Extracurricular BBC News

Is it right for BBC News to involve itself in other areas of Television presentation?

I'm talking here about:

a) Cross-promotions on bulletins
b) Appearences on dramas, such as spooks etc.
c) General use of news presenters in entertainment roles
d) The Buckingham Palace joke

For me the answer is no, and for several reasons in my opinion. Firstly, it weakens the brand of BBC News as a serious news broadcaster. If many issues with the news content of BBC News bulletins and programming, but above all the content must be seen to be impartial. Plugs for BBC programmes, regardless of how relevant to the news in question, is unacceptable to me as there is a clear conflict of interest. You have to ask if it were an ITV/Channel 4/other documentary, would it be shown given the same 'news-content' critria they set? of course not unless the subject was a talking point in the media itself (i.e. Diana on Panorama etc). I even question the reviews of Doctor Who on the Newsround website, I feel this is also a bad attempt at cross-promotion to children.

On the point of news in drama, I have no problem with this if it is done purely for the benefit of the show. I have a problem with docu-dramas that seem to occur more and more frequently, but my issue is more with the content of the shows themselves rather than the apperence of news bulletins within them.

News programmes by their very nature require a certain amount of gravitas and authority to present. I'm not saying that news presenters have never done light entertainment, but I am certain that this has increased in recent years and does no service to the image that needs to be put across in a bulletin.

"Anyone who thinks you can't do entertainment as well as news is a dreadful snob" - as Kate Silverton's agent said. Well to be honest I think I must be a snob because I'd take Philip Hayton over her any day to deliever the news. Anyone thinking Big Strong Boys and some rubbish Pyschic show is a good warm up to an intelligent journalist career is misled I'm afraid.

I also believe that news should be that, about the news and not the personalities that tell us it. This is not helped by the non-news that tends to dominate the afternoon and evening bulletins - surveys commisionned by the BBC, special reports by celebrities etc. I honestly cannot take the Six O'clock news seriously with it's line-each, hand waving and appalling presenters. I also do not mind the fact they have a huge (badly built) video wall in their programme but I don't think it justifies people standing up patronising me with simplistic figures flashing up, large videos being played as a presenter introduces a report or weather reports being read on inferior screens.

Finally, to me the Buckingham Palace incident is not a question of being momentarily misled, more the prinicple of it. If I saw this incident live, I would have been rather shocked at the use of the real newsroom coupled with real presenters telling me something serious has happened at a well-known London event. As someone on another site has pointed out, even Christopher Morris used various visual ticks and clues to aid the viewer in a spoof news item - the moustached female reporter, the 'Brasseye' breakbumper after the bulletin, no real news reporters etc. It was also included in a comedy programme and to be expected by the majority of the audience. The incident in question did not do any of this which I believe to be wrong - If a comedian was at the newsdesk it would have been fine for me.
How would have they handled it if an incident actually did occur at the party?
The newsroom and main news presenters should never be used for stunts such as this, regardless of the light-hearted intent as the integrity of the news is comprimised.
Once again, I believe it draws back to the fact that the BBC wants all it's presenters to be seen as personalities and be involved in entertainment.

I don't get what you're basing that one - are you basing the conflict of interest on the showing of snippets of Panorama reports on the Ten, etc?



It may have increased in recent years but it isn't necessarily a bad thing. It just shows that news presenters have other lives besides suits and seriousness, e.g. Natasha Kaplinsky, Bill Turnbull, Dermot Murnaghan, Fiona Bruce et al. Do you complain about them making tits of themselves for the fun of charity as well? It's nice to see presenters shed the shackles of the news studio.



You've kindly overlooked her BSc in Psychology, her studies in Arab politics, her career at Tyne Tees, Look North, and Radio Five Live. You're clearly a red-top rag reader - therefore YOU'RE misled.



You must however remember that not everyone might meet your self-assumed level of intelligence. There are people who'll be half-watching the news while they're feeding their kids (particularly one/six) and so, they'll be half listening and half-looking - therefore they'll pick up the main points and the figs will stick in their head. I do agree with you about the six though - largely down to George Alagiah it's an apalling piece of television at the moment. Equally though you cannot say that images don't add to the quality of a report. If you don't want visuals, listen to BBC Radio 4. If you don't want the weather read on "inferior" (a puzzling definition in itself - how are they inferior?) screens, then watch BBC News 24's weather reports, or watch on the web. Don't assume that everyone has the same understanding of news topics as you do.



This last paragraph is complete and utter rubbish.

Brasseye used the breakbumper after the bulletin - yes, a bulletin that's about 5 minutes long with a comedy report! The BBC News mock was 5 secs studio based pres at best, with Sophie talking to Ronnie Corbett immediately after. And of course, if something serious did happen, BBC Pres would kick in with a slide, and they'd use the daytime background. Or most likely they'd just go straight to N24.

I don't agree with BBC presenters needing to be seen as personalities. Regional news works on personalities but it's all about building a relationship with newscasters that you trust - and BBC Newsreaders having personalities will enable people to say "ah - I like/trust her, she can read me the news because she's bound to get it right".

I wonder why you hardly ever see ITN presenters appearing in these non-News roles, pretty much since the days of Mark Austin hosting Survivor and back then he was just a relief weekend newsreader

I think they worked it out when Mark Ausin was shiit on Survivor

Unfortunately I do know of her qualifications - although I think Psychology is hardly a plus - and very infrequently (if ever) read newspapers, let alone tabloids. If the BBC had wanted just journalist qualifications and experience, I doubt she'd be the first on the list. More likely it's a pretty face and pushy persona that's got her to where she is.

Admitely my point on the spoof is rather laboured, I find it hard to express my argument in short. I just find it odd that if one programme on the whole of the BBC was to remain serious at all times, I would expect it to be the news bulletins - and nothing less than serious as well. I can stand jokey items on Newsnight occasionally, or even a bad asides once in a while on Breakfast. but no spoofs of this nature from the national bulletins.

Mr.Hall, you mentioned Radio 4 in your reply at one point, and I would look to that for guidance on national bulletins. True, I may take some information for granted that others would need explaining, but it's the unecessary condecending graphics and tone of the piece that even my family have picked up on as feeling too 'chummy'. I believe the bulletins on Radio 4 accurately convey large amounts of information without the use of graphics and hands in succint reports that television could (re-)learn a lot from. No live reports either unless absolutely necessary.

But you're taking BBC News back into the dark ages - soon we'll just have the three minute headline loop!

I know there's a balance to be struck but I'm thinking more of an amalgamation of Channel 4 and Radio 4 news - less chat and celeb, more news and report. Channel 4 can just about get away with a more jokey style but it fits in with the overall product which is a solid news agenda, the BBC I feel would have to be more restrained. Channel 4 has a lot less cross-promotion in it's news as well, and less of the pointless live reports as I've moaned about earlier. It's just not quite got the breadth of coverage that the BBC has at it's disposal - and coverage that it barely uses. Instead of some celebrity fluff it could quite easily have a report from pretty much anywhere in the world, it wastes a lot of it's international postings.