Why SKY (SPORTS) is substandard quality

I've thought about it, and here are my reasons for thinking SKY Sports and its news adjuncts is low-grade broadcasting.

The alternative would not to be staid or snooty. Alternatives given.

1. The addiction to ad breaks at every conceivable turn. Understood that money has to be made. Advertising is the staff of media life. But do subscriptions pay so little? It seems they whip off to another tranche of commercials wherever possible. Cynical.

2. Constant self-advertsing. "News" elements and "exclusvies" more often than not are sneaky trailers for SKY's next shows. Perhaps they shoudl be made to carry a sign, as in newspapers: "THIS IS A PAID ADVERTISEMENT". All media need to publicise their own products, but SKY is avvin a larrrf.

3. The number of marquees, banners, headlines and drop-down popups when there is no real feature. Overstuffing the viewer with shite. Why don't they just open another channel, if there is so much to show at once? Poor production values - disorientating. I've heard of multi-tasking, but the viewer is apparently expected to have seven eyes and four ears.

4. Repeat after repeat. I don't mean news items - any 24/7 broadcaster has to keep looping the little it's generally got - though SKY has extra-short loops, it must be said, same stuff every 7 minutes sometimes - I'm talking about highlights like goals, "hot incidents" that SKY craves. How many hundred camera angles and stoked hysteria do you actually need to form a judgement?

5. False hero worship. The "Musssolini perspective" on sportsmen. (from below, scowling, muscular belittlement of the head, fascistic angle). What a lot of cults! They are just men (and women), don't build them up to be worship-ready superheroes FFS.

6. Juicing up of howling hysteria generally - in phography and commentary. Concentration on player celebrations - as manic/moronic as possible please - crowd noise, and coronary-fuelling screams from the "experts". This is not coverage, this is not even elucidation, this is piped hysteria.

Life even in top sport is not mainly about screaming like an idiot, despite what SKY pumps out.

7. Lack of perspective - except in terms of all the camera angles. Humourlessness, apart from matey bonhomie.

It is as if SKY's mission were to turn all its viewers - perhaps the world - into a mass of vicariously baying brainless hysterical chiliasts, high on cheap lager, seeking the new Messiah in every new face that is touted by News International 3D.

And I think these are cheap broadcasting values.

The alternative? Less BS, More sense, more heart, a fuller picture of sport and life, and more humour.

(Sorry for the rant, folks.)

PeterCS wrote:
Life even in top sport is not mainly about screaming like an idiot, despite what SKY pumps out.

Obviously not a football fan Pete

Shut up with your long-winded shite, Pete, you tw@t.

SKY SPORTS is the devil - you could have just said so and we'd all have agreed.

August has finally spoken sense.

But it's still better than ITV.

1 > 0 ?

If there is one thing that is going to finally push me off the edge for good it's going to be TV Advert breaks. I've just about had enough of them.

If you go channel hopping at anywhere close to the hour or a quarter past or half past or quarter to - then forget it. You only see ADs.

Okay so it sounds like a basic thing, but I am of the opinion that advertising is a whole stupid industry based on nothing that 90% doesn't work and is just annoying. Some advertising is good, in the days of Radio and early TV yes. But not anymore it's just downright annoying.

You know, it wasn't THAT long ago that the only time you saw live sport was when you actually went to the ground. Otherwise you had to listen to it on the radio.

Phurt, other than Jamie Redknapp there is nothing wrong with Sky Sports.

PeterCS wrote:1 > 0 ?

Not in the binary world. There's only 1s and 0s. Trying to do without one of them would reduce the world to anarchy.

Imagine Channel 5 having the rights to Cricket.



Helloooooooooooooooooo! "One of the Greats" < At every fricking delivery or Catch or Forward Defence.

Nein can keep Mark Nicholas.

I'm still hoping Nein goes bankrupt. Financially, that is. Morally they went bankrupt about 30 years ago.

Mark Taylors sharp analysis is holding the team together. I'm pretty sure Slater has threatened someone by now.

Got to disagree Pete.
Adverts and the occasional nauseating remark aside, Sky has done cricket a favour over the past few years IMO.
Today's TV HAS to inject gimmicky ideas like repetitive goal repeats, a wicket taken, a catch dropped, a bit of chat on the field and continuous replays of a hero holding his bat aloft whilst celebrating his century!

This isn't in any way the "Mussolini" effect of glorifying false hero's, more a way of retaining the viewers attention (shorter span these days) to avoid them flicking across the 60 channels on offer for alternative viewing fare!

The languid days of Arlott, West, Jonners and Benaud are long gone. Replaced, like it or not, by the razzamatazz of slick TV producers who always look to oomph up their package with said gimmicks, BUT with more knowledgeable (though perhaps less entertaining) commentators and pundits who offer a more comprehensive reporting on the game (pitch reports, weather patterns, bowling actions, hawkeye, etc etc etc)
This then is the evil Sky Television .....!

Those with fading memories ought to remember which government it was that "de-classified" the importance of cricket and which Broadcasting Corporation it was that decided that the days of televising the game was passe and old hat ... BOTH relinquishing the responsibility of taking the game FREE to the viewing public, opening the door to the likes of SKY.

Cue C4, who took over the tele rights for awhile ... (cut to adverts and Nikelarse) before deciding that they too"couldn't afford it" ! Great ambition, no funding !

The evil Murdoch's Sky stepped upto the plate - paid a King's ransom for the rights (topping up the game's funds) and promoted a game (deemed "sh!te" by the government and the BBC), across the globe.
Yes, Joe Public had to pay to view his sport, but was/is this Sky's fault?!

Of course, now that it's popularity has soared via Ashes '05, T20 and the WC, everyone wants a 'piece of the action' ... so much so, even a chastened Minister of Sport (same government) is now "looking into the possibility of reinstating" cricket to a "national treasure" status !!

Funny that !!

For all it's sins, it's hard to knock Sky TV too hard ... after all, they are there to entertain !!

Apologies for the lengthy epistle ... but this is a serious enough topic for debate!

I can quite agree that the (non-existent) opposition let the cup slip. Both in mot bidding, and in tending to go along with the public death of a sport (in the Beeb's case)

And I agree (of course) that there is simply no alternative, certainly at the moment.

It's just that I don't have to like the crappier sides to it. Which is what I was on abaht .... In a phrase, I think SKY tends to overblow the golden egg.

True to a great extent, but like all media outlets, there are good and crappier aspects ... I guess. And yes, Sky are undoubtedly guilty of grossly overcooking the free range egg .... but after all, that is their style!

For all Sky's commercialness and at times, irritating breaks, I for one am content to forgive their failings because, for whatever their reason, profit, gain, exposure, advertising... whatever, they single-handedly brought back and retained cricket 24/7 on our television screens, when no other bugger had any intention of doing so ..... until now that is!

I can now watch more live sport than I ever dreamed possible 20 years ago.

My knowledge of cricket is broader and runs deeper than it could possibly have hoped to in days of yore, and Sky's coverage also means I can keep abreast of all the sports I love, and have grown attachments to other new sports that I also now watch live.

In some ways this has arguably diminished my enjoyment of actually being at a live event, in the case of football at least due to the saturation coverage and that it is perhaps no longer quite as 'special' as it once was, but I wouldn't go back to the days of one live domestic game a season (the FA Cup Final), the occasional away World Cup qualifier and the World Cup itself.

Yes, the advertisements are an aggravation, but Sky are by no means as opportunisitic and outrageous with their timing of these as when those cretins at ITV get hold of a live event - it is quite clear in the case of the latter that the actual coverage of a sporting event is merely incidental to, and providing a vehicle for, as many adverts as they can cram in.

With Sky, whilst the commitment to providing a service to its subscribers is diluted somewhat by the need to bring in advertising revenue as well, it is undeniable that the commitment is still nonetheless there in my opinion.

Of course, they can not provide the uninterrupted coverage of the BBC, who are in a perhaps unique position worldwide given the way they are funded, and are in the fotunate position of being able to broadcast an event in a way that takes into account nothing but what the viewer would wish to see. On that point, I would argue that the presence of Sky in the market has made Auntie raise their game considerably on that front as well.

The overblown hype is an aggravation of course, but sadly in today's culture this is what is required to grab the attention of your average ned with the attention span of a gnat.

Yeah man!
And Rupert Murdoch for PM!

BTW how was the B'day celebs Bob?
Did the wee one sleep through the partying ?

Good thanks, mate.

But no, she made sure she got involved!

Off to the pub, pub, pub for the rugby this afternoon.

Big_Bad_Bob wrote:Good thanks, mate.

But no, she made sure she got involved!

Off to the pub, pub, pub for the rugby this afternoon.

Good to hear ... like father like daughter ... get stuck in !!
Enjoy pub x 3 + rugby x 1 ....

Since SKY took over the cricket, England have been rubbish. This is not coincidence. SKY is the DEVIL. D.E.V.I.L. Beelzebub. Satan. Margaret Thatcher. THE DEVIL.

I had a problem with my reception today, it went off as Harmison was coming in to bowl with WI 9 down and it froze on his run-up. By the time it came back on England were batting.

It wasn't just my tv as my neighbour had the same problem.

I liked their piss-take of the ITV incident on Soccer AM today...

beamer wrote:I liked their piss-take of the ITV incident on Soccer AM today...

Aye - was very good!