Local Election coverage, 5 May 2016

I know the BBC have always enjoyed creating their large 'Election' sets, and I have enjoyed seeing them over the decades.

However, whilst not wanting to diminish the 'theatre effect' of such a set: is there going to be much need for large creations in the future, unless they are purely for dramatic purposes?

The results (for whatever vote, be it referendum, local/national/regional) would be received electronically these days, and already analysed by the local/national/regions producing them for their own programmes.

Does that mean that ultimately, most of the people in the background areas of the studio will be involved in co-ordinating the OBs etc? Rather like one HUGE gallery?

EDIT: Of course, I don't mean to sound dismissive of any of the people in the studio. It's just that looking back at the BBC Parliament replays of the 1960/70s, there were a lot of people involved in information gathering (on the telephone) or in creating graphics (painting results slides), who obviously aren't needed any more.

Given failed attempts by several countries in Europe to introduce electronic voting - I think you'll find that won't be any time soon.

Wales' loss is certainly the networks gain.

I've said before when George was off ill how the BBC (TV) lacks strength in depth amongst their most senior newscasters - there is nobody even obvious just to step in for Huw now, nevermind on a par with him. That's not to say there aren't people within the BBC capable of challenging his position, but they just don't necessarily have the network role to boost their profile - and those that do just aren't in the same league.

Actually I can think of a number who could smoothly and credibly host an elections night coverage - Emily Maitlis is one such candidate, Jon Sopel another, along with Andrew Neil or possibly Andrew Marr. If you look at the Radio 4 team the bench becomes considerably longer, too - Nick Robinson is likely to appear more and more in these types of roles, given his high profile, respect and experience, and that part of his current role is working on television current affairs. Martha Kearney lacks a high profile on TV, but certainly would be confident and skilled in the role. Honestly, I'd prefer any of those names I've mentioned there to Edwards, who I've nothing against as a journalist and newsreader but whose delivery - particularly in interviews or unscripted questioning - often feels like it lacks rhythm and urgency, and doesn't come close to an Andrew Neil/ Paxman / Humphrys skill or detail. I much prefer Dimbleby, who while not perfect injects a lot more life into proceedings and I think is a lot sharper in interviews and analysis.

Narrowing your field to network presenters is, I suspect, a slightly misguided way of looking at it in 2016. I agree that the BBC doesn't currently have a great number of strong newsreaders on its network bulletins or news channel that can also handle events of this nature and profile, but I think that has more to do with a change over the last decade or two in how the BBC sees the news reading role. If George Alagiah was making the switch from correspondent to presenter now, I think he'd almost certainly end up as Martha Kearney's backup on WATO instead of Sophie Raworth's on the One O'Clock News, and work his way into a main role on radio rather than on the Six; other presenters who were at least in part following Edwards' footsteps have taken on different types of roles, like Sopel becoming North America editor, or Emily Maitlis focusing more of her time on Newsnight and rarely appearing on network bulletins, while continuing to build their network profile. Dimbleby, of course, hasn't had Edwards dual role of elections broadcaster and newsreader either.

There's no doubt that most, if not all, newsreaders at the BBC are highly intelligent journalists. But I also have no doubt that someone like Mishal Husain or Nick Robinson are going to be challenged a lot more on Today or PM than they would reading 30 second intros on a half hour prepared newscast. I think the profile of the newsreaders on the main bulletins will probably lessen overtime, because it won't actually be a great environment for upcoming 'stars' to really hone and demonstrate their skill set.

Good point re Emily Maitlis, who I think ended up anchoring a section of one election night from an ob in a pub when Millbank had a power cut.

John Sopel is a decent shout too, although I think Nick Robinson is much better in an analysis role.

It was nice in 2015 to have Nick and Andrew Marr sharing the analysis - Nick had just come back from illness and his voice was not 100% so I think they brought Andrew in to share the duties. Laura K quickly abandoned the role of reporting what was being said on social media and was adding to the general analysis in what looked like an on air audition.

As much as I don't think it will happen this time, having the current and previous two political editors around that table worked really well

Will the Ten be coming from the Elstree set next week? I seem to recall they have done for the elections on the days leading up before.

It would be a surprise if they did this week - the elections are not dominating the news in the way the General Election did.

P.S. Agree regarding Emily Maitlis - she is one of the strongest at the BBC and looks equally comfortable on BBC1 bulletins and Newsnight. Mishal Husain is also superb - both have far more credibility than Fiona and Sophie IMO.

I'm sorry, but I really don't see his star quality people see in him. He's just so boring, and the way he reads the autocue.

I'm now expecting the same old arguments saying 'why should news be exciting etc...'

Give me George anyday over him. That's just my opinion.

Agreed about Mishal Husain - it would be great to see more bulletins fronted by her but I imagine her commitment to Today limits that.

Jeremy Vine has tweeted a pic of the studio...

Back to my green space. https://t.co/YFIrWmbihr #BBCElections pic.twitter.com/fabsGcqx88

— Jeremy Vine (@theJeremyVine) May 1, 2016

Will the coverage be carried on BBC World?

I doubt it. The results would have little/no interest to anyone outside the UK.