CA
As a rule News 24 reports political stories quicker than their rivals if they are leaked reports - usually are - to the BBC. It wouldn't surprise me if the news was leaked to the BBC before being officially announced.
This happened the other day with the Omagh bombing report, that's not yet been released.
Information in the report was leaked to the BBC and reported at exactly 5pm, presumably there was an embargo on the information. It was, however, picked up 2 minutes after the BBC first reported it, by Sky. Sky then went on to organise a live to Belfast faster than the Beeb - which is quite surprising really, considering the BBC had actually been given time to prepare for it! I think the BBC were sited as the source when the news was broken on Sky. The BBC don't tend to do that when the shoe is on the other foot and Sky have a leaked report.
There have been examples of this when Sky has had information leaked to them. Take the annoucement of Camelot holding on to the lottery franchise. All of the media were outside Lottery HQ, and the news was leaked to Sky who went on to report it about 5 minutes before the decision was announced to the rest of the media.
Anyway, News 24. Well you all know how dearly I love this channel, no seriously, it's not bad.
I'm prepared to be little bit of a diplomat here - can you tell I've had a good day? - and say that the BBC are not doing badly.
Viewing figures have increased dramatically - and justifiably - since the Us have started to itch their rash of terrorism. Sky's have obviously increased too and it's still technically the more popular channel.
The BBC can not make as much of an effort with News 24 as BSkyB can with Sky News. For starters the BBC haven't got a multi-billionaire businessman to bail them out everytime war breaks out, Sky have. The BBC are also accountable to the public. Spending how much BSkyB pump into Sky News each year on BBC News 24 would cause a serious backlash against the BBC.
News 24 will not be shut down because it does - whether you find it boring or not - provide a very worthy public service, and that is, after all, the BBC's remit.
No, I don't like it when there's an event of particular national importance, there are only a few occasions when I can think of events that I have watched on News 24 because Sky has been dreadful. I do find it boring most of the time, it does need more life and a little less smugness about it. It needs to be seen as vital, not 'there', it should not be second to BBC World.
The BBC will always have the problem that it's too big. Sky are lucky, they have one outlet and one outlet alone to provide news for, and so reports can be filed quickly and lives can take place faster than their rivals - usually. The BBC have the problem that there's a huge filtration system before someone can get to air. If it's a BBC Radio reporter they have to go on regional, national and possibly international radio before going on TV, if the BBC Radio reporter is the only person there then therein lies your problem.
It does need to be more interesting, a bit more life etc. But the BBC produces some truely excellent reports, and in all fairness so do Sky.
However, in recent years I think the BBC has lost too much of its talent. A lot of reporters have lefty for the likes of The Independent and The Guardian and that's a great shame because half of them are bloody useless at writing. Polly Toynbee is the prime example of this, I can't stand her writing, I think she's irritatingly patronising, but have a look at her report (on BBC News Online) from 1993, when the Bulger killers were released. She surely has to be the best social affairs editor the broadcasting industry has ever seen. It's just a shame she's been lost to The Guardian.
Contrast Toynbee's report to the sort of report you get today. There is - whether you notice it or not - a large difference.
Toynbee's report is available here: http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/uk/newsid_1394000/1394595.stm
Look near to the bottom of the page.
News 24 do nurture talent, look at Sian Williams and Montague if you want some proof. A once unheard of News 24 presenter is now set to be fronting the Today programme, that's not bad going if you ask me. But then again Sky breeds loyalty, it's presenters either die or retire, very few of them defect. It still has the largest amount of original launch presenters of any major news channel of its age.
There will always be this comparison between the two, I'm the worst offender for making comparisons, but News 24 is The Independent of the 24 hour news channel world, it has - as I am continually reminded about The Inde, despite the fact that I read it every day - 'Limited Resources'.
This happened the other day with the Omagh bombing report, that's not yet been released.
Information in the report was leaked to the BBC and reported at exactly 5pm, presumably there was an embargo on the information. It was, however, picked up 2 minutes after the BBC first reported it, by Sky. Sky then went on to organise a live to Belfast faster than the Beeb - which is quite surprising really, considering the BBC had actually been given time to prepare for it! I think the BBC were sited as the source when the news was broken on Sky. The BBC don't tend to do that when the shoe is on the other foot and Sky have a leaked report.
There have been examples of this when Sky has had information leaked to them. Take the annoucement of Camelot holding on to the lottery franchise. All of the media were outside Lottery HQ, and the news was leaked to Sky who went on to report it about 5 minutes before the decision was announced to the rest of the media.
Anyway, News 24. Well you all know how dearly I love this channel, no seriously, it's not bad.
I'm prepared to be little bit of a diplomat here - can you tell I've had a good day? - and say that the BBC are not doing badly.
Viewing figures have increased dramatically - and justifiably - since the Us have started to itch their rash of terrorism. Sky's have obviously increased too and it's still technically the more popular channel.
The BBC can not make as much of an effort with News 24 as BSkyB can with Sky News. For starters the BBC haven't got a multi-billionaire businessman to bail them out everytime war breaks out, Sky have. The BBC are also accountable to the public. Spending how much BSkyB pump into Sky News each year on BBC News 24 would cause a serious backlash against the BBC.
News 24 will not be shut down because it does - whether you find it boring or not - provide a very worthy public service, and that is, after all, the BBC's remit.
No, I don't like it when there's an event of particular national importance, there are only a few occasions when I can think of events that I have watched on News 24 because Sky has been dreadful. I do find it boring most of the time, it does need more life and a little less smugness about it. It needs to be seen as vital, not 'there', it should not be second to BBC World.
The BBC will always have the problem that it's too big. Sky are lucky, they have one outlet and one outlet alone to provide news for, and so reports can be filed quickly and lives can take place faster than their rivals - usually. The BBC have the problem that there's a huge filtration system before someone can get to air. If it's a BBC Radio reporter they have to go on regional, national and possibly international radio before going on TV, if the BBC Radio reporter is the only person there then therein lies your problem.
It does need to be more interesting, a bit more life etc. But the BBC produces some truely excellent reports, and in all fairness so do Sky.
However, in recent years I think the BBC has lost too much of its talent. A lot of reporters have lefty for the likes of The Independent and The Guardian and that's a great shame because half of them are bloody useless at writing. Polly Toynbee is the prime example of this, I can't stand her writing, I think she's irritatingly patronising, but have a look at her report (on BBC News Online) from 1993, when the Bulger killers were released. She surely has to be the best social affairs editor the broadcasting industry has ever seen. It's just a shame she's been lost to The Guardian.
Contrast Toynbee's report to the sort of report you get today. There is - whether you notice it or not - a large difference.
Toynbee's report is available here: http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/uk/newsid_1394000/1394595.stm
Look near to the bottom of the page.
News 24 do nurture talent, look at Sian Williams and Montague if you want some proof. A once unheard of News 24 presenter is now set to be fronting the Today programme, that's not bad going if you ask me. But then again Sky breeds loyalty, it's presenters either die or retire, very few of them defect. It still has the largest amount of original launch presenters of any major news channel of its age.
There will always be this comparison between the two, I'm the worst offender for making comparisons, but News 24 is The Independent of the 24 hour news channel world, it has - as I am continually reminded about The Inde, despite the fact that I read it every day - 'Limited Resources'.