Newsreaders Pay

But then you'd have crap newsreaders, because all the good ones have been tempted by the money from other broadcasters.

Then you'd be the first to moan that these crap newsreaders are all the BBC can afford.

I'm not condoning it, but as has been said before, market values dictate, just as in housing, footballers etc. But IMO there are some far better news presenters on News24 who have to deal with breaking stories etc. , and they'll be on somewhere betweenn 80-100k I guess.

Has it ever been 'proved' as it were that trademark or signature presenters like Trevor for Ten, Michael Buerk for the old Nine or Huw for the BBC's current Ten boost ratings?
I assume it is the case, particularly with Trevor with ITV.

I'd tend to succumb to this favouritism to some degree anyway - esp at weekends when the secondary newsreaders come to the fore. One is probably more likely to switch off if one's favoured reader/s aren't featured.

Certainly on RTÉ where there are quite a few poor newsreaders it's a definite turnoff - though yes there is a difference between a bad newsreader and one you just don't like....

Just reading some of the figures posted here I'm surprised that salaries are not drastically dissimilar to Ireland which is usually the case.
To compare with the BBC, the very top newsreaders here I believe are paid in the region of €150,000 or c£100,000. Think things came up to this level only recently after years of 'poor' payment of newsreaders.

Not sure whether it has been 'proved' or not, but the ITVNC use ITV1 presenters on occasion as a way of attracting viewers/attention to the channel.

BBC News 24 have been criticised in the past for not taking on their big name presenters when big stories occur as well, haven't they?

Sorry if this sounds really stupid, but could somebody please give me a brief overview on what exactly HAS been said about 'cat face'? I must have missed this somewhere down the line.....

natasha is worth every penny

I cant do that , i cant be bothered to go through the relevant threads. From what I remember theres a mix of praise ,criticisms ( some justified )and also a fair few bitchy remarks. Theres a lot of vacuous posts from obsessive fans out there too.

I remember a radio times poll a few years ago. Trevor Mcdonald was the most trusted newsreader, Michael Buerk was bottom. Did this mean people thought Buerk was telling porkies? I've never understood the cult of mcdonald, and my opinion of him went down considerably after he put his name to the tonight show.

Are you thinking of going into publishing? You'd make a mint with that sort of material.

Nata$ha Kaplin$ky is holy overvalue, overpaid and underworked.

Back in 'e dy you were dow' pit at 7, 7o'clock or you'd right 'and

SOME of us remember his reaction to Noel Edmonds about 10 years ago. What an ignorant and egotistical man.

If anyone deserves a knighthood, it should be Michael Buerk. The man is a legend, and if it hadn't been for his epic journalism from Ethiopia in 1984, the world wouldn't have sat up and taken note of the devastation there which prompted the first Live Aid a year later.

Agreed. Michael Buerk was one of the best terrestrial news anchors of modern history. Comparing Trevor McDonald to Michael Buerk is like comparing chalk and cheese. Even after 20 years, McDonald sounds stiff and wooden. John Suchet was always miles better than him at ITV News.

Agreed also about Buerk - truly superb journalist and newsreader.
He has a likable quality whilst still being 'distinguished' - the perfect newsreader combination.
Suchet is also along those lines.

Saying that, Trevor is in a class of his own - not necessarily better, just different. The wooden aspect has a certain appeal

He certainly is that.