They obviously don’t watch what they produce.
Now I’m a grumpy old man, I’m ever more inclined to believe the ills of the world are due to incompetence or carelessness. The idea is simple, might be true, and no evidence is required because we all ‘know’ that everyone else is an idiot! As that’s obviously untrue, I recommend taking a more considered approach, not least because acting on an incorrect assumption always causes trouble.
Very often root causes are not what they seem, so it’s worth checking for alternatives. Perhaps Sky, being a professional broadcaster, watch on a colour calibrated screen on which the data looks OK. If they think the output is satisfactory, is there a way the customer might foul up, beyond the possibility he has a too cheap TV?
There is! With the possible exception of serious amateur photographers, most of us don’t colour calibrate our displays, or are even aware it’s possible. So what the public see is an approximation of the broadcast picture, and maybe not a good one.
Other technology limitations: contrast depth varies considerably on displays, and if a programme is watched over a streaming service, quality is reduced on slow connections.
And as individual eyesight varies considerably, images that work for me may not for you and vice versa.
I agree it would be smart for broadcasters to avoid colour combinations that might not work well, but it’s not always obvious what those combinations are.
Dave