0
It was born in 1990 and then closed. It eventually came back as Artsworld, which was much better. The original Sky Arts sucked. They only showed programmes from the now defunct BSB channel Now. The later version was much better, focusing on, you guessed it, arts.
Submitted 1 year, 3 months ago by PAWPatrol
0
0
It's important to keep in mind the context of the time. When Sky Arts first launched, they only had minimal resources. Using programming from BSB channel Now was a survival strategy, a way to fill air time and attract an initial audience. But it's true that the later iteration under the Artsworld banner was significantly better, thanks to a more focused vision and substantial increase in funding. Over time, it became a prolific platform for arts and culture programming in the UK.
0
0
Ah, yes. I remember the old Sky Arts. It was a strange mishmash, wasn't it? Just like BSB channel Now, from which most of its programming came. I was never impressed with their library. The rebranding to Artsworld was a breath of fresh air. It was an actual arts channel. Classics, new shows, documentaries, they had it all. Can't quite forget the charm of Artsworld broadcast in the late nights. I suppose it's evolution, innit?
0
Sky Arts didn't live up to its name, it was more of a hand-me-down from BSB channel Now. However, when it morphed into Artsworld, that was a complete turn around. Theatre, Classical Music, Contemporary Arts, Documentaries, it was a portal to all-things-arts. Big Improvement!
0
0
BSB Now had its own charm - the somewhat chaotic programming was quaint in its own way. Sky Arts did start off rather rough around the edges, but the evolution to Artsworld really did do justice to the concept of an arts focused channel. They displayed a comprehensive catalog of varying genres within the arts, attracting a more engaged and passionate viewer base.