Emma watch me fluff my lines Crosby

Discussions on news and breaking news events including, BBC News, ITV News, Sky News
Steven
Posts: 538
Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2004 7:03 pm

Post by Steven » Thu May 27, 2004 6:39 pm

Because they got tired of running around the world in flak jackets and designer Marlboro man outfits and decided on a more stable, better paid job than being a 'mere' correspondent?!







Quite. But the reason why they are the best anchors . . . . . . ?

Think of the big American network anchors - Dan Rather, Tom Brokaw.



George Aligiyah, Mark Austin here in the UK.

Newsrat
Posts: 35
Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2004 9:55 am

Post by Newsrat » Thu May 27, 2004 6:40 pm





NEWSBOY2 wrote:


I've had enough of this daft bint. I know we aren't suppose to be nasty but she really can't say a single sentence without fluffing it. What really! annoys me is that its usually the most simple of words.

I agree, herein lies the answer to the departure of Simon McCoy. I think he got totally fed up waiting to be paired up with a decent co-presenter. You could forgive EC's mistakes initially as being down to lack of experience maybe, but she should have got on top of it by now and there hasn't been any improvement!!

Can't agree with you on Juliette though, we will leave that there





eagleeye
Posts: 422
Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 12:26 pm

Post by eagleeye » Thu May 27, 2004 7:21 pm

A good journalist is a good journalist. But I think to be a correspondent or reporter on "live" news, especially fast breaking, rolling news, is much harder than being an anchor. Far more pressure and although the skills required are different, still much, much harder.



The best journalists in my humble opinion are the correspondents.

Presenter wise, what is JT on as I want some? That man is relaxxxxed.

Steven
Posts: 538
Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2004 7:03 pm

Post by Steven » Fri May 28, 2004 5:41 am

Well indeed. I wonder whether JT is on anything or if he appears so relaxed because he is a qaulity correspondent first and formost!

The best presenters are, as a rule, good reporters. It's very difficult to quantify the different levels of stress faced by a reporter and anchor. I think they both have an equally tricky job. The anchor may have to do a live interview. Emphasis on the live. The reporter has the opportunity to edit that interview.



If the anchor has to speak live to somebody midst a breaking event, they may have little time to prepare, if any at all, and may miss the opportunity to ask an important question.



That said a reporter may be rushed to a scene and have talk about an event that they had no time to prepare for also.



For the big programmes, peak programmes you need people who are quality reporters/correspondents. They will probably be the lasting effect to the viewer. They are the last resort almost. If the reporter cocks up during a live the anchor will have to rescue the situation. It's the anchor that has to pick up after himself.

NEWSBOY2
Posts: 248
Joined: Sun Feb 29, 2004 10:33 am

Post by NEWSBOY2 » Fri May 28, 2004 6:35 am

I agree. I still think its bizarre how Sky managed to lose Simon. They haven?t been able to fill that void yet. I don?t know why he was sidelined in favour of no one it seems. You wouldn?t get the likes of Emma on BBC. Although she?s young (26) that?s no an excuse for her performance. Jane Hill was the same age when she started presenting on News 24, and look how genuinely fab she is! I?m also tiring of the ?bimbo factor? it drains depth and experience, and leaves the news stale and boring.

Maybe Emma needs to read the copy before she starts presenting, more than once lol.

Also I don?t know what you on about Newsrat by talking about ?mere correspondent?.

Steven
Posts: 538
Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2004 7:03 pm

Post by Steven » Fri May 28, 2004 6:39 am



Also I don?t know what you on about Newsrat by talking about ?mere correspondent?.






I think you'll find that was Eagleeye. The inverted commas were there for a reason. Perhaps to highlight the irony.

Hello
Posts: 156
Joined: Tue May 04, 2004 6:40 pm

Post by Hello » Fri May 28, 2004 7:15 am

What about swapping Emma Crosby and Julie Etchingham about then? Ive found that when Emma does Sunrise or Skynews Today she is a lot better than when she does the later slots. Julie would be good on the later slots.

NEWSBOY2
Posts: 248
Joined: Sun Feb 29, 2004 10:33 am

Post by NEWSBOY2 » Fri May 28, 2004 7:19 am

Leave Juliet alone, you can't move someone who's capable in order to give someone else a boost. I like Juliet's interviewing technique and she seems to have a good rapport with politicans.

snfan
Posts: 37
Joined: Sun May 09, 2004 4:48 pm

Post by snfan » Fri May 28, 2004 7:22 am

It is becoming clear to me that you should all occasionally switch the channel over for a change from sky news! everyone makes mistakes, does it really matter all that much that you have to personally attack Emma?



I think you should ALL get a grip

Skybaby
Posts: 94
Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2004 8:03 am

Post by Skybaby » Fri May 28, 2004 2:20 pm

Actually, Emma is the presenter that I've been most looking forward to watching again when I return home, just to see if there has been progress, but from reading this thread, it's amazing that Emma has been there for almost a year now and is still apparently Miss Mangle. And no one senior at Sky seems to have a problem with this? I understand that in this day and age you have to look nice and young and pretty to appear on screen because that's the current mentality, but being an under 25, and therefore someone who is supposed to put style over substance, I can tell you now that I'd far rather watch some ugly ancient person who has on-screen presence read the news than someone who is just there to brighten up the scenery.

Post Reply