After some rather poor ratings for ITV's Daybreak, the finger of blame has finally been directed towards the overexposed presenting duo of Christine Bleakley and Adrian Chiles. It has been reported in the press that they have fallen on their swords and will no longer present the breakfast programme.
Christine Bleakley, I know little about outside of her television work but seems harmless enough. Chiles, the slightly grumpy person who used to present Match of the Day 2, has shown more than a glimpse of character on his own Sunday evening television programme.
The problem was never the duo themselves, but a combination of pay and height of expectation from the pairing. ITV paid them a fortune to present Daybreak, off the back of their work on The One Show. The lesson to be learned is that before paying people a small fortune to present a programme, check whether the programme they presented before is genuinely popular or only watched because there is little else worth watching at the time!
Showing posts with label Television. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Television. Show all posts
Saturday, 19 November 2011
Sunday, 3 April 2011
More BBC cuts
An entertaining and highly amusing BBC special about Top of the Pops from the 1970s, screened earlier in the week, had me starting to think about cuts to the BBC again.
There needs to be no reminder this page constantly speaks out against the folly of excessive government cuts to the public sector based on ideological motivations. The BBC is quite different. Although it is a great British export, for example the World Service, the domestic product is a symbol of excess and waste.
BBC Three and Four are the worst examples of complete waste (yet the broadcaster wanted to take the knife to minority cultural interest radio stations such as the Asian Network and 6 Music) and I would get rid of both BBC Three and BBC Four. Some of the excellent programming that occasionally appears on BBC Four could easily be given airtime on BBC Two.
However, this week I have finally embraced repeats. After years of moaning about the things, I realised after watching the Top of the Pops repeat that they can be fun, special, nostalgic, and most importantly, cheap. The BBC must have a bulging archive (not including the material they have long lost) and it is time to put it to use.
Obviously the most interesting repeats would be those programmes unseen for a long time. Would we really want to see more repeats of Dad's Army? Do we really want to see repeats of programmes initially aired only months, weeks, or worse still, days before?
If done correctly, repeats would be interesting. How interesting would it be to watch old episodes of Tomorrow's World? It is time to stop paying excess money to provide vehicles for the same old faces and start reviving some of the quality material collecting dust in the archives.
There needs to be no reminder this page constantly speaks out against the folly of excessive government cuts to the public sector based on ideological motivations. The BBC is quite different. Although it is a great British export, for example the World Service, the domestic product is a symbol of excess and waste.
BBC Three and Four are the worst examples of complete waste (yet the broadcaster wanted to take the knife to minority cultural interest radio stations such as the Asian Network and 6 Music) and I would get rid of both BBC Three and BBC Four. Some of the excellent programming that occasionally appears on BBC Four could easily be given airtime on BBC Two.
However, this week I have finally embraced repeats. After years of moaning about the things, I realised after watching the Top of the Pops repeat that they can be fun, special, nostalgic, and most importantly, cheap. The BBC must have a bulging archive (not including the material they have long lost) and it is time to put it to use.
Obviously the most interesting repeats would be those programmes unseen for a long time. Would we really want to see more repeats of Dad's Army? Do we really want to see repeats of programmes initially aired only months, weeks, or worse still, days before?
If done correctly, repeats would be interesting. How interesting would it be to watch old episodes of Tomorrow's World? It is time to stop paying excess money to provide vehicles for the same old faces and start reviving some of the quality material collecting dust in the archives.
Sunday, 13 March 2011
Murdoch to take full control of Sky - what next?
So Rupert Murdoch got his way and was able to win approval by the government for News Corporation to take full control of BSkyB.
It left me feeling a little disorientated. In one respect, I was annoyed because I felt he had won - again. In another, had it not been for his travails, I would not have known that he did not have full control of the broadcaster. For some reason I always assumed BSkyB was his pride and joy anyway.
I certainly was not aware that his share was a mere 39 percent.
Assuming the takeover goes smoothly and Murdoch ends up in full control, the concern is regarding what will happen next. The sweetener that appears to have paved the way was Murdoch's agreement to only hold a maximum of 39 percent of Sky News and keeping it separate from the rest of the company.
There is one caveat, which is the concern as to whether any safeguards have been put into place that would prevent Murdoch from launching a Fox News for the UK, a channel which he would have a full share in. Considering I have not heard about any such safeguards, I can only assume the answer to that is 'no'.
It left me feeling a little disorientated. In one respect, I was annoyed because I felt he had won - again. In another, had it not been for his travails, I would not have known that he did not have full control of the broadcaster. For some reason I always assumed BSkyB was his pride and joy anyway.
I certainly was not aware that his share was a mere 39 percent.
Assuming the takeover goes smoothly and Murdoch ends up in full control, the concern is regarding what will happen next. The sweetener that appears to have paved the way was Murdoch's agreement to only hold a maximum of 39 percent of Sky News and keeping it separate from the rest of the company.
There is one caveat, which is the concern as to whether any safeguards have been put into place that would prevent Murdoch from launching a Fox News for the UK, a channel which he would have a full share in. Considering I have not heard about any such safeguards, I can only assume the answer to that is 'no'.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)