WI
william
Founding member
But anyway, Digital Spy yesterday
http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/displayarticle.php?id=4385
One of the new four screens, 'live feed of the newsroom/gallery' - newsroom we'd already discussed , but not the gallery!!
This'll be fascinating to watch if true, but surely this absolute madness on Sky's part?!!!
Why the hell you would want to allow the public and every other broadcaster access to a 24 hour feed of what's going on in your gallery?
Apart from the competition, surely there are all sorts of legal complications, the danger for embargos on news stories to be broken by accident, footage that should not be shown for whatever reason may be visible by accident.
Wouldn't most Sky producers and technical staff be really angry about this?
Like I say, it'll be fascinating to watch, and given the choice between a 24 hour news channel and a feed like this I'd choose the latter anyday, but it really does seem totally insane on Sky's part - what have they got to gain by doing it?
William
http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/displayarticle.php?id=4385
One of the new four screens, 'live feed of the newsroom/gallery' - newsroom we'd already discussed , but not the gallery!!
This'll be fascinating to watch if true, but surely this absolute madness on Sky's part?!!!
Why the hell you would want to allow the public and every other broadcaster access to a 24 hour feed of what's going on in your gallery?
Apart from the competition, surely there are all sorts of legal complications, the danger for embargos on news stories to be broken by accident, footage that should not be shown for whatever reason may be visible by accident.
Wouldn't most Sky producers and technical staff be really angry about this?
Like I say, it'll be fascinating to watch, and given the choice between a 24 hour news channel and a feed like this I'd choose the latter anyday, but it really does seem totally insane on Sky's part - what have they got to gain by doing it?
William