Why not just have a regular couple who do Sundays only ?
Charlie and Naga this morning which is a bit unusual for a Monday.
Do the presenters have families and kids ? maybe sharing/alternating Sundays is the fair way to do it so people get the chance to be at home with the kids for the day , I know we do that so people do not work every weekend they all take turns so it is fair.
What was politically correct about it ? London is the capital city of England, home of parliament and generally where more news is generated so it was logical to place a breakfast show there rather than in a region. Yet the Breakfast team have done extremely well against the odds to maintain the standard of the programme with a rock-solid 1.5-1.6 million viewers on weekdays.It is also the first place I turn to for news in the morning,
It was all part of the previous government appeasing people who said the media was too London centric and should be moved out and also 50% of the BBC based outside of London. Along with 50% of production talent must have their usual base / home outside of the M25 and 70% of production budget will have to be spent outside the M25
That followed by calls to move things like the Opera House and British Museum.
It was all part of the previous government appeasing people who said the media was too London centric and should be moved out and also 50% of the BBC based outside of London. Along with 50% of production talent must have their usual base / home outside of the M25 and 70% of production budget will have to be spent outside the M25
That followed by calls to move things like the Opera House and British Museum.
I agree about more programming being made outside London, but as others have said Breakfast and all National News programming should be made in London. The Capital just seems the right place to me to base a National News operation, as well as being the place where you'll most likely have guests want to appear on Breakfast. I guess this applies to the likes of chat shows etc too.
I agree about more programming being made outside London, but as others have said Breakfast and all National News programming should be made in London. The Capital just seems the right place to me to base a National News operation, as well as being the place where you'll most likely have guests want to appear on Breakfast. I guess this applies to the likes of chat shows etc too.
Thanks, you made my reply for me very well. Moving Breakfast, its flagship morning television news programme, outside the capital was a big mistake and done for political purposes. I don't doubt the team there have done the best with the situation that they have, but the studio looks fake and cheap, they can't get a full rota of quality presenters to work on the programme and they can't get major guests to the studio because it's 3 hours away from the Capital. By all means move production away from London, but the programmes should be carefully selected. I note that Birmingham, the UK's second biggest city/conurbation has had most of it's production, including factual and drama moved elsewhere since the BBC closed Pebble Mill. Not sure how this fits in with the ethos.
Thanks, you made my reply for me very well. Moving Breakfast, its flagship morning television news programme, outside the capital was a big mistake .
If it was a mistake then it hasn't had any effect upon viewer numbers, the ability to "tell the news", the quality of the guests, or the ability to interview "down the line" when needed.
Moving BBC Breakfast away from London was, in my opinion a good idea. The UK as a whole, and the BBC in particular is far too metropolitan in it's outlook. One visible change, apart from, as others have commented, the naff set, is that these days you're more likely to get OBs from hospitals / factories / businesses in central and Northern UK, than scurrying off to a London unit, and the "experts" employed often come from academic institutions from the Midlands and Northwest England, rather than from UCL etc.
This serves to show that there is "intelligent life" outside the M25 and the more national institutions spread their wings out from London the better.
Yes, London is the capital, no argument there, but that doesn't mean the majority of us (those that don't live the in sesspit that is London) shouldn't have their lives and views aired. You never know, insular Londoners may actually learn something about the real world as a result.
Moving BBC Breakfast away from London was, in my opinion a good idea. The UK as a whole, and the BBC in particular is far too metropolitan in it's outlook. One visible change, apart from, as others have commented, the naff set, is that these days you're more likely to get OBs from hospitals / factories / businesses in central and Northern UK, than scurrying off to a London unit, and the "experts" employed often come from academic institutions from the Midlands and Northwest England, rather than from UCL etc.
This serves to show that there is "intelligent life" outside the M25 and the more national institutions spread their wings out from London the better.
Yes, London is the capital, no argument there, but that doesn't mean the majority of us (those that don't live the in sesspit that is London) shouldn't have their lives and views aired. You never know, insular Londoners may actually learn something about the real world as a result.
Yeh now we all get to learn everything that happens in Salford and they did an outside broadcast two weeks ago from a building opposite media city.
When Breakfast was based at TV Centre they always had plenty of regional contributions - either in studios or on OBs.I don't see anything ''politically correct'' about moving to Salford - you might as well argue they should have moved to Birmingham as England's second city, Cardiff, Edinburgh or Belfast.
When Breakfast was based at TV Centre they always had plenty of regional contributions - either in studios or on OBs.I don't see anything ''politically correct'' about moving to Salford - you might as well argue they should have moved to Birmingham as England's second city, Cardiff, Edinburgh or Belfast.
I have to say as someone who has lived in London all my life I have no problem with Breakfast as I do not spend any time thinking about where it comes from. We get the news, the presenters are ok, and I find it much better than any alternatives that are available .
It's always been a bit of a myth that all BBC production was based in London. If you go back to the early 1950s the BBC already had studios in Birmingham, Manchester and Glasgow contributing programmes to the network and that spread as television itself spread. Ironically the BBC now has more production outside London than ITV.
Yes, London is the capital, no argument there, but that doesn't mean the majority of us (those that don't live the in sesspit that is London) shouldn't have their lives and views aired. You never know, insular Londoners may actually learn something about the real world as a result.
What I dislike is the poor effort studio they've ended up with, and the fact they don't make the most of the location. Nice shiny new location and they're stuck in a little corner of converted office space with fake empty cold newsroom.
I really dislike fake newsrooms/ spaces in studios. All it needed was a nice sunrise loop view of Salford without the exaggerated colours and empty desks.
I think it's alright. If you have a view of outside, you have the Daybreak problem - it's pitch black for most of the show during the winter, and then in Greater Manchester, it's pissing down the rest of the time.
They had a disagreement about something inconsequential before she brought it to a close. That was after 8am, though, I think, when I watched. Maybe it's been frosty for a while?
They had a disagreement about something inconsequential before she brought it to a close. That was after 8am, though, I think, when I watched. Maybe it's been frosty for a while?
Professional presenters should not be indulging in any sort of tantrums. They always seem to have a much cooler relationship than Bill and Louise, I suspect Charlie is not her greatest fan:D
I think it's alright. If you have a view of outside, you have the Daybreak problem - it's pitch black for most of the show during the winter, and then in Greater Manchester, it's pissing down the rest of the time.
I think it's terrible, I'm not suggesting a live view but just a nice recording of Salford waterfront with a sunrise view.
What do you find alright about empty chairs and computers?
I think it's been widely believed for some time that Naga and Charlie don't get on, why the BBC insist on pairing them together I don't know.
What else could they do? The only option would be to swap Naga and Louise around. They're not going to do that, and I'm not overall convinced that Naga and Charlie don't get on anyway.
Plus, if they're were professional enough, they would put it past them anyway.
Comments
It's half term, which means Bill & Louise will be off.
I expect a pairing like Jon Kay & Sally Nugent will turn up to take over at the end of the week.
Do the presenters have families and kids ? maybe sharing/alternating Sundays is the fair way to do it so people get the chance to be at home with the kids for the day , I know we do that so people do not work every weekend they all take turns so it is fair.
It was all part of the previous government appeasing people who said the media was too London centric and should be moved out and also 50% of the BBC based outside of London. Along with 50% of production talent must have their usual base / home outside of the M25 and 70% of production budget will have to be spent outside the M25
That followed by calls to move things like the Opera House and British Museum.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/success-of-bbcs-move-to-salford-leads-to-calls-for-other-leading-cultural-institutions-to-be-relocated-to-cities-in-the-north-of-england-8935640.html
Bill's youngest daughter is 24 ! Is he doing a Lorraine ?
I agree about more programming being made outside London, but as others have said Breakfast and all National News programming should be made in London. The Capital just seems the right place to me to base a National News operation, as well as being the place where you'll most likely have guests want to appear on Breakfast. I guess this applies to the likes of chat shows etc too.
Thanks, you made my reply for me very well. Moving Breakfast, its flagship morning television news programme, outside the capital was a big mistake and done for political purposes. I don't doubt the team there have done the best with the situation that they have, but the studio looks fake and cheap, they can't get a full rota of quality presenters to work on the programme and they can't get major guests to the studio because it's 3 hours away from the Capital. By all means move production away from London, but the programmes should be carefully selected. I note that Birmingham, the UK's second biggest city/conurbation has had most of it's production, including factual and drama moved elsewhere since the BBC closed Pebble Mill. Not sure how this fits in with the ethos.
If it was a mistake then it hasn't had any effect upon viewer numbers, the ability to "tell the news", the quality of the guests, or the ability to interview "down the line" when needed.
This serves to show that there is "intelligent life" outside the M25 and the more national institutions spread their wings out from London the better.
Yes, London is the capital, no argument there, but that doesn't mean the majority of us (those that don't live the in sesspit that is London) shouldn't have their lives and views aired. You never know, insular Londoners may actually learn something about the real world as a result.
I have to say as someone who has lived in London all my life I have no problem with Breakfast as I do not spend any time thinking about where it comes from. We get the news, the presenters are ok, and I find it much better than any alternatives that are available .
Oh, Thank you for the insult.
You were doing quite well until that point.
Has BBC Breakfast ever had two female presenters presenting
Around Xmas, I think Louise did a show with Sally Nugent. It won't happen often, but when lots of people are off.
Is there any reason why they shouldn't have two female presenters (or for that matter two male presenters ?) What's the fuss all about ?
I think it's alright. If you have a view of outside, you have the Daybreak problem - it's pitch black for most of the show during the winter, and then in Greater Manchester, it's pissing down the rest of the time.
They had a disagreement about something inconsequential before she brought it to a close. That was after 8am, though, I think, when I watched. Maybe it's been frosty for a while?
The general dynamic is to have one each, as a balance. Steph and Sally are relief presenters, so mainly stick to business and sport, respectively.
Professional presenters should not be indulging in any sort of tantrums. They always seem to have a much cooler relationship than Bill and Louise, I suspect Charlie is not her greatest fan:D
I think it's terrible, I'm not suggesting a live view but just a nice recording of Salford waterfront with a sunrise view.
What do you find alright about empty chairs and computers?
Something for the programme editor to sort out
What else could they do? The only option would be to swap Naga and Louise around. They're not going to do that, and I'm not overall convinced that Naga and Charlie don't get on anyway.
Plus, if they're were professional enough, they would put it past them anyway.