I don't think anyone on here is saying they should tell you where you can watch the games, just that they should report on what's happening. The impression is that Sky's news values are being distorted by their commercial interests. The Beeb report on what's going on elsewhere in the RLWC. Sky seem to be deliberately ignoring it.

Their dogged stubborness in keep eddie and stevo is sickening. They need to go.

Of course they are. Sky sports news is less of a news channel and more of an infomercial for their main four sports channels

1. I'm focussing on the sports news sections on Sky News. They are deliberately ignoring the RLWC. Somebody in that organisation has taken this decision and I'd like to know who it is. (They are happily reporting news of, for example, the track cycling world cup - even though that is actually being covered by BBC2).

2. I'm sure their sports presenters realise this and some of them will feel their journalistic professionalism impugned.

3. I hope Sky News doesn't expect to win any more industry awards unless this approach is corrected fast.

Quote: Bovrick "Didn't the parliamentary group help push Virgin into taking on Premier Sports? Hopefully the next step, if we can build sufficient momentum, is to get the RLWC onto that list too.'" Not sure but just googled the list and found this en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ofcom_Co ... ted_Events I know its wikipedia but linked to ofcom site. Says only RUWC final is protected so be a long shot to get the whole tournament protected

Quote: Bovrick "Didn't the parliamentary group help push Virgin into taking on Premier Sports? Hopefully the next step, if we can build sufficient momentum, is to get the RLWC onto that list too.'" Not sure but just googled the list and found this en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ofcom_Co ... ted_Events I know its wikipedia but linked to ofcom site. Says only RUWC final is protected so be a long shot to get the whole tournament protected

This is more serious than I thought. To hear that editorial decisions on the sports channel are determined by commercial considerations is worrying enough but here you're saying it percolates into the main news channel. Isn't it a condition of their licence that they report fairly? Doesn't it reflect badly on the professionalism of the main channel as a whole? Do they have a regulator? Has it any teeth?



How do we find out?

Isn't it understandable that a commercial organisation may decide not to promote something that would help its competitors? Ch 9 here also downplays the World Cup, as do all the News Ltd papers as far as I can tell.

I am with you and that NZ figure isn't bad but my point was all the football world cup is protected but only the final in the RUWC. We have a long way to go to get protected status.

Only place sky feel it is in the pockets I have also cancelled sky sports and when asked said lack of rugby, qualifying it after listening to th RU list as RL

It is. But if they want to run a news channel it has to be impartial or it's not allowed to broadcast. It's why Fox News weren't allowed to setup a UK news channel.

You can tell the way Sky News is heading as they have just handed Kay Burley a new 5 year contract.

*shudder*

Bmx, angling, boxing, Spanish football and pool on today. No rugby league world cup

In reply to the op, Sky may well be making a statement but, it seems that they have also made an error in judgement over the 2013RLWC.
Between them, The RFL, Premier and the Beeb have done an excellent job and the World Cup looks like exceeding even the most optimistic forecasts.
All we need now is for England to win the main prize...........ok, that's too optimistic.
Also, Vossy has been a revelation, lively, enthusiastic and knowledgeable, certainly the pick of all the commentators in RL over the last 10 years.

doubtful.
The RLWC will deliver record crowds, but other than those of us "in the know", the competition has done little in the way of media domination. BARB figures for the BBC are great with 2.2 million peaks figures, but regardless of how many viewers Premier being Free on Virgin opened up, it is actual viewing figures that are the Key. 150K averages for SL on Sky across 54 regular season games and play-offs/GF costs SKY 19,000,000 a year + outside broadcast costs etc....I suspect Sky know what they would pay and what they would fill with if they didn't get the rights. 316k a game would have cost SKY 7 million for 22 non England games whilst driving eyeballs to the BBC for the 6 exclusive England games.

SKY have RL by the throat for 3 more years....by the time negotiations start in 2 years, the landscape will be clearer with BT, Premier and the internet all possibly interested in the rights.....what is needed is strong leadership with a clear vision as to what is expected. I would say 1 FTA game a week should be key...even if its on the digital wilderness of FTA TV or exclusively on-line.