HO
Agreed, I would put money on it.
University Challenge??? You should read the articles better
I was meaning BBC News, but if you want to be a pedant then University Challenge is an ITV production. That's very different to having direct work with the BBC, such as through BBC News.
This is your quote.
it wouldn't surprise me if he wanted out of the corporation rather than merely Newsnight.
The production company has noting to do with it. Is Graham Norton not a BBC presenter because his production company is owned by ITV?
Actually, it does. Filming a programme for ITV Studios in Manchester several weeks a year is very different to, at the most basic level, having to work in a building you hate (in a recent interview he described NBH as a dreadful building, in addition to his complaints about Radio 1). University Challenge is a regular, continuing programme that likely has little involvement of high-level BBC executives, many of whom again Paxman has publicly criticised or even belittled in recent years. If he joined Question Time, interviewed in the General Election coverage, had a new documentary series about the First World War, or did anything at all for News, he would be likely to find himself butting heads with producers and editors on journalistic, editorial grounds. Working for producers on a pretty non-controversial, fixed-format programme that is unlikely to be altered or overhauled in the near future is an entirely different scenario.
Remember, Paxman wasn't venting about the BBC ten years ago. Or twenty years ago. Rather a lot of current and former high-level staffers have been critical of the BBC in recent years because the corporation has changed significantly in scope and mantra. That change is because of different people running it. Beyond renewing or cancelling UC, there's not a lot those executives are likely to do to the programme. And if they do, I'm sure Paxman will be highly critical of it. But again, there are fewer issues and disputes that are likely to arise and less chance of them involving senior BBC executives when you're working for an outside production company - be it ITV Studios or SO Television - on a long running, recorded weekly entertainment programme than a directly commissioned and produced news or factual programme.
And to be clear, I wasn't saying Paxman wouldn't work at the BBC again. I was saying it struck me the BBC having no positive spin on the story - no new role or post, nothing to point to to show the relationship isn't over - was perhaps as much to do with their disputes over management and editorial as it was whether he wants to go to bed pre-11pm seven nights a week. Note the huge amount of praise he lavished on the BBC in his statement? Or on Ian Katz and his vision for Newsnight? When the best comments such a sharp-worded, creative and intelligent journalist can say is 'I've no idea what I'll do next' and 'I've worked with many smart, funny people over the years', his omissions are the statement. For comparison, take his statement when George Entwistle departed...
Eddie Mair and Emily Maitlis.
Agreed, I would put money on it.
According to one online newspaper article (forget which) Jeremy has no further BBC work lined up even 'despite the 2015 General Election'. Considering how very critical he's been of the corporation over the last year or two, it wouldn't surprise me if he wanted out of the corporation rather than merely Newsnight.
University Challenge??? You should read the articles better
I was meaning BBC News, but if you want to be a pedant then University Challenge is an ITV production. That's very different to having direct work with the BBC, such as through BBC News.
This is your quote.
it wouldn't surprise me if he wanted out of the corporation rather than merely Newsnight.
The production company has noting to do with it. Is Graham Norton not a BBC presenter because his production company is owned by ITV?
Actually, it does. Filming a programme for ITV Studios in Manchester several weeks a year is very different to, at the most basic level, having to work in a building you hate (in a recent interview he described NBH as a dreadful building, in addition to his complaints about Radio 1). University Challenge is a regular, continuing programme that likely has little involvement of high-level BBC executives, many of whom again Paxman has publicly criticised or even belittled in recent years. If he joined Question Time, interviewed in the General Election coverage, had a new documentary series about the First World War, or did anything at all for News, he would be likely to find himself butting heads with producers and editors on journalistic, editorial grounds. Working for producers on a pretty non-controversial, fixed-format programme that is unlikely to be altered or overhauled in the near future is an entirely different scenario.
Remember, Paxman wasn't venting about the BBC ten years ago. Or twenty years ago. Rather a lot of current and former high-level staffers have been critical of the BBC in recent years because the corporation has changed significantly in scope and mantra. That change is because of different people running it. Beyond renewing or cancelling UC, there's not a lot those executives are likely to do to the programme. And if they do, I'm sure Paxman will be highly critical of it. But again, there are fewer issues and disputes that are likely to arise and less chance of them involving senior BBC executives when you're working for an outside production company - be it ITV Studios or SO Television - on a long running, recorded weekly entertainment programme than a directly commissioned and produced news or factual programme.
And to be clear, I wasn't saying Paxman wouldn't work at the BBC again. I was saying it struck me the BBC having no positive spin on the story - no new role or post, nothing to point to to show the relationship isn't over - was perhaps as much to do with their disputes over management and editorial as it was whether he wants to go to bed pre-11pm seven nights a week. Note the huge amount of praise he lavished on the BBC in his statement? Or on Ian Katz and his vision for Newsnight? When the best comments such a sharp-worded, creative and intelligent journalist can say is 'I've no idea what I'll do next' and 'I've worked with many smart, funny people over the years', his omissions are the statement. For comparison, take his statement when George Entwistle departed...
HO
If the rumours are right, Kuenssberg costs a third of what Paxman does. I suspect it's more likely they made a big push to get Laura because Jeremy was leaving, rather than the other way around. Although I'm willing to bet they've saved money replacing Gavin and reducing Kirsty's role.
If the rumours being put about are right, they needed him to go for financial reasons. Having spent so much bringing in the likes of Laura Kuenssberg etc, they had to find savings elsewhere. Paxo's salary was the answer. If that is true (and it may not be) I doubt they could be too generous bringing in a presenter from outside.
If the rumours are right, Kuenssberg costs a third of what Paxman does. I suspect it's more likely they made a big push to get Laura because Jeremy was leaving, rather than the other way around. Although I'm willing to bet they've saved money replacing Gavin and reducing Kirsty's role.
BR
I do think the show needs an identifiable host - having 3 or 4 hosting a day or two a week isn't going to give it the stability it needs and really I think they should be able to run the show with one main presenter and an alternate, with a third on stand by from somewhere else within the BBC or within the Newsnight reporting team.
GH
Huge loss - but for me the natural replacement would be Eddie Mair. I suspect Kirsty Wark's days are numbered on the show, as she isn't really part of the new brand - but it is impossible for the BBC to replace her until she chooses to leave. My choice (and possibly even expectation) would be Eddie Mair and Emily Maitlis as the main presenters with Kuenssberg as the number three - that's enough presenters!
CH
Unlikely I think. Reading Peter Sissons' book he says Paxman auditioned at the same time as Sissons and his programme was deemed pretty crap (I'm paraphrasing here!) so I doubt he would want to try and do it again. I think we're more likely to see the equally competent but less aggressive Huw Edwards take over when Dimbleby leaves.
I wonder whether this would then open the door to Jeremy being David Dimbleby's successor on Question Time. It's more likely now than before.
Unlikely I think. Reading Peter Sissons' book he says Paxman auditioned at the same time as Sissons and his programme was deemed pretty crap (I'm paraphrasing here!) so I doubt he would want to try and do it again. I think we're more likely to see the equally competent but less aggressive Huw Edwards take over when Dimbleby leaves.
GH
While I highly rate Maitlis, and I'm sure she will be a big part of the presenting team, the role should go to the best interviewer in the country. (Which almost certainly means they will be very divisive). In my opinion Paxman and Andrew Neil are the best two on TV - John Humphrys and Eddie Mair the best on radio. That's why my choice would be Mair.
Isn't it about time it went to a woman? Come on, Emily Maitlis is the perfect choice to take over.
While I highly rate Maitlis, and I'm sure she will be a big part of the presenting team, the role should go to the best interviewer in the country. (Which almost certainly means they will be very divisive). In my opinion Paxman and Andrew Neil are the best two on TV - John Humphrys and Eddie Mair the best on radio. That's why my choice would be Mair.
MF
Jeremy Paxman will remain host as University Challenge. My thoughts are that his political TV career is over.
Yes, he hates the BBC, but he still enjoys University Challenge so he'll be stuck there till retirement probably.
Yes, he hates the BBC, but he still enjoys University Challenge so he'll be stuck there till retirement probably.