What's that goto do with it I don't work 5 days a week 8 hours a day like the previous posted suggested everyone does,not by choice, but by what job came my way not everyone is a 40 hour a week 5 day a week worker.
What's that goto do with it I don't work 5 days a week 8 hours a day like the previous posted suggested everyone does,not by choice, but by what job came my way not everyone is a 40 hour a week 5 day a week worker.
I don't think any breakfast presenter on any channel works a five-day week as their hours are judged to be extremely anti-social. There must be millions of people who don't work a five-day, 40-hour week.That's between them and their employer.
Most modern recorders assume you want to record a whole program and if you want to record a channel between two set times it's a less simple process.
I can do that pretty easily with both of my PVRs:
1) Record complete programme and skip what you don't want
Or
2) Set timer for complete programme, but reduce pre- & post- paddings to match the start/end times that you want.
Might not be as simple as setting a recording, but it's still do-able. In fact, i had to do (2) when The Film Review programme on the News Channel didn't have an EPG entry (in the days before the News Channel was HD), and it worked pretty well.
Naga is on contract, and that's why she does so much other stuff.!
Ah - that explains why Naga does practically any other news-related job when somebody is away/ill. So she's just contracted generally to the BBC to present whatever they decide, and not specifically to the morning show?
Where is the proof she is doing it to be more appealing she might be letting it grow because she wants a change.
She's had it this "long" before; she tends to grow it a bit, then get it cut. She'd be silly to go for long hair - the crop do is her trademark. She'd be just any old Indian bird on the BBC if she grew it long. And long hair doesn't always suit. Look at Zeinab Badawi - like something from "Planet of the Apes" in a wig.
She's had it this "long" before; she tends to grow it a bit, then get it cut. She'd be silly to go for long hair - the crop do is her trademark. She'd be just any old Indian bird on the BBC if she grew it long. And long hair doesn't always suit. Look at Zeinab Badawi - like something from "Planet of the Apes" in a wig.
Where is the proof she is doing it to be more appealing she might be letting it grow because she wants a change.
When Munchetty started presenting Working Lunch (a show that had a poor "make-over", which she subsequently managed to fatally poison, IMHO) the out-going presenter showed an early professional / publicity photo pf her. In that she had shoulder-length hair, a pleasant smile and overall "happy" demeanour. That did not contrast at all well with the reality of her stern crop and acerbic, haughty and critical attitude: a persona that has remained with her ever since.
When Munchetty started presenting Working Lunch (a show that had a poor "make-over", which she subsequently managed to fatally poison, IMHO) the out-going presenter showed an early professional / publicity photo pf her. In that she had shoulder-length hair, a pleasant smile and overall "happy" demeanour. That did not contrast at all well with the reality of her stern crop and acerbic, haughty and critical attitude: a persona that has remained with her ever since.
What a pairing today. Roger Johnson and Stef McGovern.
Roger Johnson is soo boring, and slouches all the time, so unprofessional, and so is Stef's accent.
Didn't watch this morning- but I bet Steph read the headlines on The Andrew Marr Show, as there appears to be a rule that says it is ALWAYS the female presenter who stays on to read the news.
In these days of equality, very sexist to have such a rule in place.
Didn't watch this morning- but I bet Steph read the headlines on The Andrew Marr Show, as there appears to be a rule that says it is ALWAYS the female presenter who stays on to read the news.
In these days of equality, very sexist to have such a rule in place.
There seems to be another rule that says a woman must always read the network part of the 8 pm update on BBC1 although the regional parts are often read by men.Also very sexist - who comes up with these ideas ?
What a pairing today. Roger Johnson and Stef McGovern.
Roger Johnson is soo boring, and slouches all the time, so unprofessional, and so is Stef's accent.
I have to agree, Roger Johnson should not be broadcasting to anyone, he lacks any charisma or personality, constantly slouches and fails to engage with anyone who he might happen to talk about. He definitely shouldn't be presenting a lively networked news programme. I rather suspect he only gets to do this gig because he is based in Salford and is male and there is no one else around, Steph for much the same reasons. Pairing them together is like having the worst combination possible. It's not watchable.
I've also noticed that the BBC in Salford is churning out a large number of bland, dull autocue reading robotic sports news presenters. Might have to start another thread on that though!
I have to agree, Roger Johnson should not be broadcasting to anyone, he lacks any charisma or personality, constantly slouches and fails to engage with anyone who he might happen to talk about. He definitely shouldn't be presenting a lively networked news programme. I rather suspect he only gets to do this gig because he is based in Salford and is male and there is no one else around, Steph for much the same reasons. Pairing them together is like having the worst combination possible. It's not watchable.
I've also noticed that the BBC in Salford is churning out a large number of bland, dull autocue reading robotic sports news presenters. Might have to start another thread on that though!
In fact, I'm warming to Stef, I mean Steph a bit. Roger needs to go, whenever I see his picture with his North West Tonight Co presenter on BBC iPlayer, I immediatley think bland, bland, bland.
Also, yes, BBC Sports News presenters are very bland also. They all seem soo second rate.
In fact, I'm warming to Stef, I mean Steph a bit. Roger needs to go, whenever I see his picture with his North West Tonight Co presenter on BBC iPlayer, I immediatley think bland, bland, bland.
Also, yes, BBC Sports News presenters are very bland also. They all seem soo second rate.
It's odd how some people get on in the world.
Roger Johnson is too bland and boring to actively dislike, but I remember when I first saw him on the News Channel a few years ago, wondering how he had got a spot as a relief presenter when there were umpteen people better than him. At the time his main job was BBC South's sports reporter/presenter- and normally any trialists on the News Channel would have earned their stripes as a national correspondent. first. Then Gordon Burns retires, and he lands a plum senior regional news job- again when I would have thought there would have been plenty of better contenders. And- that in turn means he gets the national BBC Breakfast job every so often- but really he's got nothing going for him presentation wise at all.
I have to agree, Roger Johnson should not be broadcasting to anyone, he lacks any charisma or personality, constantly slouches and fails to engage with anyone who he might happen to talk about. He definitely shouldn't be presenting a lively networked news programme. I rather suspect he only gets to do this gig because he is based in Salford and is male and there is no one else around, Steph for much the same reasons. Pairing them together is like having the worst combination possible. It's not watchable.
I've also noticed that the BBC in Salford is churning out a large number of bland, dull autocue reading robotic sports news presenters. Might have to start another thread on that though!
Not necessarily because Roger is Salford-based; both Jon Kay and John Maguire travel up from Bristol to present Sunday shifts.
As for the female presenter for Sunday, it's more or less going to be one of the "three S's"; Steph (McGovern), Sian (Lloyd) or Sally (Nugent), now that Katherine Downes has gone on maternity leave.
Not necessarily because Roger is Salford-based; both Jon Kay and John Maguire travel up from Bristol to present Sunday shifts.
As for the female presenter for Sunday, it's more or less going to be one of the "three S's"; Steph (McGovern), Sian (Lloyd) or Sally (Nugent), now that Katherine Downes has gone on maternity leave.
Jon Kay is very experienced and has more personality than 100 Roger Johnsons. There's a guy who presents "Your Money" on the BBC News Channel at weekends who is dreadful, always tripping over his autocued words every few seconda and who has a relief presenter who is infinitely better but no one seems to make any changes there either.
Why not just have a regular couple who do Sundays only ?
Charlie and Naga this morning which is a bit unusual for a Monday.
It's only been like this since the BBC's rather stupid but politically correct decision of moving Breakfast to Salford. In so doing they lost good presenters, the ability to attract guests into the studio and generally by meddling with an excellent and much enjoyed programme which although still good is now missing some of the professionalism and gravitas it once had. It's only because ITV's offering is so dire that it maintains its audience.
It's only been like this since the BBC's rather stupid but politically correct decision of moving Breakfast to Salford. In so doing they lost good presenters, the ability to attract guests into the studio and generally by meddling with an excellent and much enjoyed programme which although still good is now missing some of the professionalism and gravitas it once had. It's only because ITV's offering is so dire that it maintains its audience.
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,
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,
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.
Comments
Where is the proof she is doing it to be more appealing she might be letting it grow because she wants a change.
Do you start work at 4 in the morning ?
What's that goto do with it I don't work 5 days a week 8 hours a day like the previous posted suggested everyone does,not by choice, but by what job came my way not everyone is a 40 hour a week 5 day a week worker.
I don't think any breakfast presenter on any channel works a five-day week as their hours are judged to be extremely anti-social. There must be millions of people who don't work a five-day, 40-hour week.That's between them and their employer.
Most modern recorders assume you want to record a whole program and if you want to record a channel between two set times it's a less simple process.
I can do that pretty easily with both of my PVRs:
1) Record complete programme and skip what you don't want
Or
2) Set timer for complete programme, but reduce pre- & post- paddings to match the start/end times that you want.
Might not be as simple as setting a recording, but it's still do-able. In fact, i had to do (2) when The Film Review programme on the News Channel didn't have an EPG entry (in the days before the News Channel was HD), and it worked pretty well.
Ah - that explains why Naga does practically any other news-related job when somebody is away/ill. So she's just contracted generally to the BBC to present whatever they decide, and not specifically to the morning show?
Still, the more of her the better.
She's had it this "long" before; she tends to grow it a bit, then get it cut. She'd be silly to go for long hair - the crop do is her trademark. She'd be just any old Indian bird on the BBC if she grew it long. And long hair doesn't always suit. Look at Zeinab Badawi - like something from "Planet of the Apes" in a wig.
Slightly near the knuckle for that last comment!
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/09/Zeinab_Badawi_crop_UNISDR.jpg/220px-Zeinab_Badawi_crop_UNISDR.jpg
versus:
https://pbs.twimg.com/profile_images/2971596471/c2400080477f10f2d527c23119a791c5.jpeg
I rest my case! Naga rules.
That pic must have been really old. She's really young in this pic:
http://www.nsaet.org.uk/files/7913/4753/0995/Naga_Munchetty_200px.jpg
but still has the crop job (and a "happy demeanour").
I remember her with a bob on Bloomberg, she got the crop shortly before moving to the BBC.
I don't understand why her hair annoys people so much.
Roger Johnson is soo boring, and slouches all the time, so unprofessional, and so is Stef's accent.
Didn't watch this morning- but I bet Steph read the headlines on The Andrew Marr Show, as there appears to be a rule that says it is ALWAYS the female presenter who stays on to read the news.
In these days of equality, very sexist to have such a rule in place.
There seems to be another rule that says a woman must always read the network part of the 8 pm update on BBC1 although the regional parts are often read by men.Also very sexist - who comes up with these ideas ?
I have to agree, Roger Johnson should not be broadcasting to anyone, he lacks any charisma or personality, constantly slouches and fails to engage with anyone who he might happen to talk about. He definitely shouldn't be presenting a lively networked news programme. I rather suspect he only gets to do this gig because he is based in Salford and is male and there is no one else around, Steph for much the same reasons. Pairing them together is like having the worst combination possible. It's not watchable.
I've also noticed that the BBC in Salford is churning out a large number of bland, dull autocue reading robotic sports news presenters. Might have to start another thread on that though!
In fact, I'm warming to Stef, I mean Steph a bit. Roger needs to go, whenever I see his picture with his North West Tonight Co presenter on BBC iPlayer, I immediatley think bland, bland, bland.
Also, yes, BBC Sports News presenters are very bland also. They all seem soo second rate.
It's odd how some people get on in the world.
Roger Johnson is too bland and boring to actively dislike, but I remember when I first saw him on the News Channel a few years ago, wondering how he had got a spot as a relief presenter when there were umpteen people better than him. At the time his main job was BBC South's sports reporter/presenter- and normally any trialists on the News Channel would have earned their stripes as a national correspondent. first. Then Gordon Burns retires, and he lands a plum senior regional news job- again when I would have thought there would have been plenty of better contenders. And- that in turn means he gets the national BBC Breakfast job every so often- but really he's got nothing going for him presentation wise at all.
Not necessarily because Roger is Salford-based; both Jon Kay and John Maguire travel up from Bristol to present Sunday shifts.
As for the female presenter for Sunday, it's more or less going to be one of the "three S's"; Steph (McGovern), Sian (Lloyd) or Sally (Nugent), now that Katherine Downes has gone on maternity leave.
Jon Kay is very experienced and has more personality than 100 Roger Johnsons. There's a guy who presents "Your Money" on the BBC News Channel at weekends who is dreadful, always tripping over his autocued words every few seconda and who has a relief presenter who is infinitely better but no one seems to make any changes there either.
Charlie and Naga this morning which is a bit unusual for a Monday.
It's only been like this since the BBC's rather stupid but politically correct decision of moving Breakfast to Salford. In so doing they lost good presenters, the ability to attract guests into the studio and generally by meddling with an excellent and much enjoyed programme which although still good is now missing some of the professionalism and gravitas it once had. It's only because ITV's offering is so dire that it maintains its audience.
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,
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.