TSCelebs

Bic Basher wrote:From a capping point of view, if you like Laura Tobin, fantastic. It should also reduce the amount of Susanna Reid caps considering she's mainly stuck behind a desk in the central position. Charlotte at least is on the end of the desk.

In London, the presenter is still sitting down, which is the same for STV, but I'm aware most now stand up in front of the plasma, so no leg shots.

Thats the worst part of it.Granada have got the presenter from shoulders up standing next to a screen. Sarah Rogers has been looking fantastic recently and now we only get to see her head in extreme close up.Even that is copying the BBC where they did a brief bulletin like that at around 7pm with Ellie Crissell among others.

Andy wrote:

Bic Basher wrote:From a capping point of view, if you like Laura Tobin, fantastic. It should also reduce the amount of Susanna Reid caps considering she's mainly stuck behind a desk in the central position. Charlotte at least is on the end of the desk.

In London, the presenter is still sitting down, which is the same for STV, but I'm aware most now stand up in front of the plasma, so no leg shots.

Thats the worst part of it.Granada have got the presenter from shoulders up standing next to a screen. Sarah Rogers has been looking fantastic recently and now we only get to see her head in extreme close up.Even that is copying the BBC where they did a brief bulletin like that at around 7pm with Ellie Crissell among others.

Considering London and Granada have a similar set, it was surprising to see Sarah Rogers standing up from their tiny little plasma, just so Ben could hand over to her from the studio.

I had no real problems with it from what I watched, but having all four presenters on at the same time seems a bit redundant. Every time I flipped over it seemed like Charlotte was just telling us the time and what was up next.

And the graphics need a bit of streamlining. The competition did make me go a bit "ugh.." too.

I don't think this will get the success levels ITV are looking for and I don't think it's about Susanna - it's about the way this is a re-hash of Daybreak which was a re-hash of GMTV which was a... I could go on. How else can it be justified that the likes of Richard Arnold, Kate Garraway, Ross King (who I think is ok, especially in comparison to Richard Arnold) are still around along with the majority of the Daybreak correspondents etc. Throw in a few naff competitions and you're all set. Charlotte needs an Eamonn to have some banter with (though it is early days and the presenters I'm sure will develop some chemistry), always though Ben was over-rated and never seen or heard of the other guy so no opinion on him.

However there are some silver linings in that Ranvir is still around (shame Matt isn't joining her - instead they decided to once again dust off John Stapleton!) and great news that Michelle Morrison is on the team - maybe we'll get to see her more than half a dozen times a year from now on!

http://www.mirror.co.uk/tv/tv-news/good ... id-3471331" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Format not great! Too much jumping between presenters. Too many adverts - I watched 4 mins of adverts Monday just to see how long it would be! People will turn over when ads come on. Who has 4 mins to waste at that time of the morning? So you turn over and watch the BBC or Sky even until they go to their ads and then you switch to BBC. In the USA all channels have adverts so you are screwed there but here the Beeb don't have any so it's a better watch - regardless of the presenters! Until ITV realise that people don't have the time/inclination to watch adverts first thing in the morning their breakfast show will always fail when against one that has no breaks and nauseating adverts. Long live Sky+!

Rant over. HH

I see the BBC are really worried, as they have carried on as normal.

I'm going against the grain here, I think the new show is a stark improvement. The previous DayBreak I simply could not watch, whereas I could watch this one (although I'd stick prefer BBC/SKY) its a massive improvement.

They've still got the competition but its not as cheap and nasty looking as the previous competitions and as everyone else has pointed out, the smiles on everyones faces (whilst obviously contrived) does actually make the show appealing on the eye.

Laura with the weather is just a complete gem. Great looking, natural smiles and great at presenting the weather. The full package.

I know most people are fans of Charlotte but I dont think she has the "banter" that they're obviously looking for with the show format (all 4 chatting together, not too serious). The other 3 can chat off cue with jokes but you dont really get anything from Charlotte. It was the same on Sky News when Eamonn would chat about things, all I ever saw her do was read out the feedback on the Ipad.

But overall I think its an improvement. Its not GREAT, but certainly a step in the right direction and I'm sure viewing numbers will improve once people have adjusted but they'll never match Sky/BBC. They dont have anywhere near the required live correspondents covering news stories.

I just wonder how long it is before we see more "legs and cleavage". There was more legs on show on Daybreak! TV is all about looks and legs now, they wont be able to resist the pressure.

That "good morning Britain" tagline is cheesy as all f*ck.

If this fails, which I have no doubt it will, Reid and Hawkins have committed televisual suicide.

Good for leg shots though.

It's not bad, it's not good.

modk wrote:I'm going against the grain here, I think the new show is a stark improvement. The previous DayBreak I simply could not watch, whereas I could watch this one (although I'd stick prefer BBC/SKY) its a massive improvement.

After watching it for a second morning I agree, it's a significant improvement on Daybreak and other ITV morning variants which preceded it. I like the fast pace, I like the presenters and I, generally, like the content. The graphics are a bit annoying, the Andi Peters competition parts are something I really dislike, but overall it's very enjoyable.

Watched bits of it again today.

The look and feel of the show is a definite improvement (I'm surprised if anyone seriously prefers Daybreak) but other than the "look" it still just doesnt have proper news content. So much for being news-driven. Todays big story was Prince Harry is single. What is this, gossip column?

There's zero
Business News (what's happening with FTSE/Stocks)
Politics (you wouldnt even know which party was in government)

I've concluded that Daybreak/Good-Morning-Britian doesn't actually compete with Sky News/BBC, they dont want to. Sky News and BBC Breakfast compete with each other for prime-time news breakfast, and ITV's version is an alternative for those who don't want the serious news. ITV is for people who want gossip column, celebrity engagements, pop idol, competitions. They've made no attempt to go serious, and thats by design.

I'll stick with what I said yesterday, I still think its an improvement (Daybreak was so bad it could only get better!) but they havent transformed the show into serious news-driven cotent. More of a new lick of paint, new presenters and a few tweaks here and there.

Had to laugh about the comment about Sky News and BBC Breakfast competing with each other as today the big breaking news story on sky was about Nigel Farage not standing as MP and the reason they got that news was because they where watching BBC breakfast in the other studio you could even see it in the background

I think Farage spoke to both Sky and BBC. He spoke to BBC first and then did an interview with Eamonn straight after it.

Althoguh you dont see ITV camera's there or Susanna interviewing him live, there's the difference, they're just not interested in that type of news.
Its news driven content.... only a different type of news, Prince Harry single and someone getting a haircut.

It seems to jump all over the place, no real structure. And the promise of being more newsy is a joke, still get that joker from LA on within the first 15 mins.

To use a sporting analogy,the fact that the reporting team has a front three of Peters,Arnold and King tells you all you need to know. On a lighter note, if you want to see a masterclass in four-handed presentation search out "Not the nine o'clock news - Abou ben Adhem".

Its better than Daybreak and GMTV, but then again, so is a kick in the nuts.

The main problem they have is that there is a press frenzy over trashing ITV breakfast shows, they enjoy doing it, so they will always print negative stories, no matter how good it is.

Monday it was 'Has Susanna been told to cover up by iTV bosses?', then she wears something short and its 'Susanna gets the legs out in desperate attempt to boost ratings'.

The media are going to hate because that's what they do. If they turned around and said it was great, what would they complain about every week? Most people will simply hate it because the press media say it's rubbish and it's the popular thing to do. If half the people who complained about Daybreak when it launched had actually watched it in it's first week, Daybreak's ratings would have been twice that of the BBC and Sky combined.

It's an aesthetic improvement, but it's still 80% GMTV content. Until there is a major overhaul behind the camera with the production team and input from the usual suspects (Kelly, Garraway etc) it will remain the same. The door is open, but it needs a grenade and not a flashbang.

If they paid attention to BBC/Sky they would see that they use a pretty simple set up, nothing flash, and thats why they work.

I was off work yesterday, watched it again without flicking the channel...Its still very poor. Better than daybreak perhaps but I would rate Daybreak as the worst ever Morning News TV show. I think ITV are out of their depth again.

The only way to beat Breakfast is to be even more newsier than they are now. Where's their sexy Steph? Great they're doing sport properly now, but then when they do those crappy Ross King/Dickie Arnold fluffy bits instead and my god Andi bloody Peters needs to go back to the Broom Cupboard.