[AllanTheScot]

From a presentation point of view the pausing of new studios is a big mistake. The glass box is soulless and looks so bland on screen.

[eyeTV]

What happened to that 2005 massive newsroom studio, whats there now, was it demolished?

[London Lite]

2005 may have been great for presentation, but as a news channel which introduced appointment to view programming and three people standing behind a podium, it was the beginning of the end.

[eyeTV]

When you look at that compared to what we have today it was complete overkill to have 3 presenters. All of them doing the headlines and then all walking off to the separate presentation areas.

[London Lite]

When you look at that compared to what we have today it was complete overkill to have 3 presenters. All of them doing the headlines and then all walking off to the separate presentation areas.

I think Sky saw the conversion of Sky News to 16:9 as an excuse to show off what they could do presentation wise, but the major issue was that viewers dip into the channel for news, not for an hourly jib cam movement.

What we have now is Sky concentrating on news which the journalism side continues to perform as well as it did in the 90s and early 00s, but it's missing something. I don't want the 2005 flashy era back, but something along the lines of what they did in the mid 90s to the revamp in 2005.

[mouseboy33]

Maybe 2005 was a bit much. But they used to know how to present breaking news like it was important. Even if we just concentrate solely on how Breaking News was presented in the 90s, early 00s and then today. The tone is completely different. Today the presenters are almost apologetic for interrupting the news wheel with breaking news. Even presenters that were around back there presenter now speak in hushed quiet tones with seemingly no sense of urgency. Which was their trademark. First for Breaking News. It was built into the DNA of the channel.

Id even take their current look if they just turned it up more. Pumped some life into the presentation. Maybe do something more dramatic with how they present breaking news. Like they used to, maybe bring back a signature audio sting that made you look at the telly. Also a full screen graphic Breaking News graphic behind the presenter. W So it got your attention. Get the presenters to liven up their presentation style. Stop show down those boring corridors or maybe do something to dress them up to look more interesting.

[all new phil]

I think the problem they had previously was that the OTT presentation undermined the journalism, which was excellent then and continues to be excellent. Their biggest threat these days is trust, I suspect the grown-up / sober approach is a big part of countering this. Previous looks were very American-influenced and the perception is often that American = biased.

[Scarbados]

It's about getting the balance right with regards to presentation. There needs to be a look and style that is different to the competition, otherwise what's the point if all you are doing is more of the same. You won't attract viewers if all you are doing is what the BBC do, but with commercials. Do something different, that will reach out to a different audience, and the viewers will come, and you should then have a more commercially viable model.

I do find it odd that they say the age of the powerful anchor has gone, yet have given names to more of their output in recent times, such as "Kay Burley" at Breakfast and "The Sarah-Jane Mee Show". There's nothing special about those programmes, just presenters delivering the standard delivery of the days stories.

[derek500]

When Ryley took over Kay Burley was hated by the left, the Guardian picked up on everything they could to undermine her journalism. "Sack Kay Burley" was chanted and on placards. Same with Adam Boulton.

Ryley leaves with Burley and Boulton's replacement, Rigby, loved by the left, in tune with the Guardian.

That's some legacy!!

[Skygeek]

What exactly makes Beth Rigby "Burley and Boulton's replacement"?

Yes, Beth occupies the post *once held* by Boulton, but Kay Burley is still there.

This to me seems to be a version of the very derangement syndrome you're decrying.

Also, speaking as someone who's benefited from John Ryley's professional generosity - counting myself among hundreds of journalists over 30+ years who can say the same (and you only need look at the tributes on social media yesterday from people inside and outside Sky to back me up) - THAT will be his lasting legacy, not as the subject of petty carping about personalities individual viewers may or may not like.