NE
I'm not really sure that sex abuse allegations, albeit ones that have been withdrawn, are really a suitable topic for Breakfast TV when a large proportion of the audience are likely to be children getting ready for school. I suspect some awkward questions were being asked in some households this morning.
I didn't see the programme, but from the reports I've read, it seems that Starr became quite upset at the line of questioning and the suggestion that he may have been responsible for his actions being misunderstood.
No doubt it was his choice to do the interview, but taking advantage of a man who has perhaps suffered enough over the last 18 months isn't really entertainment or news: it's voyeurism of the worst kind.
This sort of tabloid journalism doesn't do much for GMB's credibility, and even less for the ITV(ITN) news brand they have on display most of the time in their ticker.
I absolutely agree, I think it's this kind of sensationalist tabloid journalism that really does nothing to boost GMB's credibility as a serious alternative morning news programme. This kind of coverage that was associated with GMTV and Daybreak. The interview wasn't really agenda setting or engaging. To be fair I'm sure that if BBC or Sky ran with that story (not that they ever would) it would feature heavily as their top news story. Others will disagree but I personally felt they spent far too much time on it whereas they could have focused on other headlines. Yes, GMB does need more 'big' interviews such as today's interview with the PM to boost the show's profile. However, they need to focus on stories that are more relevant and newsworthy, not just topical in my opinion.
With regards to the set, I highly doubt they would alter or tweak the backdrop to reflect the real time view of London during mid winter at 6am given what happened with Studio 7.
The Freddie Star story was the lead on most news programmes at the end of last week. First interview seems like an exclusive to me!
I'm not really sure that sex abuse allegations, albeit ones that have been withdrawn, are really a suitable topic for Breakfast TV when a large proportion of the audience are likely to be children getting ready for school. I suspect some awkward questions were being asked in some households this morning.
I didn't see the programme, but from the reports I've read, it seems that Starr became quite upset at the line of questioning and the suggestion that he may have been responsible for his actions being misunderstood.
No doubt it was his choice to do the interview, but taking advantage of a man who has perhaps suffered enough over the last 18 months isn't really entertainment or news: it's voyeurism of the worst kind.
This sort of tabloid journalism doesn't do much for GMB's credibility, and even less for the ITV(ITN) news brand they have on display most of the time in their ticker.
I absolutely agree, I think it's this kind of sensationalist tabloid journalism that really does nothing to boost GMB's credibility as a serious alternative morning news programme. This kind of coverage that was associated with GMTV and Daybreak. The interview wasn't really agenda setting or engaging. To be fair I'm sure that if BBC or Sky ran with that story (not that they ever would) it would feature heavily as their top news story. Others will disagree but I personally felt they spent far too much time on it whereas they could have focused on other headlines. Yes, GMB does need more 'big' interviews such as today's interview with the PM to boost the show's profile. However, they need to focus on stories that are more relevant and newsworthy, not just topical in my opinion.
With regards to the set, I highly doubt they would alter or tweak the backdrop to reflect the real time view of London during mid winter at 6am given what happened with Studio 7.
but not all publicity is good publicity. The BBC give lots of publicity to UKIP. Lots of which contains repeated footage of Nigel Farage having a beer or a fag. Lots of which consists of reporting on whatever one of their politicians has said that is really racist or sexist or homophobic. Note: this is merely an example and I do not wish to offend any UKIP supporters out there.