Daybreak - the launch onwards

So it was at Adrian/Christine's request?
I suppose your right and I see your point. I think it was more the way it came across than anything else i.e on facebook basically "tell us what your doing this weekend" instead of "Were looking for some uplifting/heartwarming stories."

By the way anoilyrag, do you have any more details about any possible set/graphic changes coming? Only after that set designer posted tweeted "Shame RND isn't in a couple of weeks - could have had the set.' I think it gives people the impression that their going to rip the whole set out! So hoping your'll be able to set us straight.

Daybreak still doesn't seem to know what it wants to be. When it launched, there was promise - it was smart, upbeat, and had some interesting ideas. They now seem to have got it into their heads that viewers want cosy, a bit silly and constant showbiz. Whilst there is room for a bit of this, they take it too far and they are now stuck in a rut.

I usually catch some of the first half an hour, and the reason I don't stick with it is I don't really learn much from it. There's too much discussion between the people in the studio, which comes across as a bit lazy and cheap. In fact, there are too many people in the studio in the first place. I can switch over to Sunrise on Sky News, and get news, decent reports, live interviews, analysis, everything I need to know with a decent pace. I've said it before but this is what Daybreak should be looking at doing. A 5 minute news roundup every half an hour really isn't good enough.

You've got fingers. Choose one of the numerous 24 hour news channels to satisfy your lust.

No changes this side of September. That set designer is not and has never been associated with the programme.

Seems plenty of others are doing just that.

Perhaps making some sort of sarcastic remark about the future of the show?

Oh ok. Strange that he said that then. As Jugalug as said, maybe it was just a joke, because everyone seems to think that it'll virtually be changing back to GMTV by September.

So there will be changes come September then? Anything in particular or too early to know yet? To be fair most revamps seem to happen September anyway.

...and herein lies the problem. From what we can make of ratings/figures/AI indexes.... etc, "news" is what people want of a morning. That is why Daybreak is failing terribly, and this is why the "old" GMTV of the 1990s rated very highly. It managed to successfully combine gossip and other light features with news and current affairs issues, providing a decent alternative to the other broadcaster's offerings. The problem is that it began to rely too heavily on the "light stuff", turning viewers off gradually (and the competition saga didn't really help matters - although I realise that was not solely down to GMTV).

Daybreak could have launched with an agenda similar to the "old" GMTV that managed to captivate larger audiences in the 1990s, but instead of persisting with anything mildly like this, it is turning into the 2006/2007 era GMTV and subsequently turning viewers off. I don't think you're helping, anoilyrag, by essentially defending Daybreak's inconsistent agenda and non-news content...!

Anoilyrag, I know you will defend Daybreak, but didn't Daybreak aim to launch at a look at the day's news ? If I remember correctly, it was advertised as being anchored , not presented, and with the presenters reading the top story before handing to the news desk, it felt more newsier, instead of the celebrity/reality TV stuff they've shoved onto screen ever since. The idea as to what Daybreak should be has completley changed, from the different way that seemed the original plan, to the fluffy, warm and welcoming spoon-fed style of news that they've changed to now.

Adrian and Christine seem to be there at times as in-vision continuity announcers, announcing what's coming up, before handing to the news desk, before they drag on about ten top tips to stopping flowers wilting, before linking to a competition, then a break, then the sports news, then the weather, then a competition, then the news desk, then another reality TV/celeb gossip fest, before continuing in the same style.

Isn't the problem that Breakfast now targets the same sort of audience that GMTV did in the 1990s?

Back then Breakfast News was much more formal but has gradually pushed down into the friendly light market that GMTV occupied.

Yes, I think that is the case. Which creates a problem for ITV - either they try and steal that audience back, or offer an alternative - which they are doing. Trouble is that the alternative is not really appealing, and they seem against returning to a slightly more formal agenda. It's as if they are stuck in a rut. And for those that think Daybreak should stick to how it is, since when is it a given that ITV should play second fiddle to the BBC in almost everything? A lot of it's programming used to beat the BBC hands down for decades - from light entertainment to the news to breakfast telly.

They could relaunch at some point with a decent editorial set-up, but they'd have to stick with it. I know that's a big risk in commercial television with income depending on advertising, but how else are you going to win the audience back, especially if the "alternative" is not popular?

No way, it was never launched as a news programme. The concept of the show has always been to give the viewer news, sport, weather, entertainment and a sense of fun.

As for the in-vision continuity announcers comment; is that not the role of a presenter? Linking into VTs, leading the show, handing to other presenters and reporters and interviewing guests.