Newsreading Easy - Wogan

Obviously they don't control the items or running order but the presenters may have an input on the wording of the script and what is relevant. Then if we're going to branch out a little further, a lot of the reporters at ITV are credited as 'editors', so they write their own scripts and have a lot of input.

Equally many of the journalists in BBC radio, particularly local radio, are referred to as producers. It used to be quite common to hear a report introduced as from "our [name of a district] producer"

Of course they do. They attend all the production meetings, which start many hours before the live broadcasts. There are also meetings after TX. The good ones don't just pack up and go once the programme is off air. You say they only work 4 day weeks, but don't forget that many of them work long shifts and frequently unsociable hours, not to mention the stress of presenting live telly. It's not like working in a supermarket. Think about sitting there with all those lights and cameras on you knowing that you're being watched by potentially millions of people and if you don't listen to what's going on in the gallery you could look like a fool at any moment. That's what you call stress! I was amazed at how presenters were able to listen to the director telling them to move news stories around the bulletin, and thus having to re-order their scripts without so much as flinching on air. You are completely underestimating the job!

If the newsreader has an input in the stories covered, why is the running order and the stories covered often identical on the main news stations. Some of them are doing live tv years, they're well able for it and being paid handsomely as well.

Because every broadcaster has more or less the same stories to cover. There are only so many news stories in a day, and it's pretty obvious which the big ones are

It's much more than just selecting stories, though. As Media Boy said, the presenters write all their own links, so they have at least some editorial control over the emphasis placed on certain aspects of stories.

Exactly my point...thus presenters don't decide what's on the programme. Writing the scripts is the least they could do. It's a fine job, you don't get wet either. I do take the point that the hours are unsociable but that's it.

It's a team effort, the editors and journalists (including the presenters) work together to decide what goes into the programme.

It's very rare for 2 competing channels or news programems to have an identical running order, and even ifthey do the treatment of the stories will often be very different. If they are the same or similar it means that the editors have come to the same conclusion on the news values of the stories, sometimes it's very obvious what the top story should be

Of course they decide what's on the programme. As I keep saying, it's not just picking stories to cover and that's that. The production meetings - where the programme editors, producers and presenters get together - also discuss HOW the stories are going to be covered - which angle are they going to take? Who are they going to get as commentators? Is there going to be a studio debate? These things are decided well in advance of broadcasts so reporters can be sent off with briefs etc. What about if the presenter is going to be interviewing an important politician live on the programme? They need to know exactly what they want to get out of the interview and they need to properly brief themselves so they don't get caught out themselves. I don't think you'd just saunter in and interview George Galloway or Peter Mandelson without preparing yourself first. If you think newsreading is just walking into a studio and reading off a pre-prepared autocue, then you are sadly mistaken.

Edit - when I sat in the Channel 4 News control room, I remember Samira Ahmed asking for changes to the images shown during the headlines sequence just minutes before transmission because she wasn't happy with it. They're a lot more involved than you think.

Right, but the reports on the 6 news are virtually the same as the 10 news on ITV and BBC unless there's been a breaking story. Newsreaders do interviews once every 6 months and when they're done live, they last 2 or 3 minutes, even less on ITV.

If anyone can remember Anna Ford doing the 1 o'clock news. Nobody can tell me she decided the running of the programme and everything else. She went in for the morning updates, the 1 news and then went home.

It's rare for a news bulletin not to include a live interview of one sort or another.



Keeping an interview that brief and still getting the information you're looking for from the interviewee is a skill in itself.

You never see a live interview on BBC or ITV bulletins? The 24 hour channels yes, but not the 24 minute bulletins.


Your second point is scrapping the bottom of the barrel.

Of course you do, even most regional news programmes do a couple of interviews a night




Not really, interviewing is a skill like any other... especially when there's someone gabbing in your ear when the guest is replying.

Also it's not uncommon for a news presenter to have to interview someone at very short notice, sometimes they'll know a bit of background about the story, other times they won't. I knwo of a presenter who was on air when the news broke of the death of a fairly obscure (but fairly well known in the right circles) author, 5 minutes later he was on the phone live on air to an expert about the author. No autocue, no preperation other than a quick Google search at the news desk. You need to be a pretty good presenterto pull that off.