Turning up the volume
The eagle-eyed Sun readers among you may have spotted a reference to me and my colleage from Sky News in the paper's Westminster column, The Whip, this morning. John Craig is congratulated for being heard on the 91Èȱ¬ microphone I was using in Downing Street reporting for the Ten O'Clock News, while he was on air for Sky at the same time.
Of course security outside No 10 is very tight, so there is limited space for us to set up our cameras. So, as often happens, on Tuesday night our two camera crews and sound men were set up cosily right next to each other.
Us humble correspondents do speak at different volumes and despite the wonders of modern sound technology, and the fact that I am no whisperer, 91Èȱ¬ viewers may well have been able also to hear John talking to Sky viewers in the background.
I'm 
Comments
Yes Laura, I thought John Craig was unpolite to shout so much while you were on air.
I think he was rather rude to be honest, because he looked like he was doing it on purpose to drum your reporting.
To prove this, John Craig was really shouting for no apparent reason when one listens to what he had to say on Sky News, same time you were reporting.
Next time, take it up to a higher key Laura.
Yeah, the same was true outside Defra the other evening - though I can't recall whether you could hear 91Èȱ¬ on Sky or vice versa! (Not that I'd have been watching Sky normally, of course.)
Oh, it was loud and clear to the point that you could make out exactly what he was saying sometimes. Nick R often manages to be a ghostly figure alone in the famous street, but maybe his glasses scare others off?
However, that leaves two questions:
1) Why do correspondents have to stand in the street at all? It makes no difference to a report unless someone enters or leaves No.10.
2) We both come from Scotland with the benefit of Scottish education. Maybe standards have declined since my day, but "Us humble correspondents do speak" is not English.
Quiet, isn't it?
No, I don't read the Sun either . . .
So?
How fascinating dear. But it's not news is it. Why do you reporters insist on thinking that you are important or interesting. You are only messengers - and you know what happens to them !
It's a framing issue. It makes their presentation look important and relevant even if the substance came off the same press wire everyone else got and all the major players have retired to their beds.
I can't stand regionalism or the common touch for the sake of it. It just makes everyone harder to understand and the artificial chumminess just gets in the way.
This are two reasons why I don't watch broadcast news anymore. You can add seasick inducing graphics, celebrity journalists, and ratings driven content to the list. None of this is wrong in itself it's just that the dial is cranked around too far for me. There's not much point in arguing or complaining about it so I just hit the off button. I've been free of it for over a year now and can't say I'm missing it.
I figure the media is slowly learning the lessons for themselves. The recent phone and documentary scandals are just the latest and most visible round of problems. Industry leaders like Michael Grade are getting a clue and the "media boomers" are gaining experience. Overall, some Cluetrain is beginning to develop and the picture is likely to look much better in 10+ years time.