I'm not trying to defend ITV News, but with the way that the press is reporting the Ross and Brand news, and the acceleration in complaints over the past few days will most probably mean that whatever people think of the stunt that they would stick around to watch the news if it were the lead story rather than a few stories in.
Oh I know that all of the other news programmes were also leading with the story and I wasn't just singling out ITV News even though it seems like I was. Its just a shame that ITV had to follow the crowd and report on a story that has been blown into epic proportions and not really helping matters. I bet some people might have wanted to escape the story, its a shame that during the week at least one of the news programmes didn't lead with that story.
The actual details of the story just show how bad the media have blown it up. It happened in the middle of October yet it only came to light in the past week. There were less than 10 complaints until the news started reporting it, suddenly that shot up to over 30,000. It just shows the power the media have over people in this country and how sad some people are to actually complain. How many people who complained actually listened to and were offended by the phone call? Less than 1% I bet.
Right I'll stop there because I'm going off on a tangent and right off the point of the thread, leading it right into another argument
It's one of those media stories though where it's not the initial event which makes the headlines, but the complete over reaction to it. Several angles to take to it too - though my point of view is it's more about the loss of free speech on the BBC than Jonathan Ross hosting a Halloween party.
I'm not trying to defend ITV News, but with the way that the press is reporting the Ross and Brand news, and the acceleration in complaints over the past few days will most probably mean that whatever people think of the stunt that they would stick around to watch the news if it were the lead story rather than a few stories in.
So does that mean the "grabbiest" story should be your lead?
It has been so quaint and peaceful watching ITV News without Nina Hossain - so not suited to national news.
Concerning the Brand/Ross scenario, I am not fans of them. I find their 'comedy' crude and vulgar - and that's me been nice about them - that it serves them right.
Regarding ITV News' reliance on the story as a regular top story: it is the BBC failing basic standards once again, for what, the fifth time this decade - literally - and seeing as the taxpayer pays for the BBC, we have a right to know.
I didn't mind it being Top Story, however, having correspondent Tim Rogers outside Jonathan Ross' house for no more than one minute on the Evening News [not often I watch it] was a bit pointless because nothing new was said. Furthermore, I respect and liked ITV and Channel 4's coverage of it - very neutrally.
You know it is a big story if Channel 4 News puts it on over its opening titles!
I understand it is ITV's most "favourite-itest newscaster"'s birthday today - Mark Austin, who is 50. To cheer him up, another 15 years, he can receive his pension.
I'm not trying to defend ITV News, but with the way that the press is reporting the Ross and Brand news, and the acceleration in complaints over the past few days will most probably mean that whatever people think of the stunt that they would stick around to watch the news if it were the lead story rather than a few stories in.
So does that mean the "grabbiest" story should be your lead?
Not at all, and I wouldn't chose to do so personally, but I can see why they have been leading with it.
