Anyone see Sky News tonight?

DaBreno

Bit of a naive rant, so bear with me.
Started at 12.00 midnight and kept my attention with the brutal Pakistani crisis for 10 mins. What stuck in my mind was what crept under the radar.
After the quake story was literally a 15 second slot on how Tony Blair is pushing through a law that can keep people prisoner for 3 months without charge. (Just like that guilty Brazilian lad). Then a 15 second piece on a fight in the Thailand parliment coz a millionaire is taking control of a large section of their media. (I was in Thailand when the story broke, the country is in an uproar but too bad, the millionaire in question is a buddy of the ruling Billionaire Prime Minister.)
The next story was about a group of sumo wrestlers in Las Vegas and ran for several minutes, detailing their gambling, eating and how the winner won a surf board. The presenter had "no idea how he would use it".

Its amazing that Sky is considered reputable by many.

besty

in fairness,that caters for what the viewer wants



*where's my phone?*

DonkeyStyle \o/

Yeah I hate that.... they concentrate so much on stupid stories and sports, entirely skipping major world news while they're at it.
You could watch Sky News for a bit, then switch over to RTE news and you'd hear all sorts of new things from the world stage.

Reminds me of a Simpsons moment with Ken Brockman, where he waffles on about something stupid for the whole news report ... then adds "oh! and huge earthquake somewhere, millions dead... we'll see you after the movie." (rough quote)

Mossy Monk

it is a televisual version of The Sun tbh

MrJoeSoap

There is a news/media forum, but I am inclined to agree. Almost everything about the media these days is just wrong.

Don't forget who owns Sky. We've been doing a critical analysis of the media in college over the past two weeks and I was watching the live coverage of the Pakistani earthquake relief effort today when a thought just suddenly sprung to mind...

What if the guy giving us the "news", facing the camera and rehashing some lines he has learnt, was actually to help out...

Also, isn't it weird how when the hurricane was heading towards New Orleans and hundreds of thousands of people were fleeing for their lives, the media was travelling towards the city? We all know the cliched scenes of news reporters being blown all over the place by massive winds.

When Hurricane Mitch hit Honduras and Nicaragua, however, the media watched from a safe distance in Mexico...

billy the squid

The Irish government also did this by combining a controversial budget which individualised a married couple's tax rates, with them sneaking Ireland into the Partnership for Peasce organisation. There was serious objections to Ireland entering PFP as it was linked with NATO.

Goodshape

That's one of the most appalling things I've heard all day. It's been a slow day, but still.

Stop watching Sky News.

Karoma

Goodshape wrote:

Stop watching Sky News.

But then what am I going to do for news? I'm illiterate (so that rules out The Sun..)

Goodshape

Well then stop voting. Please, you're ruining it for everyone.

Pighead

Pighead loves Sky News! They manage to give decent news coverage without any bias like the BBC. If you support excellent broadcasting Sky News is the channel for you! The live coverage they give to events is excellent and they don't hesitate at scraping advert breaks. In fact BBC News 24 gives less live coverage because it has a fetish for giving Weather reports! The anchors are likeable and seem to have charisma and the reporters and correspondents are second to none. Adam Boulton is a prime example, the guys a legend.Theres no pussyfooting with Adam,he specialises in jugulars
Sky News Active now gives you news on demand, and frankly this service is absolute genius! I love it to bits!
I've always seen coverage of events on Sky News when it's been on the other stations, so it may not be as big as the BBC, but by darn is it more efficient and effective. Sky News, news how it should be I say!

sceptre

DaBreno wrote:

The next story was about a group of sumo wrestlers in Las Vegas and ran for several minutes, detailing their gambling, eating and how the winner won a surf board. The presenter had "no idea how he would use it".

Ah, what I've long called the sick-cat-caught-up-a-tree story. In case that isn't catchy enough, you lot can call it "Bart's People" if you like. It's their fluffy story that they used to put out at quarter to the hour every hour regardless of who'd just been stabbed or invaded.

Unfortunately it's caught on and idiots appear to like it. Obligatory on Sky and long a mainstay of ITV and latterly TV3 news, even RTE are getting in on the act. It would appear that lots of people don't like watching the news because it's all doom and gloom, which depresses them a tad. And what better way to solve that problem than by including an mandatory story about a cute transvestite budgie that reads the paper, a cat whose best friend is a dog, a boy scout dancing for Jesus or something else stupidly uplifting. On TV3 it also turns a shocking lead story of a dearth of available hospital beds into a shock horror treatment of big flashing numbers and an inset of how it's affecting one particular poor old soul and all of his friends, which is RTE's cue to do the same. Sure, haven't we Prime Time for the serious stuff so no-one should feel all that bad at the notion of the bulletin at six turning into a supermarket magazine.

Tabloids sell. Partly because they fit in your pocket I suspect, partly because they have good big sports pictures and sometimes because they use big headlines and small words with any sort of analysis abandoned in favour of the shock horror treatment about how everything is blooming wonderful or everything is ****ing awful.

Someone worked out that TV newscasts could attract bigger audiences if they did the same. So the TV news gloom has become gloomier with big letters, big screens, flashing lights, skull'n'bones graphics and anything else to distract from the fact that the entire report could have been written by a twelve year old stuck down a coalmine with no candle who really just wants to hear how long poor unkie Joe has been waiting for a new hip as opposed to pinning the inept Minister for Health to the wall of the newsroom in full glare of the nation and asking him/her what the devil they're going to do about it. And when.

And for the non-gloom we get Bertie the bleeding sumo wrestling budgie who likes to listen to the Crazy Frog, about twelve times a day and all through the night if you watch Sky News long enough. And the worst thing is that they've pretty much all started to do it. And they're unlikely ever to stop. In fact, I can guarantee that it'll get worse.

Depressed yet?

billy the squid

Pighead wrote:

Pighead loves Sky News! They manage to give decent news coverage without any bias like the BBC.

this is going to hurt.

Sky news is in no way shape or form better than the BBC. The BBC have reporters EVERYWHERE! all sky news has is people in Washington and whatever they are allowed to borrow from their sister station FOX news.

Sky news ireland is a complete Joke. if something happens in ireland after the sky news ireland script is written, it doesnt get shown.

If you support excellent broadcasting Sky News is the channel for you! The live coverage they give to events is excellent and they don't hesitate at scraping advert breaks

The BBC news 24 doesnt have ad-breaks. Sky doesnt need adbreaks because it has a gozillion other channels pumping out adverts for them.

. In fact BBC News 24 gives less live coverage because it has a fetish for giving Weather reports! The anchors are likeable and seem to have charisma and the reporters and correspondents are second to none. Adam Boulton is a prime example, the guys a legend.Theres no pussyfooting with Adam,he specialises in jugulars

This is incorrect. Not only are the BBC news 24 capible of giving better live coverage of events, but they also are able to put their live broadcasts online if a big story breaks. you can watch streaming live coverage. Sky have never done this.

Sky News Active now gives you news on demand, and frankly this service is absolute genius! I love it to bits!

BBC news is also interactive, also their selection of video streams from their website is ten times better than Sky

I've always seen coverage of events on Sky News when it's been on the other stations, so it may not be as big as the BBC, but by darn is it more efficient and effective. Sky News, news how it should be I say!

Sky blow trivial events up to be bigger than they actuallly are, while the BBC will just give you facts.

Really though, Sky caters more towards a right-wing viewpoint and pushes the agenda of its owner Rupert Murdoch.

cuppa

agree with last 2 posts

Pighead

billy the squid wrote:

Really though, Sky caters more towards a right-wing viewpoint and pushes the agenda of its owner Rupert Murdoch.

I've heard this old argument thrown out before and I simply don't concur.I agree that his papers have a certain whiff of Eau de Mordoch about them but I have always found Sky News to be accurate and comprehensive.
Have you any examples of Murdoch agenda pushing?

Karoma

Pighead wrote:

I've heard this old argument thrown out before and I simply don't concur.I agree that his papers have a certain whiff of Eau de Mordoch about them but I have always found Sky News to be accurate and comprehensive.
Have you any examples of Murdoch agenda pushing?

google it
Example: http://www.moderateindependent.com/v2i4world.htm

Goodshape

Karoma wrote:

Example: http://www.moderateindependent.com/v2i4world.htm

A good read.


What exactly does it mean to OWN all that stuff? Is he the top shareholder in each of these companies, or is it beyond that? If he dials a phone tomorrow and tells a guy on the other end to find him a book - one about cats, set in london - and to release it to the world and make it a success - will it be done?

Surly no amount of 'ownership' of these sorts of companies can really make THAT much of a difference... or maybe it would, but it would take a long time.

Murdoch's one scarey mofo anyway. The kind of guy you'd imagine might have a small army of bots out trawling the web for any mentions of his name....




HI RUPERT!

[Jackass]

lol....he controls the world....he's watching us right now....*shifty eyes*

I'd love to see an Irish digital news channel, we have a very good sports channel in Setanta, and four generally decent multi-interset channels (I know you might think TG4 is a crock...but it has decent films, and programmes sometimes, especially HECTOR!! G'WAN TRAVERSE YA BOY YA!)

Also RTE have a sattellite kids channel ...The Den, showing cartoons all day (seperate from the den programme...this is the den channel.)

Where's our 24 hour news channel??? Make sky news Ireland 24 hour please rupert...thanks.

Hobbes

MrJoeSoap wrote:

When Hurricane Mitch hit Honduras and Nicaragua, however, the media watched from a safe distance in Mexico...

Not actually true. Some of the media. Not all of it.

mycroft

billy the squid wrote:

this is going to hurt.

Sky news is in no way shape or form better than the BBC. The BBC have reporters EVERYWHERE!

Something to do with having 8 times the budget of Sky?

all sky news has is people in Washington and whatever they are allowed to borrow from their sister station FOX news.

Not true on two counts they've two US correspondents, two europe, a fulltime asia bureau, unsurprisingly they use ABC stringers in Australia.

Secondly on a whole they use CNN. One hour a day is direct feed from CNN, and they tend to go with CNN reporters when they'res something that they can't/aren't able to cover. Fox is used as a last resort and it's worth pointing out BBC and ITN will do the same.

Sky news ireland is a complete Joke. if something happens in ireland after the sky news ireland script is written, it doesnt get shown.

Again harsh and not completely true, it's a small bureau smaller than either rte or tv3.

The BBC news 24 doesnt have ad-breaks. Sky doesnt need adbreaks because it has a gozillion other channels pumping out adverts for them.

Thats hardly fair, already three times this year they've suspended ad breaks for days on ends. You're criminalising they for being run for a profit, do you object to ITN acting in the same manner? If they were hell bent for profit than at no point would the cease to run ad breaks, infact the cynic would suggest that when something is happening that would be so extradordinary for them to cease running breaks (ie london bombings) is the exact time no one would be watching the gozillion other channels, and therefore would be a prime time to jack up advertising revenue on the news station when viewing figures were peaking.

This is incorrect. Not only are the BBC news 24 capible of giving better live coverage of events, but they also are able to put their live broadcasts online if a big story breaks. you can watch streaming live coverage. Sky have never done this.

Fair enough see, budget discrepancy between the two.

BBC news is also interactive, also their selection of video streams from their website is ten times better than Sky

Same could be said of every news website on the planet. Nothing matches bbc.co.uk

Sky blow trivial events up to be bigger than they actuallly are, while the BBC will just give you facts.

I could make a sly reference to the judgement of the hutton inquiry, but I'd end up a charatiture of myself.

I'm not going to defend sky, I'm not fond of sky, but theres again two points

A) You're comparing it to the finest news organisation on the planet (well pighead is, but the day he makes a coherant point, is well, the day pighead flies without the aid of Michael O Leary)

it's a populist news station, however the tragic fact remains it's not a isolated becon of dumbed down infotantment the tabloids have been doing this for decades Murdoch and Maxwell have alot to answer for, but they're selling well because people like it. The sun and ilk outstrip broadsheet sales, people like their news this way. Sky et all is a sympthon of an overlying problem.

Really though, Sky caters more towards a right-wing viewpoint and pushes the agenda of its owner Rupert Murdoch.

No argument there.

WhiteWashMan

DaBreno wrote:

Bit of a naive rant, so bear with me.
Started at 12.00 midnight and kept my attention with the brutal Pakistani crisis for 10 mins. What stuck in my mind was what crept under the radar.
After the quake story was literally a 15 second slot on how Tony Blair is pushing through a law that can keep people prisoner for 3 months without charge. (Just like that guilty Brazilian lad). Then a 15 second piece on a fight in the Thailand parliment coz a millionaire is taking control of a large section of their media. (I was in Thailand when the story broke, the country is in an uproar but too bad, the millionaire in question is a buddy of the ruling Billionaire Prime Minister.)
The next story was about a group of sumo wrestlers in Las Vegas and ran for several minutes, detailing their gambling, eating and how the winner won a surf board. The presenter had "no idea how he would use it".

Its amazing that Sky is considered reputable by many.

perhaps you should phone them and tell them which story you would like to hear more of?

im not really sure what your point is, that they showed not enough details of some political issues, or that they showed too much of something that you deem unimportant?

and are you sure it was 12 oclock, sounds to me more like 12:30 update tbh.

Plankmonkey

I get all my world news, national news and important stuff during the day on the internet and occasionally I buy a decent paper like the irish indepenent or the irish times. When i get home i don't want to hear all the same stuff again, i want to hear about sumo wrestlers and governments knocking chunks out of each other! I still hate sky though, they just looooove a tragedy.

billy the squid

@mycroft

your claim that Sky news uses CNN more than fox is inacurate. I would also like to point out that they do not broadcast one our of CNN every day
http://www.onthebox.com/partner/otb/default.asp?day=12&chnls=133,%2024,%20176,%2052,%2053&slice=0

ot true on two counts they've two US correspondents, two europe, a fulltime asia bureau, unsurprisingly they use ABC stringers in Australia.

I'm curious why you are not surprised they use ABC journalists in austrailia when there is another sister station of Sky there. Again your claims are not based on facts http://www.skynews.com.au/index.asp

I haven't seen it but if it were a station riddled with right-wing spin, then THAT would be unsurprising.

Again harsh and not completely true, it's a small bureau smaller than either rte or tv3.

If they can't report it on their 7pm bulletins they should make an effort to do so on their 10pm bulletins.

Their weather forcasts come from London where the forcaster thinks the only two counties in the country are Tipperary and Mayo.

Hobbes

Sky news is the "clock channel". When you need to know the time check Sky news.

billy the squid

Hobbes wrote:

Sky news is the "clock channel". When you need to know the time check Sky news.

euronews has a clock, actualy it has three of them for different parts of the world. plus the sky clock is a minute slow.

MrJoeSoap

billy the squid wrote:

plus the sky clock is a minute slow.

Just add a minute so...

mycroft

billy the squid wrote:

@mycroft

your claim that Sky news uses CNN more than fox is inacurate. I would also like to point out that they do not broadcast one our of CNN every day
http://www.onthebox.com/partner/otb/default.asp?day=12&chnls=133,%2024,%20176,%2052,%2053&slice=0

Sorry my mistake, I meant CBS. The central thrust is they don't rely on Fox as you suggest, which is correct. I mixed up a vowel and constonant. You suggested they get the rest of their news from FOX. I corrected you, you tried to correct me again. Tell me how many letters do CNN and CBS share with FOX?

And you're calling moi, inaccurate?

I'm curious why you are not surprised they use ABC journalists in austrailia when there is another sister station of Sky there. Again your claims are not based on facts http://www.skynews.com.au/index.asp

Again nitpicking. You suggested they've only bureau in Washington, when corrected you backpeddle and demostrate they've loads of bureaus. Your point?

I haven't seen it but if it were a station riddled with right-wing spin, then THAT would be unsurprising.

Whats your point?

If they can't report it on their 7pm bulletins they should make an effort to do so on their 10pm bulletins.

Example?

Their weather forcasts come from London where the forcaster thinks the only two counties in the country are Tipperary and Mayo.

See point about it being a small regional bureau.

Hobbes

billy the squid wrote:

euronews has a clock, actualy it has three of them for different parts of the world. plus the sky clock is a minute slow.

Your telling me the Sky News clock is leaning to the left! Murdoch would be turning in grave.

billy the squid

Sorry my mistake, I meant CBS. The central thrust is they don't rely on Fox as you suggest, which is correct. I mixed up a vowel and constonant. You suggested they get the rest of their news from FOX. I corrected you, you tried to correct me again. Tell me how many letters do CNN and CBS share with FOX?

First off, what you said in your original post was CNN, If your going to mix up 2 thirds of an acronym when trying to make a point then do not go blaming me because it made your post look inacurate.

Secondly, Sky do not use CBS reporters in their bulletins. They rebroadcast their news bulletin late at night but use FOX news people when doing live output outside of Washington. They did this during their pre-Katrina landfall coverage from New Orleans. They also used FOX news reporters alongside their own staff (not CBS,but FOX) during the Michael Jackson Trial.

at least I can get the names of the stations I am talking about correct.

Again nitpicking. You suggested they've only bureau in Washington, when corrected you backpeddle and demostrate they've loads of bureaus. Your point?

They have a sister station in austrailia. it is run as a separate entity as apposed to a bureau of the Sky news in London. I don't see any backpeddling here.

mycroft

billy the squid wrote:

First off, what you said in your original post was CNN, If your going to mix up 2 thirds of an acronym when trying to make a point then do not go blaming me because it made your post look inacurate.

Oh please billy mixing up CBS and CNN when you're claiming in your OP

whatever they are allowed to borrow from their sister station FOX news.

thats it's entirely fox. You're now quibbling that you're right because I mixed up an hour a day of material from CBS and not CNN.

Secondly, Sky do not use CBS reporters in their bulletins.

Yes, yes they do. Seeing as it's demostrated that they use CBS for an hour a day and regularly repackage CBS reports during their late night reports

They rebroadcast their news bulletin late at night but use FOX news people when doing live output outside of Washington. They did this during their pre-Katrina landfall coverage from New Orleans.

Gosh because it was so hard for all news agencies to put up an entire 24hr channel of coverage hours after the landfall, esp when you're 8hrs behind. On the US they'll happily use BBC/ITN/Sky feeds on all channels for stories over here during their night cycle.

They also used FOX news reporters alongside their own staff (not CBS,but FOX) during the Michael Jackson Trial.

Yeah cause you needed a full bureau to cover that important story :rolleyes:
First you're complaining that they give too much coverage to superfical stories, and now you're complaining they're using stringers?

at least I can get the names of the stations I am talking about correct.

Is that you scrabbling to maintain a point. Hey Billy boy noticed you never provided an example of the Irish bureau missing a story in the 7 and still not covering it in their 10. Ohhhhhhh you're soooooo winning this.

They have a sister station in austrailia. it is run as a separate entity as apposed to a bureau of the Sky news in London. I don't see any backpeddling here.

Oh really?

You claim the station has only

all sky news has is people in Washington and whatever they are allowed to borrow from their sister station FOX news.

Bascially you start by saying they're just FOX's bitches without any resources.
Now you're citing their sister station half way around the globe. Well hey. Again I'm not defending sky news just, ill information, frankly pathetic criticism of it.

billy the squid

firstly to address the question of whether Sky News ireland are interested in stories that happen after a certain time. The deadline was not actualy 5.30 it was 4.30 mentioned in thread below
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=168129
are you going to call those people liars?

thats it's entirely fox. You're now quibbling that you're right because I mixed up an hour a day of material from CBS and not CNN.

Ok lets say you did mix up CNN with CBS, your statement above conflicts with the statement you made in the previous post you made. You are now saying that i am quibbling over 1 hour of material. yet earlier you were saying that they get more of their material from CBS than FOX

Secondly on a whole they use CNN. One hour a day is direct feed from CNN, and they tend to go with CNN reporters when they'res something that they can't/aren't able to cover. Fox is used as a last resort and it's worth pointing out BBC and ITN will do the same.

Gosh because it was so hard for all news agencies to put up an entire 24hr channel of coverage hours after the landfall, esp when you're 8hrs behind. On the US they'll happily use BBC/ITN/Sky feeds on all channels for stories over here during their night cycle.

Firstly Katrina made landfall at 6am, CDT. that would be 12 noon here, 6 hours not 8 hours behind us, and not exactly in the middle of the night.advisory issued by NHC shortly before landfall

Secondly I did not mention Post landfall coverage, I mentioned pre-landfall coverage.

Read my post on this matter again.

missingtime

Someone there said they used it as the clock channel, I use it for the hour of power.Sweeet

billy the squid

Hobbes wrote:

Your telling me the Sky News clock is leaning to the left! Murdoch would be turning in grave.

they are oblidged to tilt something to the left in the interest of balance by the UK equivelent of the BCI.

the_syco

DaBreno wrote:

After the quake story was literally a 15 second slot on how Tony Blair is pushing through a law that can keep people prisoner for 3 months without charge.

He's being going on about this for the last while. It came about after the London bombing.

DadaKopf

Not surprising for rolling media. Might have been such a short article because it was news ust in, so no analysis; or Sky News are so dependent on government drip-feeding that they had nothing to say because the government likes things this way; or Sky News is run by fascists.

The bottom line, IMHO, is these laws are being slipped in because politicians know full-well that the poverbial is going to hit a fan fairly soon, and they're introducing anti-protesting laws to crack down in the inevitable dissent that will come with peak oil and the collapse of the current economic order by justifying it on the basis of terrorist threats, which, I think are really as threatening as the Communist terrorist brigades of the 1976s and early 1970s.

It's happened before. It's happening again.

mycroft

billy the squid wrote:

firstly to address the question of whether Sky News ireland are interested in stories that happen after a certain time. The deadline was not actualy 5.30 it was 4.30 mentioned in thread below
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=168129
are you going to call those people liars?

What? People on a bulletin board having ill informed ill equiped opinions! Never!

Try harder billy.

Ok lets say you did mix up CNN with CBS, your statement above conflicts with the statement you made in the previous post you made. You are now saying that i am quibbling over 1 hour of material. yet earlier you were saying that they get more of their material from CBS than FOX

Huh! Thats not even english you're managling. In your orginal post you say they get most of their material from Fox when the schedule presented by you shows they get 1/24th of their news a day (at least) from an entirely different US station. Keep trying.

Firstly Katrina made landfall at 6am, CDT. that would be 12 noon here, 6 hours not 8 hours behind us, and not exactly in the middle of the night.advisory issued by NHC shortly before landfall

So they failed to have a reported slap bang in the middle of a disaster, while the city was being evacuated. For shame.

Secondly I did not mention Post landfall coverage, I mentioned pre-landfall coverage.

Read my post on this matter again.

Yeah I have Billy, you made some ill informed criticism and when called on it are scrabbling around wildly with a scattergun. Your OP claimed they've got no bureau outside of washington and rely on Fox for all their reports. Still standing by that?

billy the squid

mycroft wrote:

What? People on a bulletin board having ill informed ill equiped opinions! Never!

Try harder billy.




Huh! Thats not even english you're managling. In your orginal post you say they get most of their material from Fox when the schedule presented by you shows they get 1/24th of their news a day (at least) from an entirely different US station. Keep trying.



So they failed to have a reported slap bang in the middle of a disaster, while the city was being evacuated. For shame.



Yeah I have Billy, you made some ill informed criticism and when called on it are scrabbling around wildly with a scattergun. Your OP claimed they've got no bureau outside of washington and rely on Fox for all their reports. Still standing by that?

i just think it is a bit rich you accusing me of gettingmy facts wrong when i have pointed out 3 if not more inacuracies that you have posted yourself.

Oh eyah and saying "oh yeah, its the internet, i'm entitled to **** up" isn't good enough when your out to jump downs someones throat. neither is namecalling or insults.

mycroft

billy the squid wrote:

i just think it is a bit rich you accusing me of gettingmy facts wrong when i have pointed out 3 if not more inacuracies that you have posted yourself.

Lets see you claimed

A) They get most of their news from Fox; when I pointed out that was wrong, you try and catch me on the mix up between CNN and CBS. Still doesn't change the fact you were wrong in the first place.

You claim sky Ireland miss stuff for their seven report and don't include in in their ten. And when asked for evidence cite an internet posting about them failing to cover Roston's dads kidnapping (a total non story while we're at it) in their seven. Thats your only evidence and doesn't even support your claim.

C) You claim they don't have any bureau's outside washington, and when corrected you sneer at me over Sky news Australia. Okay so I forgot it, still doesn't make you right. In fact by pointing it out you make your own original point redundant.

Trying to claim you're winning this argument when you're reduced to pointing out slight factual inaccuracies, in my posts, and in doing so you're helping to prove my point (more news from CBS than fox, it's australia bureau) and thereby weakening your own original point is just funny.

Oh eyah and saying "oh yeah, its the internet, i'm entitled to **** up" isn't good enough when your out to jump downs someones throat. neither is namecalling or insults.

When did I say that?
When did I resort to name calls or insults?

My my billy you're reduced to the tactics of making stuff. You're as bad as the station you're bitching about.

billy the squid

A) They get most of their news from Fox; when I pointed out that was wrong, you try and catch me on the mix up between CNN and CBS. Still doesn't change the fact you were wrong in the first place.

no i didn't, I stated that they get most of their US reporters from fox, You on the other hand could not tell which news outlet they used late at night for an hour. You said CNN three times in your initial post, so you can't claim it was a typing error.

Sky do indeed use fox news for a majority of their US news reports.

I would also like to point out that sky only rebroadcast whole news bulletins from CBS news late at night, CBS news reporters do not take part in sky news bulletins.

C) You claim they don't have any bureau's outside washington, and when corrected you sneer at me over Sky news Australia. Okay so I forgot it, still doesn't make you right. In fact by pointing it out you make your own original point redundant.

Whilst owned by the same man as Sky news UK, Sky news Austrailia has the same relationship to Sky news UK as Fox news. It is a separate news channel serving a separate part of the world. it is not a Sky news bureau.

as for insulting and namecalling, calling me "Billy Boy" and accusing me of not being able to use English, I would find disrespectful. I have not done this with you, so I would appreciate it if you reciprocated.

MrJoeSoap

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2005/10/13/national/w133549D86.DTL

Just saw this tonight. Not surprising in the slightest (we've seen how Bush responds to questions that pressurize him, Carol Coleman etc...) but its great to see it caught on live TV. I expect the director is being interrogated as I type.

mycroft

billy the squid wrote:

no i didn't, I stated that they get most of their US reporters from fox,

Now now billy boy

you said;

billy boy wrote:

all sky news has is people in Washington and whatever they are allowed to borrow from their sister station FOX news.

Which utterly contradicting what you're now claiming you said.

You on the other hand could not tell which news outlet they used late at night for an hour. You said CNN three times in your initial post, so you can't claim it was a typing error.

No I confused CNN with CBS. I never said it was a typing error it was an error. Still doesn't negate the original thrust of the point, to wit, you were wrong;

Sky do indeed use fox news for a majority of their US news reports.

Er you're admiting they use an entirely different network for a guarentee'd 1/24th of their schedule. You've backed down on the point they've only gotten a washington bureau outside of the uk. So they've got their own staff, use another network, so I assume you'll back up this charming ickle factoid;

I would also like to point out that sky only rebroadcast whole news bulletins from CBS news late at night, CBS news reporters do not take part in sky news bulletins.

Woa!

Hold on, first it's

billy boy wrote:

all sky news has is people in Washington and whatever they are allowed to borrow from their sister station FOX news.

now it's

billy the backpeddlar wrote:

sky only rebroadcast whole news bulletins from CBS news late at night,

Onto

Whilst owned by the same man as Sky news UK, Sky news Austrailia has the same relationship to Sky news UK as Fox news. It is a separate news channel serving a separate part of the world. it is not a Sky news bureau.

So again

billy the squid, happy billy? wrote:

all sky news has is people in Washington and whatever they are allowed to borrow from their sister station FOX news.

You admit the above is horsemanure?

as for insulting and namecalling, calling me "Billy Boy"

I'm sorry if I offended and pierced your pale soft tender flesh.

and accusing me of not being able to use English, I would find disrespectful. I have not done this with you, so I would appreciate it if you reciprocated.

When did I accuse you of an inability to use english. Just rampant backpeddling and incoherance.

bungeecork

I think.....
* that the BBC is one of the worlds largest news gathering clubs
* that SKY is very well crafted to satisfy the audience it is aimed at
* that TF1 and FR2 in France do a better job in quality of news content and in news presentation compared to any UK TV bulletin or any UK News channel
* that Irish people tend to think that UK TV news is the be-all and end-all of news
* that ITV news is a complete mess these days (what has happened to the ITN brand - dear oh dear)

PS I just said that to stoke the fire

OfflerCrocGod

BBC is clearly the best news organization in the world and while I dislike Sky they -at the moment- are not as awful as Fox (partly due to the fact that the Beeb has high standards) but I still can't stand the channel. I would dearly be able to tune in to BBC 24 I'd prefer that to Sky. As a side note be on the look out for an increase in the anti-EU rhetoric in the UK media because Rupert lost his monopoly on footy. I hate the bastard.