Well as a self confessed News 24 fan, I equally enjoy seeing Cheshirec getting all excited about the abysmally poor (but soon to relaunch with a whole new reporting style, because the old style was that good) Sky News. Very entertaining (unlike Sky News).
And Scottie is perhaps the most amusing thing on the radio, have you ever listened to him?
If Sky News was so bad then people would actually watch News24, which they don't, well there is you, and a couple more.
Sky News is a hell of a lot more amusing than News24, at least the presenters appear to have a personality!
Have you actually ever seen Sky News? You seem to know very little about it.
SA
sat101
It is true, the sky news presenters do seem to have more of a laugh than the rather ridgid news 24 lot, although i still think they are both excellent news channels.
Have I listened to Scottie McClue, well not usually for more than 2 minutes, because his show is drivel. I agree with you about James Whale, he is in a different league, but McClue is so notoriously awful it beggers belief, he's been sacked from more stations I can remember for being SO BAD. Dinky Doo indeed.
And yes I have watched Sky News, but when I want my news, I usually turn to News 24.
Then explain why Scottie has the top grossing evening talk show in the UK? aha! you cannot.
Yes he did talk a total pile of crap, but that was what was so funny about it, getting all the nuts phoning in.
I have the CD and will be putting some MP3's up for your listening pleasure!
I am off now, to eat something, and watch Live At Five, incidentally, I don't remember News24 having a programme like Live at Five.... just the normal single anchor stuff on News24, ahh well...
No, according to RAJAR figures when Scottie was on Century 105 he had the largest audience figure of an evening talk show.
James Whale does not qualify, as he is in the national category, Scottie was only local.
Oh yes, the reporting style is to change, it will be more of a world news from a UK style, type thing, and it will be much faster than current broadcasts, even better with breaking news etc.
But how exactly can SKY News be quicker bringing 'Breaking News' than it is at the moment? Are they planning hooking up with more broadcasters around the world for OBs? Less recorded shows? More money being poured into the channel? Reporters on speed?!
Sorry, Asa, I was given a job for the way I debate and have frank views and am more than willing to express them without being bothered whether or not I hurt of offend people in anyway.
And I have to tell you it does get rather boring aronud here sometimes, when all I see when I look at the forum is BBC Something BBC Nothing BBC Everything, it does rather get on my nerves.
I would think my employer would be over the moon that I took that sort of line with the people on this forum, all the better for sparking off debates, and it has worked well, evidently.
As far as I know Asa, the only presenters that are on drugs are those at the BBC, who work for childrens programmes, but don't quote me on that (although it is doubtless someone will).
I think they are linking up more strongly with the AP, using their newsrooms, and I said 'Better' with breaking news, not faster, I doubt they could get any faster, but more correspondents on hand.
As I said before, Sky News is apparently being broken off from BSkyB, hence will have direct funding from News Corp.
And anyway, at least Sky News doesn't have a recorded show during peak time eh?