The Newsroom

BBC News: Presenters & Rotas

(March 2013)

This site closed in March 2021 and is now a read-only archive
BE
Benjamin1
AdamABC posted:
"Ask Emily Maitlis" - what's to ask? If it was such a big gig, why would she have left the programme to join NC? I have to disagree with you; presenting on the NC means that the presenter is more likely to present national bulletins, unlike a regional newscaster.


Maybe Emily Maitlis didn't want the big gig or decided the BBC NC suited her better! And I disagree with the latter as BBC Breakfast and ITV News utilise regional presenters.
JW
JamesWorldNews
Nicholas, Naga, Louise and Simon. Sublime all.

Bravo, I'd say! Good shout, RosterDoctor!
BE
Benjamin1
Cando posted:
Btw neither BBC london news or London Tonight are typical regional news programmes. They are much higher profile, London Tonight even managed to get Kaplinsky to do cover work.


I would imagine ITV News bulletins in addition (and still doing them so following the end of her London Tonight stint) would have sweetened the deal.
IT
itsrobert Founding member
bilky asko posted:

itsrobert posted:
By the way, I'm intelligent enough to know what pouting and simpering mean without visual aids. Just for future reference, you understand.

I felt the visual aids would help get the point across that you're not telling the truth.


How dare you suggest that I am lying. You don't know me from Adam. I have three degrees not to mention a pair of eyes. I'm therefore well capable of being able to discern when someone is simpering and patronising on the television. I'd suggest that you are looking at Breakfast through rose-tinted lenses as I quite clearly see evidence of this behaviour on a regular basis.

I'd also suggest in future that you allow members to have their own opinions without calling them liars. The trend towards arrogance which you are displaying is tiresome.
BA
bilky asko
itsrobert posted:
bilky asko posted:

itsrobert posted:
By the way, I'm intelligent enough to know what pouting and simpering mean without visual aids. Just for future reference, you understand.

I felt the visual aids would help get the point across that you're not telling the truth.


How dare you suggest that I am lying. You don't know me from Adam. I have three degrees not to mention a pair of eyes. I'm therefore well capable of being able to discern when someone is simpering and patronising on the television. I'd suggest that you are looking at Breakfast through rose-tinted lenses as I quite clearly see evidence of this behaviour on a regular basis.

I'd also suggest in future that you allow members to have their own opinions without calling them liars. The trend towards arrogance which you are displaying is tiresome.


Quite honestly, I have no idea how you could possibly discern such things to the level you do. I also don't care how qualified you are in things completely irrelevant to this argument.

I don't view Breakfast through rose-tinted lenses at all - there are plenty of holes one could pick; however, the facial expressions of the presenters isn't one of them.

I don't think it is arrogant to challenge you on something that is clearly not a factual statement. Next time you present an inflammatory statement, make it clear it's an opinion of yours rather than stating it as fact.
MW
Mike W
bilky asko posted:
Mike W posted:
I think you pay more attention to the BBC logo than the presenters then. Smarmy, patronising rubbish.

Are you honestly saying that the presenters don't do anything but be patronising, and pull faces? It's hyperbole at best, and outright lies at worst.


Are you honestly twisting what I said? I never said it was all patronising, it just is patronising: "Total job losses, that's how many people have actually lost their job" (or similar fluff). Hardly lies.
MW
Mike W
itsrobert posted:

I'd also suggest in future that you allow members to have their own opinions without calling them liars. The trend towards arrogance which you are displaying is tiresome.


See his signature for a reason why he's like that. I think they're all on a wind-up!
BA
bilky asko
Mike W posted:
bilky asko posted:
Mike W posted:
I think you pay more attention to the BBC logo than the presenters then. Smarmy, patronising rubbish.

Are you honestly saying that the presenters don't do anything but be patronising, and pull faces? It's hyperbole at best, and outright lies at worst.


Are you honestly twisting what I said? I never said it was all patronising, it just is patronising: "Total job losses, that's how many people have actually lost their job" (or similar fluff). Hardly lies.


Well if you're not discounting hyperbole, then we're not disagreeing.
IT
itsrobert Founding member
bilky asko posted:
itsrobert posted:
bilky asko posted:

itsrobert posted:
By the way, I'm intelligent enough to know what pouting and simpering mean without visual aids. Just for future reference, you understand.

I felt the visual aids would help get the point across that you're not telling the truth.


How dare you suggest that I am lying. You don't know me from Adam. I have three degrees not to mention a pair of eyes. I'm therefore well capable of being able to discern when someone is simpering and patronising on the television. I'd suggest that you are looking at Breakfast through rose-tinted lenses as I quite clearly see evidence of this behaviour on a regular basis.

I'd also suggest in future that you allow members to have their own opinions without calling them liars. The trend towards arrogance which you are displaying is tiresome.


Quite honestly, I have no idea how you could possibly discern such things to the level you do. I also don't care how qualified you are in things completely irrelevant to this argument.

I don't view Breakfast through rose-tinted lenses at all - there are plenty of holes one could pick; however, the facial expressions of the presenters isn't one of them.

I don't think it is arrogant to challenge you on something that is clearly not a factual statement. Next time you present an inflammatory statement, make it clear it's an opinion of yours rather than stating it as fact.


Tell you what, bilky. Do an internet search for the name of any of the female presenters of Breakfast and - using Boolean operators - combine it with any combination of the keywords patronising, simpering or pouting. Take a look at the results, then you'll see how many others are "lying".
BA
bilky asko
itsrobert posted:
Tell you what, bilky. Do an internet search for the name of any of the female presenters of Breakfast and - using Boolean operators - combine it with any combination of the keywords patronising, simpering or pouting. Take a look at the results, then you'll see how many others are "lying".


Where shall I look first? "I can see your knickers - Page 3 - TV Shows: UK - Digital Spy Forums", or "BBC News: Presenters & Rotas: Split from the old thread" - wait, that's here...
IT
itsrobert Founding member
bilky asko posted:
itsrobert posted:
Tell you what, bilky. Do an internet search for the name of any of the female presenters of Breakfast and - using Boolean operators - combine it with any combination of the keywords patronising, simpering or pouting. Take a look at the results, then you'll see how many others are "lying".


Where shall I look first? "I can see your knickers - Page 3 - TV Shows: UK - Digital Spy Forums", or "BBC News: Presenters & Rotas: Split from the old thread" - wait, that's here...


Your Google must be faulty...I get a lot more than that! Maybe you should ask for a refund.....
BA
bilky asko
itsrobert posted:
bilky asko posted:
itsrobert posted:
Tell you what, bilky. Do an internet search for the name of any of the female presenters of Breakfast and - using Boolean operators - combine it with any combination of the keywords patronising, simpering or pouting. Take a look at the results, then you'll see how many others are "lying".


Where shall I look first? "I can see your knickers - Page 3 - TV Shows: UK - Digital Spy Forums", or "BBC News: Presenters & Rotas: Split from the old thread" - wait, that's here...


Your Google must be faulty...I get a lot more than that! Maybe you should ask for a refund.....

Yes, such authoritative sources as MumsNet and a tweet. You could find such things about lots of presenters.

Newer posts