Daybreak: With Lorraine Kelly and Aled Jones

The Sun is reporting that both Dan Lobb and Steve Hargrave have quit.

Aled Jones - very odd choice.

Aha. So now I get it.

One of the spoilers on here last week said "it's going to be a very Good Morning from 3rd September". So, the reference to "Good Morning" was perhaps a veiled reference to Aled Jones, as opposed to a name-change for Daybreak????

Call me Hercule.

Aled Jones is an interesting choice. I think it might just work.

I won't post a link to the site I write for, but I did get The Mirror story checked out regarding a name change and was told that the name was staying. Also Kate is staying with the show for now.

I echo many of the sentiments of forum members is saying that Aled Jones is a bizzare and yet interesting choice. I think nobody was expecting it. I still think Matt Barbet would have be the ideal candidate to takeover the revamped breakfast show.

With regards to Dan, I did not think he would be leaving the show. I think he probably quit before he was pushed out. Despite the failure of Daybreak I don't think it has damaged his reputation as he is clearly still popular amongst some in the viewing audience.

Also, it is hardly suprising the reaction of facebook towards to news of Lorraine and Aled with them saying as usual they simply switch to BBC. I think whoever was announced as new presenters they would have had the same reaction.

As I've said before I am extremely concerned at the editorial direction to the show is going. I think the appointment of Aled does not suggest a newsier approach. I think ITV have to be very careful in terms of managing the transition between now and the re-launch in September. If they don't it is very possible to suggest that they will simply replicate the same mistakes they made in 2010 and alienate the core audience further.

You're right, Neilly. I tend to agree.

Although, despite the initial reaction to Aled Jones as being a rather bizarre selection, I think all of us - in the distant back of our minds - are probably harbouring secret thoughts along the lines of "this is such a random appointment and unexpected pairing, it might just be one of those that really hits it off".

After all, look at Holly and Phil? They were also doomed by many, and have gone on to be a rather watchable pairing.

The show's content is where all the panel-beating needs to happen.

Maybe they were after Alex Jones and just made a typo.

Anyone else watching also though, when he first looked into the camera and around the studio he was thinking "Shut it Chiles, one day all this will be mine"

Presumably Steve Hargrave's appointment makes way to confirm the rumours of Richard Arnold's return. 'Tis a shame, because Steve does the job very well, without making what can be a very dismissive part of the show not so over the top and very much watchable.

Daybreak did these big stories well, the problem is when there isnt something significant to cover, they dont fill it with news.
watching the programme from 06.30 news update and local news followed by a discussion/guest to talk about a news story takes place and sometimes a second. They then have a lighter story before going to LA for entertainement news. It doesnt seem too bad.. But this is a good example:

I totally agree Daybreak did really well when they covered big news stories such as the death of Osama Bin Laden this time last year. On the day after the video clip the programme averaged 911,000 viewers and a 20% audience share as a result of the improved coverage. As you say the major problem for Daybreak is filling the content with items that are pointless and not news related. If they had a better balance between the light items and news it would be so much better. I am not saying having news constantly but have a decent amount of coverage. A fundamental issue for Daybreak at the moment is consistency. It seems sometimes the show is all over the place in terms of content.

I also agree with acconnell, with the news of Steve Hargrave quitting it does look like Richard Arnold will be returning which is a very bad idea IMO. Steve was actually very good in his role as entertainment correspondent he did not come across as arrogant and way over the top unlike Richard Arnold who epitomised the worse aspects of GMTV before it was axed.

Its fine saying that they need to find a good balance but it depends if the new Daybreak will be a news show or a magazine show. With the presenter signings, my understanding is that it will basically be 'Lorraine' from 7-9.25am which is no bad thing if that's the format they set it out to be. They just need to stick with that and not lapse into the current inconsistent format where it seems anything goes.

If Kate Garraway is to front the Newshour I'd like to see her present news updates throughout the mornings and for her to conduct any topical interviews. When a big story breaks that requires blanket coverage, rather than have Lorraine & Aled cover it and for it to come across too fluffy or lightweight, Kate should present it. It would give the news focus more consistency and more of a 'face', and would give a clear divide between that/the magazine elements. It would be a slightly different take on the format too. This would effectively be taking off air regular programming for a news flash- just as ITV1 would with ITV News updates- so could give the required urgency or gravitas.