Daybreak - the launch onwards

I agree, I just hope with the choice of Editor who's had a very successful track record as we know can produce something that is not as orrange as a talent salon in content and female presenters (if they let him.)

With the new editor taking over I was thinking could we see a role for Isla Traquir who was very popular at 5 during his time there?

Agree with your sentiments Robert but whilst in my experience too most people don't bow to the celebrity altar ITV pray to, alas, ratings suggest a sizeable proportion of advertisers' dream young audiences do just that.

When a 10 year old jungle castaway show records its highest ever launch figures and Jordan & Peter: The Next Chapter clocks up 2m for ITV2, is it any wonder they're running these tired, generic formats into the ground?

However, although applying this, sigh, winning formula to a faltering breakfast programme may seem logical to them, in reality it is paved with pratfalls. The question should be is celeb obsession an inescapable part of these saps' lives or merely a hobby of casual escapism? Will this audience really be prepared to switch on daily at 7am?

Does anybody desire a Celebrity 24 to start a cold, damp Tuesday 22nd November morning in the real world ?
I hope the answer is and always will be no, for christ's sake, no.

I'm wondering whether Christine & Adrian will have a 'last day' or if they just disappear from the programme.. I'm looking forward to seeing how it's handled onscreen.

Not so much with celebrity, but I did enjoy the launch days of daybreak for entertaining features such as cool before school, etc. I don't want 2 1/2 hours of entertainment news, but at the same time I don't want 2 1/2 hours of hard news in the morning. I want to see them delivering the news and enjoying themselves which I believed that they were doing until ratings news brought down the presenters and countless changes have been made for no reason.

Still think they need to look to Sunrise for inspiration, and maybe presenters. Eamonn Holmes and Charlotte Hawkins would be a good team, with Charlotte just being not well enough known to add too much pressure. Think they should maybe go for a 30 minute loop with maybe different features each half hour, but the same pattern of news, regional news, weather and sport. It's a bit loose still now.

Me too!

Just watch the ratings rise as the 'rubber-neckers' like me start tuning in to see how they handle their final weeks. They both seem quite bitter about the way the news came out, but perhaps they're both professional enough to continue with dignity until the end.

Unless they bring in a visible ITN presence to provide the news, then Daybreak isn't going to start to come close to matching the audience share of BBC Breakfast.

IMO, most people want a 'News, Weather, Sport' agenda provided in a 30 minute repetitive format first thing in the morning. It works well for Sky & the BBC, with 'fluffy stuff' coming after 8:00 or 8:30.

I appreciate that ITVplc survive on advertising revenue, but perhaps they should regard ITV Breakfast Ltd and the 6:00-8:00 period as a 'loss-leader' into the rest of the morning, rather than something which generates profit.

I've tried watching Daybreak, but as others have said, I also switch back to the BBC once adverts, competitions or sponsorships come on.

BBC Breakfast manages to have features, even early in the morning. I get up at 6am and see the headlines just before I take the dog out for a walk. If there was an interesting special feature, then I know I can catch it at 6:30 or at 7:00 after I've had a shower and got ready for work: so by 7:15 when I leave home I should've been able to catch just about everything I wanted to know - including the regional bits. It also registers in my 'early morning sluggish brain' as something to do with BBC News, so I trust what they are telling me.

I like Bill & Sian on BBC Breakfast: they seem to work well together, but they work just as well when with others. The personalities aren't really important - it's the content and the timing that matters to me.

Most of the time I am only looking at the screen to see what time it is: the TV is on in both my bedroom and the living room, so I can hear it while I'm getting ready. When tuned into BBC One, I can judge what time it is by just listening to it and what they're talking about. There has never been any such consistency in Daybreak: because so much of the broadcast seemed to be advertising or sponsorship - and there was no clock on screen even if I could see it.

Apologies if this has already been mentioned, but while Breakfast is popular and has done much better during Kermode's time, David Kermode was also at the heart of Natasha Kaplinsky's Five News which - while up in ratings - is awful. So while he might be able to fix ratings, don't necessarily expect a great programme.

With a lot of comments about advertisements and competitions, is it possible that ITV Breakfast could look for a sponsorship deal to replace the majority of adverts whether it be the first hour completely or cut down the amount. Again presenters are only a small part of the problem and so sorting the income to allow more content time would help further?

Seeing clips of TV3 Sunrise (i think) they incorporated a sponsor in their titles but I am unsure whether they had breaks or how the channel operated.

I think because Daybreak is technically a news programme it can't be sponsored. Not sure though.

That's not going to happen. Isla now lives in Canada, and is about to start filming a show for the Oprah Winfrey Network.

Good luck with them trying to find a winning formula because there seems to be two distinct views of what is a winning formula

Half want GMTV back which it practically is already

Half want more news but then give no reason as to why people will turn off Breakfast to watch an under resourced version of the same news with adverts every 15 mins

Then you've got the few here who want it to be like Daybreak was originally because it looked nice, which obviously didn't work as everyone switched off.

GMTV's problems started when Breakfast became more accessible moving from high-brow to mid-brow, pushing GMTV into the low-brow area.

So you're saying ITV need to have a high-brow alternative?