Sky News - Printable Version
+- Pres Café (https://pres.cafe)
+-- Forum: Pres Café TV and Radio Forums (https://pres.cafe/forumdisplay.php?fid=1)
+--- Forum: News and Sport Presentation (https://pres.cafe/forumdisplay.php?fid=3)
+--- Thread: Sky News (/showthread.php?tid=73)
+- Pres Café (https://pres.cafe)
+-- Forum: Pres Café TV and Radio Forums (https://pres.cafe/forumdisplay.php?fid=1)
+--- Forum: News and Sport Presentation (https://pres.cafe/forumdisplay.php?fid=3)
+--- Thread: Sky News (/showthread.php?tid=73)
Pages:
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
RE: Sky News - Stockland Hillman - 16-01-2024
(16-01-2024, 12:17 PM)harshy Wrote: Sky are leaping ahead, whilst the bbc aren’t improving anything it’s a no contest at the moment, Sky News is improving getting the right people, trying to improve their presentation, the bbc news channel is stuffed really budget wise to make any improvements.
From a content and production perspective, Sky is streets ahead of the current BBC offer
However its worth noting that Sky News runs a full newsgathing, online and broadcast service, including distribution costs for apparently LESS than BBC News channel alone.
It's reported at start of Comcasts legal undertaking to fund Sky News it was circa £90m a year costs (15m loss after sales) that's increased by CPIH every year.
Also worth noting that since the switch to Ross Overdrive, Sky News runs a very efficient production workflow on fewer involved staff than the BBC channel, even now.
So yes budget plays a role, but so does the talent to manage and work effectively, use skilled staff, and a having a clear strategy.
I'm not a fan of the editorial choices and approach of Sky News - but it is very well crafted, with excellent international news.
RE: Sky News - Lec_Ver16 - 16-01-2024
Don´t get me wrong, but Sky News doesnt´t have regional news and neither the production value of BBC One´s buleltins or Newsnight, or the international presence with correspondents that BBC News has. So costs are obviously less than the BBC.
Is Sky News more interesting on a presentation level? Yes, but i think that it always has been the case since the start. Can BBC News do better with the budget that they have now? Totally too. The offering since the merger has been mediocre at best.
RE: Sky News - Stockland Hillman - 16-01-2024
(16-01-2024, 04:41 PM)Lec_Ver16 Wrote: Don´t get me wrong, but Sky News doesnt´t have regional news and neither the production value of BBC One´s buleltins or Newsnight, or the international presence with correspondents that BBC News has. So costs are obviously less than the BBC.
Is Sky News more interesting on a presentation level? Yes, but i think that it always has been the case since the start. Can BBC News do better with the budget that they have now? Totally too. The offering since the merger has been mediocre at best.
You misunderstand. The Sky cost is for the entire news organisation and distribution. The BBC cost I mention is higher is JUST the news channel, not including network news, regional news, radio news, online, distribution etc.
You are correct to point out that the BBC has a vast operation, so the news channel itself should be a much deaper and more polished experience than Sky News
RE: Sky News - Brekkie - 16-01-2024
And Sky may not have a regional operation or as many foreign correspondents but they rarely come across as lacking in those areas when it matters. Nowadays the BBC News Channel is coming across as lacking on a daily basis.
P.S. What figure to you have for the news channel budget, and does that include the BBC World contribution?
RE: Sky News - TMD_24 - 17-01-2024
Jayne Secker is coming from the temporary Westminster set today for PMQs.
RE: Sky News - DTV - 17-01-2024
(16-01-2024, 01:09 PM)Stockland Hillman Wrote: However its worth noting that Sky News runs a full newsgathing, online and broadcast service, including distribution costs for apparently LESS than BBC News channel alone.It's definitely right to say that Sky News is better pretty much across the board than the BBC News channel these days - being more interesting in content, formats and presentation, as well as at least having a clear sense of what it is trying to do and who it is trying to serve.
It's reported at start of Comcasts legal undertaking to fund Sky News it was circa £90m a year costs (15m loss after sales) that's increased by CPIH every year.
That said, not sure it's right to say that Sky News costs less than the BBC News channel alone. As you say, Sky News is around £90-100m; based on the piecemeal public data, BBC News channel is somewhere around £50-70m - both BBC channels were in that region before, but UK contributions were cut by about 50% and World weren't bringing in as much advertising towards the end as they had done previously, so would guess that World contributions to the budget are down too. It could be a bit higher than that ballpark, but can't see it adding up to Sky levels.
But as I've said previously, I'm not sure that all the bizarre choices around the new channel are budget related - the presentation and format seems to be (at least in part) out of a deliberate (and misguided) attempt to ape Outside Source and The Context across the day.
RE: Sky News - Neon Pig - 17-01-2024
They also appear to have changed the location in the main newsroom that they film from.
RE: Sky News - interestednovice - 17-01-2024
(17-01-2024, 01:28 PM)DTV Wrote: It's definitely right to say that Sky News is better pretty much across the board than the BBC News channel these days - being more interesting in content, formats and presentation, as well as at least having a clear sense of what it is trying to do and who it is trying to serve.
That said, not sure it's right to say that Sky News costs less than the BBC News channel alone. As you say, Sky News is around £90-100m; based on the piecemeal public data, BBC News channel is somewhere around £50-70m - both BBC channels were in that region before, but UK contributions were cut by about 50% and World weren't bringing in as much advertising towards the end as they had done previously, so would guess that World contributions to the budget are down too. It could be a bit higher than that ballpark, but can't see it adding up to Sky levels.
But as I've said previously, I'm not sure that all the bizarre choices around the new channel are budget related - the presentation and format seems to be (at least in part) out of a deliberate (and misguided) attempt to ape Outside Source and The Context across the day.
The emulation of Outside Source & The Context, I can only guess, is part of a drive to compete with opinion-led US news channels for the US market (especially with the upcoming election). However, especially to the British viewer, it is not “the BBC they are used to” and is a major disappointment. As you alluded to, given the huge amount of LF money that still contributes to the channel (at a guess, at least 50%) it very much feels like the UK viewer is getting a raw deal.
RE: Sky News - Brekkie - 17-01-2024
Outside Souce was quite dynamic though - little evidence that has filtered through to the news channel.
RE: Sky News - interestednovice - 17-01-2024
True, “touch screen Outside Source” was an attempt to do a fairly fast-paced analysis programme which looked at the news in some detail and attempted to explain stories. This worked quite well.
Now, the BBC only focus on stories briefly and fall back on “talking heads” too much (as, ironically, “The Context” does).
Sky News is really the only hope these days for proper analysis on breaking news. Certainly the BBC News opt-out balcony is not really set up for proper analysis at all because it’s such a minimal operation.