Some people seem to watch +1 without realising, and then take to Twitter to moan about the clock being an hour behind. There's an account which showcases the best tweets...
Interesting. With every revamp the ITV breakfast audience has gone down. How did Breakfast do over the same period? Has its audience stayed constant?
I'd love to see how Breakfasts Ratings have changed since 2000. I've always understood it to have been GMTV leading until 2005, then it being close for a while and GMTV falling away but maintaining in hindsight decent numbers.
They really are idiots for ditching the GMTV brand, they could have just refreshed it and introduced some new presenters. Basically the have fiddled around so much now it's stupid. GMB is doing terribly, worse than daybreak was doing at the beginning (which wasn't actually from what I saw doing that badly), but I think they should just leave it alone now.
Personally when ever I have watched GMB it's been like a disgusting old 70's house that got a lovely new facade but is the same horrible dump inside. I don't even think the new facade is that brilliant.
Mark Sweney @marksweney 3m
Germany vs Brazil is highest ever rating TV show in Germany (since data been collected) with avg 32.6m viewers and 87.8% share. Apparently
Wow at that German share!
32.57 million, 87.8% share, around 40% of the country watching. Final should be good.
I'd love to see how Breakfasts Ratings have changed since 2000. I've always understood it to have been GMTV leading until 2005, then it being close for a while and GMTV falling away but maintaining in hindsight decent numbers.
They really are idiots for ditching the GMTV brand, they could have just refreshed it and introduced some new presenters. Basically the have fiddled around so much now it's stupid. GMB is doing terribly, worse than daybreak was doing at the beginning (which wasn't actually from what I saw doing that badly), but I think they should just leave it alone now.
Personally when ever I have watched GMB it's been like a disgusting old 70's house that got a lovely new facade but is the same horrible dump inside. I don't even think the new facade is that brilliant.
Funny you should bday that about GMTV Ken. I'm quoting myself here but former ITV Head Of Daytime Dianne Nelmes thought the same thing.
Or rectifying mistakes they made in the same place which many of us mentioned. Two presenters and no desk for a start.
Dianne Nelmes was Head Of Daytime at ITV and spoke about GMB pre launch on The Media Show. She said they didn't need to hire Susanna Reid and should use people they already had there like Kate Garroway and Helen Fospero. She also said she did a report on GMTV when ITV bought it. She advised her bosses to keep it as it had some loyalty and fix the content.
I'd love to see how Breakfasts Ratings have changed since 2000. I've always understood it to have been GMTV leading until 2005, then it being close for a while and GMTV falling away but maintaining in hindsight decent numbers.
They really are idiots for ditching the GMTV brand, they could have just refreshed it and introduced some new presenters. Basically the have fiddled around so much now it's stupid. GMB is doing terribly, worse than daybreak was doing at the beginning (which wasn't actually from what I saw doing that badly), but I think they should just leave it alone now.
Personally when ever I have watched GMB it's been like a disgusting old 70's house that got a lovely new facade but is the same horrible dump inside. I don't even think the new facade is that brilliant.
GMTV was getting 1m vs BBC's 1.4m at the time it was axed. I do wonder what would have happened if Adrian & Christine's Daybreak aired under the GMTV brand. Brand loyalty counts for a lot more than some people realise and the audience may not have fallen away so dramatically. The irony is, by the end of GMTV, they actually ironed out a lot of the problems it had faced in recent years and the content was great and could've moved forward with Kate Garraway and Dan Lobb with Helen Fospero- something Daybreak eventually turned into!
GMB isn't a bad programme, the content isn't much different to that of the BBC and they have a good team of presenters. Its very much as GMTV would be if it was still on air. But the damage done in that slot seems virtually irreversible and it'll take something big to happen to BBC Breakfast before GMB can gain any ground.
I'd say ITV were brave to try and refresh their Breakfast show. But GMTV at the time wasn't beating the competition either so they were right to review it. They just haven't been able to produce anything better. But I do think a younger audience is there if they could find it and fight back. I think another regeneration is needed fairly quickly and I can't see how Good Morning Britian can still be on in another 18 months.
Funny you should bday that about GMTV Ken. I'm quoting myself here but former ITV Head Of Daytime Dianne Nelmes thought the same thing.
Thanks for digging that up, makes ITV look really stupid. I would argue that GMTV was a massive brand still, okay it had a few blotches but people young and old knew what it was. All it needed was kick up the backside and a fresh face or two.
I'd argue it didn't even need a re brand at the time. Unfortunately if they were to bring it back I think it would have no effect, ITV have blown it. NO audience trust left.
On this thread we always talk about stagnant things on here as a bad thing. In all the years I have been following this nonsense it's actually the opposite, viewers especially in daytime and mornings like familiarity. Programs lose most of their viewers through decline in quality, not because of people being bored of them.
I'd say entertainment is the only form of television people stop watching due to getting bored with the format and still I would say quality is more important.
GMB isn't a bad programme, the content isn't much different to that of the BBC and they have a good team of presenters. Its very much as GMTV would be if it was still on air. But the damage done in that slot seems virtually irreversible and it'll take something big to happen to BBC Breakfast before GMB can gain any ground.
I've said this before, but ITV had their chance when GMB launched - 800,000 viewers wasn't it? If the content, presentation and presenters were any good (or what the audience wanted) those 800,000 viewers would have stayed, and would probably have been joined by a few more over the ensuing weeks (give or take). But that didn't happen, the additional viewers did not return, and it now looks like they managed to alienate some of the then existing Daybreak viewers.
Now I cannot see what would entice those viewers to come back now, bar another relaunch and associated promo campaign to say "hey, we've changed, this is what we look like now, you'll like it". And even then, and with the jaded memories of previous relaunches that failed to excite, the likelihood of success is small.
Edit: Just to add, I agree with F1Ken, looks like ITV have had their chance, and blown it.
I'd say ITV were brave to try and refresh their Breakfast show. But GMTV at the time wasn't beating the competition either so they were right to review it. They just haven't been able to produce anything better. But I do think a younger audience is there if they could find it and fight back. I think another regeneration is needed fairly quickly and I can't see how Good Morning Britian can still be on in another 18 months.
You see without wanting to cause offence I would say you have fallen into the ITV trap. They didn't refresh their breakfast in 2010, they totally changed it.
IN 2010 all they needed to do was to give GMTV a coat of paint and some new presenters, as JFoster1 says towards the end GMTV had actually became a good breakfast show again. In fact I switched back to GMTV until it ended.
I say they just leave GMB alone and let the GMB team improve it. Let it find an audience. If ITV change it again then they have learnt nothing.
Massive benefit of hindsight alert here. If you'd have read these forums at the time, most wanted GMTV to be axed. If it had continued, it would still be being slated for being tired and demanded to be axed due to it being behind Breakfast and down on its heyday.
Massive benefit of hindsight alert here. If you'd have read these forums at the time, most wanted GMTV to be axed. If it had continued, it would still be being slated for being tired and demanded to be axed due to it being behind Breakfast and down on its heyday.
This thread likes that phrase and as I've said above, I think it's bull. It just goes to show this thread is at about the same level as ITV's executives are!
Having a level head in TV strikes me as very important. Not reading the papers as well is important because they spout out nonsense. My wife Buy the Daily Mail (You wonder why I go on about her!) and I use it to light the fire in the front room, even when its hot outside. Diabolical chip paper.
I've said this before, but ITV had their chance when GMB launched - 800,000 viewers wasn't it? If the content, presentation and presenters were any good (or what the audience wanted) those 800,000 viewers would have stayed, and would probably have been joined by a few more over the ensuing weeks (give or take). But that didn't happen, the additional viewers did not return, and it now looks like they managed to alienate some of the then existing Daybreak viewers.
Now I cannot see what would entice those viewers to come back now, bar another relaunch and associated promo campaign to say "hey, we've changed, this is what we look like now, you'll like it". And even then, and with the jaded memories of previous relaunches that failed to excite, the likelihood of success is small.
Edit: Just to add, I agree with F1Ken, looks like ITV have had their chance, and blown it.
I do agree with you but the overall format at launch was different to what is on air today. A sizeable chunk of the 800k viewers who watched at launch obviously didn't like how bold it originally was, something ITV have realised and are quickly reverting to a two presenter format with far less American-isms. There was also a quote from someone at ITV who said something about morning routines and how you rarely change what you have for your breakfast etc, which is also quite fitting for breakfast TV. That is mainly due to familiarity, which as already pointed out by another poster, is something daytime audiences want. The extra 200k viewers it gained at launch just may not have wanted to incorporate it into their daily routine for whatever reason, whilst the Daybreak viewers it has alienated just may not have liked the change.
A point I've made numerous times is that they haven't necessarily lost viewers to BBC Breakfast but to other outlets and thats where their challenge is. They do need to stop trying to go for that audience because it will never happen, just look at BBC and ITV News at Ten. At the same time, they can't plan yet another revamp because any programme they air really does need to establish itself and it just isn't happening. What they need is some kind if unique hook in the morning (reintroduce a kids block, it worked for TVAM and GMTV?), not what the BBC are airing but with adverts because the BBC will win every time.
1 ITV3 08:00 PM Midsomer Murders 975 4.3%
2 E4 07:00 PM Hollyoaks 788 4.5%
3 ITV4 07:00 PM Tour De France 2014 Highlights 736 4.1%
4 BBC Three 11:25 PM Family Guy 645 6.6%
5 BBC Three 11:00 PM Family Guy 606 4.5%
6 BBC Three 11:45 PM American Dad! 583 8.2%
7 E4 06:30 PM The Big Bang Theory 568 3.5%
8 Film4 09:00 PM Red 549 2.4%
9 BBC Three 12:10 AM American Dad! 501 9.7%
10 E4 08:00 PM The Big Bang Theory 490 2.4%
I do agree with you but the overall format at launch was different to what is on air today. A sizeable chunk of the 800k viewers who watched at launch obviously didn't like how bold it originally was, something ITV have realised and are quickly reverting to a two presenter format with far less American-isms.
But that is now the issue - having lost those 200,000 or 300,000 viewers, how do you now tell them that it's changed (even if the two-presenter format is sometimes there, and sometimes not)? ITV had their chance and blew it big time. Viewers tried, it, did not like what they saw, and left.
Relying now on word of mouth is likely to mean that any recovery is going to be measured in years rather than months, and I don't feel that neither the programme nor ITv have that long (despite pronouncements to the contrary).
Massive benefit of hindsight alert here. If you'd have read these forums at the time, most wanted GMTV to be axed. If it had continued, it would still be being slated for being tired and demanded to be axed due to it being behind Breakfast and down on its heyday.
People here say Breakfast is tired but the ratings say that people like it. ITV genuinely thought a complete overhaul was needed whereas others said just refresh the content. I wasn't a GMTV fan but it did have a loyal audience. Losing the housewife demo spurred ITV into action. But was a complete change the answer?
But that is now the issue - having lost those 200,000 or 300,000 viewers, how do you now tell them that it's changed (even if the two-presenter format is sometimes there, and sometimes not)? ITV had their chance and blew it big time. Viewers tried, it, did not like what they saw, and left.
Relying now on word of mouth is likely to mean that any recovery is going to be measured in years rather than months, and I don't feel that neither the programme nor ITv have that long (despite pronouncements to the contrary).
It will be difficult and a recovery probably will be measured in years because breakfast TV shows have a habit of rising over a period of time (but sinking quickly and failing to win their audience back). What they're probably going to have to do is use the summer to iron out the format and do what the original Daybreak ended up having to do and relying on The X Factor, of course assuming that takes off this year. It probably isn't the route they want to go down but it's the only thing that has worked before. The Daybreak average rose back up to 1m if I remember correctly, when they started to do that.
We watched a recording of the TdF highlights at half time and returned to the football at the end.
Those numbers defy all logic.
I think you've very much alone in that situation, I don't know why you'd switch off a match when Brazil were losing 5-0 and Germany looked like they were on for a record score. If it was 2-0 or something, maybe, but 5-0 is just the most bizarre scoreline.
As for the Beeb picking it, obviously they weren't to know it was going to end like that and it could easily have been as dull as some of Brazil's other matches in the tournaments with them parking the bus. BBC1 are slightly more competitive tonight and, given the freak result, almost certainly ITV will rate lower tonight. Not because it's ITV, natch.
Ah okay. Didn't know because how poorly ITV rates on Tuesdays!
There's a danger again that "Tuesdays are crap on ITV" becomes the catch-all excuse. The reason ITV are crap on Tuesdays usually is because 'stEnders and Holby are on BBC1 and ITV seem totally unable or unwilling to counter. But for the past few weeks that has not been the case because the Tuesday schedules are not what they usually are. Holby hasn't been on Tuesday for weeks. So you can't use the last few Tuesdays and say, oh, ITV are just crap on Tuesdays, nothing to see here, because they don't have the usual Tuesday schedule. Obviously last night was rather different but you can't use "it's Tuesday" as an excuse.
People don't avoid ITV on Tuesday because it's Tuesday. They avoid it because they show a load of crap. Sadly we now seem to have got to the stage where even ITV believe there's something about Tuesdays and so they show a load of crap because it's Tuesday, which is just a self-fulfilling prophecy. Show something good there (like Love Your Garden) and the viewers come back.
But that is now the issue - having lost those 200,000 or 300,000 viewers, how do you now tell them that it's changed (even if the two-presenter format is sometimes there, and sometimes not)? ITV had their chance and blew it big time. Viewers tried, it, did not like what they saw, and left.
What Good Morning Britain need is a big news story when people who don't usually watch breakfast TV do. I don't mean something like an election or hard news like that, because the people who they're trying to attract won't turn to them for that. I mean a big human interest story, even something like a big snowstorm. I know it's a bit of a cynical suggestion but that's going to be what it takes.
I'd say ITV were brave to try and refresh their Breakfast show. But GMTV at the time wasn't beating the competition either so they were right to review it. They just haven't been able to produce anything better. But I do think a younger audience is there if they could find it and fight back. I think another regeneration is needed fairly quickly and I can't see how Good Morning Britian can still be on in another 18 months.
I thought they were changing GMB from within - are they not already moving away from the desk etc. Thats the way to continue although whether that will ever lead to better ratings is moot.
What Good Morning Britain need is a big news story when people who don't usually watch breakfast TV do. I don't mean something like an election or hard news like that, because the people who they're trying to attract won't turn to them for that. I mean a big human interest story, even something like a big snowstorm. I know it's a bit of a cynical suggestion but that's going to be what it takes.
I know what you mean, they did seem to go down that route (dort of anyway) with the Freddie Starr interview, but any increase that day seemed to melt away very quickly. And with most stories such as floods, snowstorms etc, people tend to go to the BBC anyway
I think you've very much alone in that situation, I don't know why you'd switch off a match when Brazil were losing 5-0 and Germany looked like they were on for a record score. If it was 2-0 or something, maybe, but 5-0 is just the most bizarre scoreline.
As for the Beeb picking it, obviously they weren't to know it was going to end like that and it could easily have been as dull as some of Brazil's other matches in the tournaments with them parking the bus. BBC1 are slightly more competitive tonight and, given the freak result, almost certainly ITV will rate lower tonight. Not because it's ITV, natch.
11m were there from the start so Brazil v Germany was already a draw, those crazy five minutes meant a massive switch over to see something astonishing. And they stayed to the end which was amazing.
There's a danger again that "Tuesdays are crap on ITV" becomes the catch-all excuse. The reason ITV are crap on Tuesdays usually is because 'stEnders and Holby are on BBC1 and ITV seem totally unable or unwilling to counter. But for the past few weeks that has not been the case because the Tuesday schedules are not what they usually are. Holby hasn't been on Tuesday for weeks. So you can't use the last few Tuesdays and say, oh, ITV are just crap on Tuesdays, nothing to see here, because they don't have the usual Tuesday schedule. Obviously last night was rather different but you can't use "it's Tuesday" as an excuse.
People don't avoid ITV on Tuesday because it's Tuesday. They avoid it because they show a load of crap. Sadly we now seem to have got to the stage where even ITV believe there's something about Tuesdays and so they show a load of crap because it's Tuesday, which is just a self-fulfilling prophecy. Show something good there (like Love Your Garden) and the viewers come back.
ITV does shit on Tuesday because they put shit on Tuesday. They do well when good programmes are on.
What Good Morning Britain need is a big news story when people who don't usually watch breakfast TV do. I don't mean something like an election or hard news like that, because the people who they're trying to attract won't turn to them for that. I mean a big human interest story, even something like a big snowstorm. I know it's a bit of a cynical suggestion but that's going to be what it takes.
But when there was a big weather story people tuned into Breakfast in larger numbers like with the floods or the Arctic conditions Britain had.
But when there was a big weather story people tuned into Breakfast in larger numbers like with the floods or the Arctic conditions Britain had.
Yeah, Breakfast would go up but so too would Good Morning Britain, because you'd be getting people who wouldn't watch Breakfast because they think it's boring. Especially if Breakfast was also reporting on a big political story or something.
UK TV Ratings @TVRatingsUK 15s
Germany's extraordinary 7-1 victory over Brazil was watched by a huge peak audience of 13.98m/57.8% last night. @GaryLineker
UK TV Ratings @TVRatingsUK 3s
Coverage of #BRAvGER averaged 11.52m/51.0%. The match began with 11.23m, jumped to 13.13m at 9.20, then remained above 13m until full time.
Comments
That account
I'd love to see how Breakfasts Ratings have changed since 2000. I've always understood it to have been GMTV leading until 2005, then it being close for a while and GMTV falling away but maintaining in hindsight decent numbers.
They really are idiots for ditching the GMTV brand, they could have just refreshed it and introduced some new presenters. Basically the have fiddled around so much now it's stupid. GMB is doing terribly, worse than daybreak was doing at the beginning (which wasn't actually from what I saw doing that badly), but I think they should just leave it alone now.
Personally when ever I have watched GMB it's been like a disgusting old 70's house that got a lovely new facade but is the same horrible dump inside. I don't even think the new facade is that brilliant.
AS I always say, the worst thing about Television is the audience!
Unbelievable. If that's the average mental capacity of the GMB viewer then you have to say giving them serious news is a bad idea!
I don't suffer fools gladly. >:(
http://www.focus.de/kultur/medien/wm-deutsches-7-1-sorgt-fuer-tv-rekord-32-57-millionen-zuschauer_id_3977040.html
That figure for PM is awful.
GMTV was getting 1m vs BBC's 1.4m at the time it was axed. I do wonder what would have happened if Adrian & Christine's Daybreak aired under the GMTV brand. Brand loyalty counts for a lot more than some people realise and the audience may not have fallen away so dramatically. The irony is, by the end of GMTV, they actually ironed out a lot of the problems it had faced in recent years and the content was great and could've moved forward with Kate Garraway and Dan Lobb with Helen Fospero- something Daybreak eventually turned into!
GMB isn't a bad programme, the content isn't much different to that of the BBC and they have a good team of presenters. Its very much as GMTV would be if it was still on air. But the damage done in that slot seems virtually irreversible and it'll take something big to happen to BBC Breakfast before GMB can gain any ground.
Thanks for digging that up, makes ITV look really stupid. I would argue that GMTV was a massive brand still, okay it had a few blotches but people young and old knew what it was. All it needed was kick up the backside and a fresh face or two.
I'd argue it didn't even need a re brand at the time. Unfortunately if they were to bring it back I think it would have no effect, ITV have blown it. NO audience trust left.
On this thread we always talk about stagnant things on here as a bad thing. In all the years I have been following this nonsense it's actually the opposite, viewers especially in daytime and mornings like familiarity. Programs lose most of their viewers through decline in quality, not because of people being bored of them.
I'd say entertainment is the only form of television people stop watching due to getting bored with the format and still I would say quality is more important.
I've said this before, but ITV had their chance when GMB launched - 800,000 viewers wasn't it? If the content, presentation and presenters were any good (or what the audience wanted) those 800,000 viewers would have stayed, and would probably have been joined by a few more over the ensuing weeks (give or take). But that didn't happen, the additional viewers did not return, and it now looks like they managed to alienate some of the then existing Daybreak viewers.
Now I cannot see what would entice those viewers to come back now, bar another relaunch and associated promo campaign to say "hey, we've changed, this is what we look like now, you'll like it". And even then, and with the jaded memories of previous relaunches that failed to excite, the likelihood of success is small.
Edit: Just to add, I agree with F1Ken, looks like ITV have had their chance, and blown it.
You see without wanting to cause offence I would say you have fallen into the ITV trap. They didn't refresh their breakfast in 2010, they totally changed it.
IN 2010 all they needed to do was to give GMTV a coat of paint and some new presenters, as JFoster1 says towards the end GMTV had actually became a good breakfast show again. In fact I switched back to GMTV until it ended.
I say they just leave GMB alone and let the GMB team improve it. Let it find an audience. If ITV change it again then they have learnt nothing.
That's my silly old view anyway!
This thread likes that phrase and as I've said above, I think it's bull. It just goes to show this thread is at about the same level as ITV's executives are!
Having a level head in TV strikes me as very important. Not reading the papers as well is important because they spout out nonsense. My wife Buy the Daily Mail (You wonder why I go on about her!) and I use it to light the fire in the front room, even when its hot outside. Diabolical chip paper.
Sorry I got distracted!
I do agree with you but the overall format at launch was different to what is on air today. A sizeable chunk of the 800k viewers who watched at launch obviously didn't like how bold it originally was, something ITV have realised and are quickly reverting to a two presenter format with far less American-isms. There was also a quote from someone at ITV who said something about morning routines and how you rarely change what you have for your breakfast etc, which is also quite fitting for breakfast TV. That is mainly due to familiarity, which as already pointed out by another poster, is something daytime audiences want. The extra 200k viewers it gained at launch just may not have wanted to incorporate it into their daily routine for whatever reason, whilst the Daybreak viewers it has alienated just may not have liked the change.
A point I've made numerous times is that they haven't necessarily lost viewers to BBC Breakfast but to other outlets and thats where their challenge is. They do need to stop trying to go for that audience because it will never happen, just look at BBC and ITV News at Ten. At the same time, they can't plan yet another revamp because any programme they air really does need to establish itself and it just isn't happening. What they need is some kind if unique hook in the morning (reintroduce a kids block, it worked for TVAM and GMTV?), not what the BBC are airing but with adverts because the BBC will win every time.
1 ITV3 08:00 PM Midsomer Murders 975 4.3%
2 E4 07:00 PM Hollyoaks 788 4.5%
3 ITV4 07:00 PM Tour De France 2014 Highlights 736 4.1%
4 BBC Three 11:25 PM Family Guy 645 6.6%
5 BBC Three 11:00 PM Family Guy 606 4.5%
6 BBC Three 11:45 PM American Dad! 583 8.2%
7 E4 06:30 PM The Big Bang Theory 568 3.5%
8 Film4 09:00 PM Red 549 2.4%
9 BBC Three 12:10 AM American Dad! 501 9.7%
10 E4 08:00 PM The Big Bang Theory 490 2.4%
Relying now on word of mouth is likely to mean that any recovery is going to be measured in years rather than months, and I don't feel that neither the programme nor ITv have that long (despite pronouncements to the contrary).
People here say Breakfast is tired but the ratings say that people like it. ITV genuinely thought a complete overhaul was needed whereas others said just refresh the content. I wasn't a GMTV fan but it did have a loyal audience. Losing the housewife demo spurred ITV into action. But was a complete change the answer?
Tbh I don't think you could have expected much more for a rpt of Life stories at 10:35pm and that usually only gets around 3m for a new episode.
It will be difficult and a recovery probably will be measured in years because breakfast TV shows have a habit of rising over a period of time (but sinking quickly and failing to win their audience back). What they're probably going to have to do is use the summer to iron out the format and do what the original Daybreak ended up having to do and relying on The X Factor, of course assuming that takes off this year. It probably isn't the route they want to go down but it's the only thing that has worked before. The Daybreak average rose back up to 1m if I remember correctly, when they started to do that.
I think you've very much alone in that situation, I don't know why you'd switch off a match when Brazil were losing 5-0 and Germany looked like they were on for a record score. If it was 2-0 or something, maybe, but 5-0 is just the most bizarre scoreline.
As for the Beeb picking it, obviously they weren't to know it was going to end like that and it could easily have been as dull as some of Brazil's other matches in the tournaments with them parking the bus. BBC1 are slightly more competitive tonight and, given the freak result, almost certainly ITV will rate lower tonight. Not because it's ITV, natch.
There's a danger again that "Tuesdays are crap on ITV" becomes the catch-all excuse. The reason ITV are crap on Tuesdays usually is because 'stEnders and Holby are on BBC1 and ITV seem totally unable or unwilling to counter. But for the past few weeks that has not been the case because the Tuesday schedules are not what they usually are. Holby hasn't been on Tuesday for weeks. So you can't use the last few Tuesdays and say, oh, ITV are just crap on Tuesdays, nothing to see here, because they don't have the usual Tuesday schedule. Obviously last night was rather different but you can't use "it's Tuesday" as an excuse.
People don't avoid ITV on Tuesday because it's Tuesday. They avoid it because they show a load of crap. Sadly we now seem to have got to the stage where even ITV believe there's something about Tuesdays and so they show a load of crap because it's Tuesday, which is just a self-fulfilling prophecy. Show something good there (like Love Your Garden) and the viewers come back.
What Good Morning Britain need is a big news story when people who don't usually watch breakfast TV do. I don't mean something like an election or hard news like that, because the people who they're trying to attract won't turn to them for that. I mean a big human interest story, even something like a big snowstorm. I know it's a bit of a cynical suggestion but that's going to be what it takes.
I thought they were changing GMB from within - are they not already moving away from the desk etc. Thats the way to continue although whether that will ever lead to better ratings is moot.
I know what you mean, they did seem to go down that route (dort of anyway) with the Freddie Starr interview, but any increase that day seemed to melt away very quickly. And with most stories such as floods, snowstorms etc, people tend to go to the BBC anyway
ITV does shit on Tuesday because they put shit on Tuesday. They do well when good programmes are on.
But when there was a big weather story people tuned into Breakfast in larger numbers like with the floods or the Arctic conditions Britain had.
Yeah, Breakfast would go up but so too would Good Morning Britain, because you'd be getting people who wouldn't watch Breakfast because they think it's boring. Especially if Breakfast was also reporting on a big political story or something.
The Final could pull in some real numbers on Sunday.