All 2 entries tagged Freeview
View all 3 entries tagged Freeview on Warwick Blogs | View entries tagged Freeview at Technorati | There are no images tagged Freeview on this blog
February 08, 2007
That’s the sound of the retreat.
Sky are to pull Sky News, Sky Sports News and Sky Three from the Freeview platform in order to use the space for pay-per-view football and films.
I’m not personally worried by the loss of the latter two, but the absence of Sky News from Freeview is bad news all round.
The channel’s been on the slide ever since its expensive revamp in 2005, culminating in the loss of the channel’s boss, Nick Pollard. BBC News 24 has pulled ahead in the ratings, largely thanks to cross-promotion from BBC One and the increased number of recognisable ‘faces’ on the channel, such as Huw Edwards and Ben Brown.
But the news that Sky News is to retreat from such a popular platform (almost certainly losing a large percentage of its viewers) suggests Sky has little faith in the future of their news operation. The latest figures from BARB suggest 9% of the population see a bit of Sky News every week – but only being available on Sky and Cable will probably reduce this substantially.
Sky News also has incredibly low advertising rates – they’re not exactly rolling in cash, even if the channel’s a bit of a loss-leader for the Sky brand.
But it’s not just bad news for Sky. The demise of the ITV News Channel in 2005 was bad enough, as it was just becoming half-decent when it was killed off. But soon there will be little competition for BBC News 24. And not even the most ardent of BBC fans want to see an end to the rivalry between the two.
It’s not good for journalists, and it’s not good for viewers.
December 20, 2005
Writing about web page http://media.guardian.co.uk/broadcast/story/0,7493,1671450,00.html
Several executives from BSkyB and another pay-TV operator have told a government committee today that Freeview – the digital terrestrial platform with nearly 40 TV channels and 25 radio stations – is bunk.
Mike Darcey, BSkyB's director of strategy went as far as saying "Freeview is for the elderly and economically inactive".
Now lets clear up the blatant conflict of interest. BSkyB execs want people to hand over money every month to watch hundreds of TV channels, bet on interactive gambling channels and use their set-top-box to bank, shop and yes, spend more money.
Freeview is the antithesis of this model. You pay £30–200, and that's it. You never pay anything again. In return, you get all of the digital channels from the BBC, ITV and currently most of Channel 4's and soon Channel 5's too. You even get three Sky channels! Every genre is covered except for a sport channel (apart from Sky Sports News) and a film channel (although FilmFour is rumoured to be going free in 2006).
The technology isn't really any less clever (as Sky make out), but the channels are simply trapped in a certain amount of frequency, a fact that satellite broadcasters don't have to worry about so much. The picture quality is slightly poorer as a result (but still much better than analogue) and admittedly, not everyone can get Freeview.
But the fact is, by 2012, virtually everyone should be able to receive Freeview. At the moment, the transmitters are turned down so as not to interfere with the analogue signal. But turn off the analogue, and you've got almost perfect reception across the country. At the moment it's a bit like a Virgin Pendolino that isn't allowed to tilt because the lines aren't ready.
Yes, you get far fewer channels on Freeview, but you've got to be a sports or movies fanatic, or an incredibly niche viewer to need Sky. Year after year, the channels on Freeview get better, and you can't say the same of Sky's offering.
So keep your money in your pocket. Get Freeview, or even get Sky's free satellite option (with worse channels than Freeview), or wait a bit longer and just download all of your favourite programmes using the BBC's Interactive Media Player which should be out next year.
In the meantime, don't believe a thing that Sky says about its technological superiority. Not until HDTV, at least.