TV Home Forum

Daybreak - the launch onwards

From 6am (September 2010)

This site closed in March 2021 and is now a read-only archive
BA
Badger264
Sorry, just to clarify my national emergency comment, at the time the story was just breaking and there was nothing to add other than earthquake, where, what size. Only one person had been confirmed dead when Daybreak came off air. That's why I think the balance was right, because the scale wasn't apparent until later in the morning. Hindsight sometimes doesn't work too favourably.

I do find 'Lorraine' a little disappointing though, the whole point of going live daily was so that it can be more topical instead of what shade of lipstick to wear with your shoes.
BB
bbcfan2014
Badger264 posted:
Sorry, just to clarify my national emergency comment, at the time the story was just breaking and there was nothing to add other than earthquake, where, what size. Only one person had been confirmed dead when Daybreak came off air. That's why I think the balance was right, because the scale wasn't apparent until later in the morning. Hindsight sometimes doesn't work too favourably.

I do find 'Lorraine' a little disappointing though, the whole point of going live daily was so that it can be more topical instead of what shade of lipstick to wear with your shoes.


It's nothing to do with hindsight. The unbelievable pictures from Japan (that the world was seeing from 7am GMT onwards) meant it was obvious there would be a massive death toll. The Daybreak bosses should have ripped up their running order from 7am onwards. GMTV in its better days would have done that.
BA
Badger264
jagjeet21 posted:
Badger264 posted:
Sorry, just to clarify my national emergency comment, at the time the story was just breaking and there was nothing to add other than earthquake, where, what size. Only one person had been confirmed dead when Daybreak came off air. That's why I think the balance was right, because the scale wasn't apparent until later in the morning. Hindsight sometimes doesn't work too favourably.

I do find 'Lorraine' a little disappointing though, the whole point of going live daily was so that it can be more topical instead of what shade of lipstick to wear with your shoes.


It's nothing to do with hindsight. The unbelievable pictures from Japan (that the world was seeing from 7am GMT onwards) meant it was obvious there would be a massive death toll. The Daybreak bosses should have ripped up their running order from 7am onwards. GMTV in its better days would have done that.


Recent examples include the Australian floods, Christchurch earthquake and Brazillian floods. All had a lot of coverage but not to the extent of what is going on now, and that's because the death toll was relatively lower.

Daybreak gave similar amounts of coverage to three said examples as the Japanese earthquake and tsunami and at the time it was the right thing to do.
BB
bbcfan2014
Badger264 posted:
jagjeet21 posted:
Badger264 posted:
Sorry, just to clarify my national emergency comment, at the time the story was just breaking and there was nothing to add other than earthquake, where, what size. Only one person had been confirmed dead when Daybreak came off air. That's why I think the balance was right, because the scale wasn't apparent until later in the morning. Hindsight sometimes doesn't work too favourably.

I do find 'Lorraine' a little disappointing though, the whole point of going live daily was so that it can be more topical instead of what shade of lipstick to wear with your shoes.


It's nothing to do with hindsight. The unbelievable pictures from Japan (that the world was seeing from 7am GMT onwards) meant it was obvious there would be a massive death toll. The Daybreak bosses should have ripped up their running order from 7am onwards. GMTV in its better days would have done that.


Recent examples include the Australian floods, Christchurch earthquake and Brazillian floods. All had a lot of coverage but not to the extent of what is going on now, and that's because the death toll was relatively lower.

Daybreak gave similar amounts of coverage to three said examples as the Japanese earthquake and tsunami and at the time it was the right thing to do .


I'm sure the ratings for Friday will confirm whether 'it was the right thing to do'.
BP
bpmikey
Joshua posted:
The thing I dislike is how all the news is in the news bulletin, and Adrian and Christine just have the dross to cover. When Daybreak launched, A+C read out the top story and then went to Tasmin for the news at about 6:05, which worked a lot better IMO.


I second this, and have thought this for a while. Who cares about journalistic credibility when all the presenters do is link from one item to the next and read out rehearsed questions in interviews!? The first show was better, but still there is room for improvement. I thought Adrian was one of the most experienced in his field? In which case he is wasted on Daybreak!
JT
jolly turnip
jagjeet21 posted:
Badger264 posted:
jagjeet21 posted:
Badger264 posted:
Sorry, just to clarify my national emergency comment, at the time the story was just breaking and there was nothing to add other than earthquake, where, what size. Only one person had been confirmed dead when Daybreak came off air. That's why I think the balance was right, because the scale wasn't apparent until later in the morning. Hindsight sometimes doesn't work too favourably.

I do find 'Lorraine' a little disappointing though, the whole point of going live daily was so that it can be more topical instead of what shade of lipstick to wear with your shoes.


It's nothing to do with hindsight. The unbelievable pictures from Japan (that the world was seeing from 7am GMT onwards) meant it was obvious there would be a massive death toll. The Daybreak bosses should have ripped up their running order from 7am onwards. GMTV in its better days would have done that.


Recent examples include the Australian floods, Christchurch earthquake and Brazillian floods. All had a lot of coverage but not to the extent of what is going on now, and that's because the death toll was relatively lower.

Daybreak gave similar amounts of coverage to three said examples as the Japanese earthquake and tsunami and at the time it was the right thing to do .


I'm sure the ratings for Friday will confirm whether 'it was the right thing to do'.


Even if Daybreak had gone to rolling coverage, I would expect ratings to go down as at times like that people will always look at the BBC. And to a point Sky also.
TI
timbouk
To be fair to daybreak, I heard Chris Moyles describing the tv pictures he was watching at Radio 1 and told people to turn to BBC News to watch the pictures. I turned to BBC Breakfast and they were talking about gardeners world!
CR
Critique
timbouk posted:
To be fair to daybreak, I heard Chris Moyles describing the tv pictures he was watching at Radio 1 and told people to turn to BBC News to watch the pictures. I turned to BBC Breakfast and they were talking about gardeners world!


BBC News is the BBC News Channel, not BBC One. He'd have said BBC Breakfast if that's what he'd meant.
NG
noggin Founding member
timbouk posted:
To be fair to daybreak, I heard Chris Moyles describing the tv pictures he was watching at Radio 1 and told people to turn to BBC News to watch the pictures. I turned to BBC Breakfast and they were talking about gardeners world!


I suspect you were watching after 8.30 when BBC One carries Breakfast, but BBC News carries BBC News. If you'd followed Chris's advice you'd have switched to the BBC News Channel (if you had it available to you)
CH
chris
noggin posted:
timbouk posted:
To be fair to daybreak, I heard Chris Moyles describing the tv pictures he was watching at Radio 1 and told people to turn to BBC News to watch the pictures. I turned to BBC Breakfast and they were talking about gardeners world!


I suspect you were watching after 8.30 when BBC One carries Breakfast, but BBC News carries BBC News. If you'd followed Chris's advice you'd have switched to the BBC News Channel (if you had it available to you)


I think BBC News didn't run the Breakfast simulcast for a lot of the morning anyway.
NG
noggin Founding member
bpmikey posted:
I thought Adrian was one of the most experienced in his field? In which case he is wasted on Daybreak!


Hmm - Adrian has never anchored any breaking news of significance on any TV outlet (though he may have done on the Radio). He spent 10+ years presenting a daily business news programme, and segued into quirky football coverage. Both required him to think on his feet - but in a very different way to that required for breaking news.

He's a bright intelligent journalist, with good, natural, TV presenting abilities when in his comfort zone. He's not an experienced breaking news presenter.
WE
weaz
Daybreak have now got Richard gaisford and I believe cordelia too in Japan.

Newer posts