very light, airy surroundings. I know where I'd rather present. They are really in desperate need of this relaunch.
I feel so much better for that.
WI
This is perhaps a little unfair...
BBC2 covered the whole thing live, as they always do, and superimposed reminder captions at various points along the way. Then at the end they had the usual round table discussion at Millbank, and OBs from Peter Snow, Sian Williams etc.
News 24 also put most of their normal schedule aside, but showed edited clips of Gordon Brown two or three minutes after they'd happened, and Nick Robinson explained the main points in detail - which I thought was quite an innovative way of doing it.
You did however really have to choose and stick with one or the other, I attempted to channel hop back and forth at the start and it was thoroughly confusing.
News 24 *had* to cover the budget somehow, it was and always is the main news story of the day - and if they had just simulcast BBC2 people would have complained it was a waste of a separate channel.
And BBC parliament showed all the speech and the responses uninterupted (though of course you could argue they are obliged to and someone has to provide a parliamentary channel).
william
Founding member
Quote:
I'll give you another example if you want... the Budget.
One of the biggest news events of the year.
Now BBC Two, Parliament and News 24 were covering it.
But instead of fully taking the budget news 24 just said 'BBC Two has live coverage of the budget' and then just talked about the budget instead of covering what was actually happening. They just cannot be a dedicated news channel if that is the attitude they take.
I do not want to skip about over channels all covering different things, I want one channel covering the budget and then giving detail after it.
One of the biggest news events of the year.
Now BBC Two, Parliament and News 24 were covering it.
But instead of fully taking the budget news 24 just said 'BBC Two has live coverage of the budget' and then just talked about the budget instead of covering what was actually happening. They just cannot be a dedicated news channel if that is the attitude they take.
I do not want to skip about over channels all covering different things, I want one channel covering the budget and then giving detail after it.
This is perhaps a little unfair...
BBC2 covered the whole thing live, as they always do, and superimposed reminder captions at various points along the way. Then at the end they had the usual round table discussion at Millbank, and OBs from Peter Snow, Sian Williams etc.
News 24 also put most of their normal schedule aside, but showed edited clips of Gordon Brown two or three minutes after they'd happened, and Nick Robinson explained the main points in detail - which I thought was quite an innovative way of doing it.
You did however really have to choose and stick with one or the other, I attempted to channel hop back and forth at the start and it was thoroughly confusing.
News 24 *had* to cover the budget somehow, it was and always is the main news story of the day - and if they had just simulcast BBC2 people would have complained it was a waste of a separate channel.
And BBC parliament showed all the speech and the responses uninterupted (though of course you could argue they are obliged to and someone has to provide a parliamentary channel).
CA
*Hits Square Eyes*
I would just say that you are comparing what is a temporary service, Sky News, to a fully finished service, News 24.
Let us just make the comparisons after September 3rd!
The Budget coverage should have been a News 24 production, from their studios.
It should have gone out on BBC Two and News 24.
The BBC could make such better use of News 24. It's good how they are using it for news reports. Previous to 1997 we would never have had any Archer trial coverage on BBC One, but because News 24 has launched it has allowed the BBC to do that.
They need to be more risky with News 24, Sky have a good reputation and they take risks, just go for it!!
I would just say that you are comparing what is a temporary service, Sky News, to a fully finished service, News 24.
Let us just make the comparisons after September 3rd!
The Budget coverage should have been a News 24 production, from their studios.
It should have gone out on BBC Two and News 24.
The BBC could make such better use of News 24. It's good how they are using it for news reports. Previous to 1997 we would never have had any Archer trial coverage on BBC One, but because News 24 has launched it has allowed the BBC to do that.
They need to be more risky with News 24, Sky have a good reputation and they take risks, just go for it!!