BBC News Thread

Breakfast WAS taliking about the breaking news at 8.10 am this morning. Came back from news with Gillian, and went straight back to that breaking news.

And although Breakfast isn't as newsy as previous versions, it is news. It fails to deliver news - crap. Yes, there could be improvements, but there is news between 8.10 and 8.20. EVERY morning, they have a correspondant, or guests to interview or discuss, at 8.10, after the news, one of the main stories.

Yes, at times, Brekkie is fluff - but it's higher class fluff compared to GMTV. I do despair, at times with certain stories, but I assure you that most mornings, untill 8.30 it is news. There have even been (extremely rare) occasions, when it has been newsy 'till 9.

Bring back a desk, to compliment the sofa, and headlines every fifteen minutes, a couple of minor changes here and there, and to me, Breakfast will be much better.

I take it your not awake at 6am to watch the 'Breakfast Breifing' which is on until 6:30 and is pure news, with the main news & sports readers infront of the Breakfast news desk. By the way where you know who, I haven't seen her reading the news for Breakfast recently?

No, when I turned on they were interviewing Frank Gardner about the security situation in the Gulf. No mention of the ATC up until the point when I left for work at 8.20.



Agreed with the headlines at 8.15 (I think they do have headlines at 7.45 but oddly not at 8.15) and stop the stupid fluffy weather forecast which takes far too long. Just tell us briefly whether we need a coat or brolly and leave the rest until later. I haven't time in the morning to be told about some OB location or to have a look at the "beautiful sky" in Plymouth!

As for there being news after 8pm, yes it is news, but it's fluffy interviews. It should be very fast paced, from a desk, with a story and a quick report or live, then another story. Get as much in as possible. Very often there is only one story (usually a drawn out interview with a guest) from 8.10 to 8.20.

And why compare it to GMTV? GMTV is not supposed to be a news programme. Breakfast is part of the output of the BBC's rolling news channel - "If it happens, it happens here" - not something to tempt the mums away from GMTV! Leave them to their Lorraine Kelly and dieting tips!

No! Well in the land of nod then!

I first became aware of it via a certain member who advertises it in their signature. Also I had to get up early this morning to go to work, so I watched it.

Yes, Breakfast should go much newsier than they are now. Breakfast was never as bad as this in 1993 - 2000 - and people were still "fragile in the morning" (as Dermot says) 9 years ago - but they certainly watched Breakfast News bulletins then.

Less lifestyle and health concern tatt, less soap gossip and OTT giggly weather presenter, and concentrate on the News and business of the day.

AT LEAST one should be able to get such an alternative on BBC News 24, if the bbc1 morning news must be continued to be diluted as it is now.

I would even go back as far as late 1986 - when it became newsy. I agree with you that people were fragile in the morning all those years ago - certainly weren't after the virtual-era theme tune!

I personally felt that 1997-2000 was the best era, mixing everything together well. Who cares if at on minute you were at a desk, the next at the soft area - it worked well giving it pace.

An idea to reduce fluff news- bring back the paper review to weekdays , can take around 10 mins, and can be entertaining, yet informative.

Totally agree with Moz here.

Granted I only tuned in for about 15 minutes (had Radio 1 on for sound, just News 24 pictures) but if this had been any other time, I would have seen at least one headlines round up during this time.

Instead, I saw one BN banner for the ATC failure, which was taken down in about 2 minutes - and didn't hear about the M&S takeover at all. I did see at least one interview about something unrelated.

In contrast, Sky & ITV had full BN banners up whenever I flicked.

Breakfast has to go, or at the very least News 24 should take a good long look at itself between 6-9am, as every time I see it, it fails to be a rolling news channel.

Part of the relaunch was to say that *whenever* news breaks, N24 would shout about it and be perceived as being the first. It is IMO failing to do this when Breakfast is on.

But does the BBC advertise this fact when promoting News 24 as being a "24 hour rolling news channel" - carrying rolling news "whenever it happens"?

If said news breaks between 6-9am, News 24 covers it "most" of the time. Sorry BBC, but this simply not good enough. Either Breakfast becomes a rolling format for the full 3 hours, or News 24 should go its own way.

Perhaps this Breakfast Briefing could be the basis for a sensible compromise? Make Breakfast totally news for the first half hour, then News 24 goes its own way for the back half hour... certainly from 8am when the City starts, having "fluff" on a rolling news channel is a poor show.

I don't know what some people were expecting from Breakfast this morning. At the end of the day, some computers failed for less than an hour this morning, causing some delays until the early afternoon. If it was so important, News 24 would have been with it non-stop, and it would still be the top story. Instead, they covered it for a bit, then moved on to other news. At 17.00, it was the very last headline on News 24.

As for people saying they want the news in the morning, surely you want a full digest of news, rather than knowing a copius amount on just one story? Breakfast would draw criticism if it were to abandon everything for one story, and a relatively minor one at that. It's hardly as if a bomb had gone off, killing thousands of people. When there's so little to say, you can hardly sustain the one story for three hours!

I'm not saying I am in favour of Breakfast's format - I agree that returning to the 2000-2002 style would be better, but I only give criticism where it's due.

Fair points, however in my experience Breakfast is failing to even give a headlines roundup every 15 minutes - meaning I'm not even getting the digest of news that I am promised 24/7.

And granted this story has decreased in importance as the day as worn on - however N24 were not "shouting" as the relaunched promised us. This is as much a complaint with their graphics though, as anything. They seem to have been getting a lot better with keeping BN banners up for longer than a few seconds - but times like this morning are prime examples why there is still room for improvement.

I'm tempted to say that, had the BN banner been up and the ticker is used properly, then the criticisms being made on here, would be answered. This, I guess, would mean Breakfast adopting the News 24 graphics set. In which case bring it on!!!

"some computers failed for less than an hour", yes, but several thousand people - if not tens of thousands - were affected during the course of the day as a result of it.
Sky had correspondents at Heathrow (alright, so it's just down the road), Manchester, and on the phone in Birmingham by the time I tuned in at 8. They had enough to go on without repeating themselves too much. Although, admittedly, it would have been nice if they broke away every so often to go over the rest of the day's headlines.

I didn't manage to catch Breakfast, but going by what being said here, for the BBC to still be in their magazine format on News 24 while a fairly major transport story was still breaking, just seems somewhat misguided.