Originally Posted by Tiggergirl:
“I am a girl and I personally preferred Holly as a presenter although Christine wasn't as bad as I thought. I find Holly a bit warmer as a presenter and not as abrupt in the questioning of the celebs etc but that may change with time.
People could ask why you have such an issue with Holly surely her appearance alone isn't enough justification for all the complaints you have about her in the various threads. It seems a bit shallow that your main complaint is that she would have low cut dresses on when presenting DOI that hardly affects her skill as a presenter of the show and certainly didn't mean she couldn't do the job properly.”
Do you know - you are right - I do have 'a bit of a thing about Holly.' Here's why:
First saw her on DOI and thought she was a very pretty girl but vacuous.
Flabbergasted when she got the This Morning gig which meant I couldn't watch the programme anymore. The vacuous attitude got worse, the hair extensions, the constant tossing of the hair, the vacant look to camera which made her look bored most of the time, her lack of journalistic ability, etc. Programme had no relevance for me anymore and I was amazed that Schofield couldn't see how much her appointment had devalued the programme and made him look like a grandfather presenting with his grandaughter
In short, it is nice to see beautiful people on screen, but not people who appear to have looks and nothing else. It's personal, just can't stand her and I don't mind saying so.
Not been a great fan of Bleakley's who I could handle on The One Show on the rare occasion I watched it because it did work with Adrian Chiles. Christine fell for her own publicity and took the Daybreak job which was a mistake. Again, it was a position calling for a journalistic background which she doesn't have and the whole thing failed. Wrong woman, wrong gig. Preferred her on DOI mainly because as an ornamental job she fulfilled the role without having her front hanging out. Nothing more, nothing less. Not a great presenter but I honestly don't think that's where its at for her.
The problem is that ITV paid an enormous amount of money for her and now have to slot her in wherever they can.
So, in summary I guess my problem is over promotion based on looks. Natasha Kaplinsky is a stunning looking woman as is Kirsty Young and yet both are good journalists and can cut it in many formulas. Holly Willoughby cannot and I think the same is true for Miss Bleakley.
Many fans of DOI had a similar problem with Alesha. Loved her when she was excelling at something she was good at, (winning Strictly) disliked her intensely when it was assumed that because she was liked in one capacity,she must automatically have the ability in another - being a judge.
What I and many viewers want is presenters who have ability and not just looks.