Are BBC 1 News Presenters Credible?

Interested to read that Natasha Kaplinsky is to be a co-presenter alongside Bruce Forsyth in the latest series of "Strictly Come Dancing" on BBC 1 networked television.

Now, I for one, do not like my news presenters (on whom I rely to bring me the world's events) to do so, when they have spent the previous hours on my screen dabbling in slapstick entertainment (no offence intended to highly talented and magnificent professional dancers all over the world), dressed in attire that is not quite reminiscent of a serious news broadcaster.

OK, ok, ok, before everyone starts to bleat. I know that times have changed, and it's now the 2000's and no longer are we in a televison era headed up by Richard Dimbleby, Richard Baker and Kenneth Kendall, etc, etc.

However, BBC seems to have different policies for its news presenters. i.e. would they permit Zeinab Badawi and Lyse Doucet from BBC World to present variety shows alongside Bruce (God love him)? No, they wouldn't, because Zeinab and Lyse are there to present the news in their role of serious broadcast journalists.

Why then to they permit Natasha (and Fiona Bruce and Kate "Watchdog" Sanderson) do do this?

Is this a very clear and obvious public endorsement by BBC News Chiefs that they do not consider UK Network output to be as important as their global output on BBCW, by allowing their frontline presenters to appear to trivialise their jobs and themselves by appearing in sequins?

Or, is it more due to the fact that Zeinab and Lyse and others would never dream of doing this sort of thing in the first place, because they are serious broadcast journalists and feel that they are there to uphold everything that the BBC "allegedly" stands for?

It really does puzzle me when we have Natashas, Kates and Fionas all trying to be the next Davinas, Cillas and Cat Deeley's!

Moira must be squirming on her podium mounted chair at hearing of this latest dalliance by her Breakfast "journalist" colleagues. After all, Moira is not allowed to lead Breakfast or any other BBC News programme because she is considered to be from the Announcing era, and she is not a "qualified" journalist. Yet, the "qualified" ones are the same ones who are permitted to appear in variety-based television.

Confused?

Natasha Kaplinski should not be on BBC News. She's awful, has no credibility and looks like she's made out of plastic.

Well it is nothing new - Jill Dando did it in the 1990's with Holiday.

Remember that although they work for BBC News they are seen on BBC One - so creating an all round *star* is desirable. It makes them more human - apparently.

I'm not sure about it to be honest - but i don't know what you are going on about Moira for - she presented a game show thing.

Yes, she (Ms. Stuart) presented a game show thing BEFORE she took on the job of presenting the most serious material that viewers ever get to see in staple form, i.e. The News.

Since choosing that career path (i.e. to be a News Presenter), Moira no longer finds it appropriate to dilute her credibility by appearing on Come Dancing, or whatever.

Unfortunately, Ms. Kaplinsky and her BBC bosses appear not to be able to make that distinction.

Therefore, her credibility as a serious news presenter is weakened in parallel with her bank balance being strengthened, I am sure.

Next we will have George Alagiah presenting the National Lottery and perhaps Huw Edwards having his own magic show. Who knows.

Oh I think that is a bit harsh. I think she has the same versitility as Jill Dando once had, she is attractive, she is authorative and most importantly for the BBC, she is popular with viewers. For heavens sake, this is the year 2005, why on earth should people be shunted into one role jobs.

Her and Dermot make great breakfast viewing, and her on her own presenting the national news is just as great.

"Now on BBC one, the news with Carol Smillie and Nick Knowles".

It can't be far off.

As I said in another thread, Moira presented some sort of gameshow, IIRC, just a couple of years ago, possibly in 2002.

I disagree with your comments -- I don't find the news less important just because it's presented by someone who also does a gameshow. People work to make money -- if hosting gameshow brings in the cash, then they'll do it! Your analogy of Lyse Doucet and Zeinab Badawi is unrealistic. They present an international news service, not a domestic one. You have to understand that being on BBC One makes them much more likely to be hosting a UK gameshow. No-one would even know of Lyse or Zeinab!

Spencer hits the nail on the head! Does the BBC consider its UK viewers to be too stupid to realise that news presenters can be credible if they are also variety acts?

i.e. If Carol Smillie or Dale Winton appeared on screen to announce the death of the Queen or the resignation of Tony Blair, or Iran's invasion of Iraq, would the public believe it? No they blooming well wouldn't. Because they are not credible as news presenters, and the closer that Natasha and others become to the celebrity that Dale and Carol etc make their living from, the less credibility Natasha and her colleagues will carry.

Then if it's all about making money, why can't we have Bruce Forsyth or Ken Dodd or Carol Smillie or Dale Winton reading the news. After all, it's only reading the autocue, so why shouldn't they cross boundaries to generate new income too.

News presenters should only read the news, whether they are network, N24 or World. They are BBC Journalists, not variety acts.

Celebrity Fame Academy, actually, according to this!

Another fine example, although ths could be overlooked as it is purely in the name of charity.

Strictly Come Dancing is not.

*CHECKS CALENDAR*

Anyway, nothing's changed, wasn't Angela Rippon at the height of her career when she appeared in that famous dancing sketch with Morecambe and Wise ?

News presenters / journalists are human beings too, not just robots.