GMB’s highest rating and audience share this week was on Thursday, on one of the days Piers doesn’t present. Unfortunately I can’t post the actual numbers, but every other day that week was below 700k. I’m becoming increasingly convinced that the Piers-centric format of GMB has peaked, although we obviously can’t be certain from one week alone.
Think they need to stop trying to engineer clickbait. Piers is brilliant when he is holding politicians to account, but the outrage at vegans, feminism, political correctness etc is becoming too contrived.
But it’s still a far better watch than the dirge on the other side.
Could it also have been because it followed on from the big political story the night before?
That’s definitely a possibility, but the first few days of the week seem to have dropped back by 100k or so since September/October. I think they’ll easily get another year (or potentially longer) of the format, but they should consider what comes next.
ITV will maintain the current format if the programme is making reasonable money from advertising and sponsorship. Yes, it might struggle to get 700,000 a day, but those 700,000 demo might be the people the advertisers want to attract, and if GMB pulls them in, makes profit, ITV will keep the Piers driven show.
At a guess it's probably not entirely Piers as it is that the past week was very dry for news. The meaningful vote was a bit of a damp squib in terms of events as I think the anticipation and build up was killed back in December, and in general I think everyone had talked out everything they possibly could on the WA. The No Confidence vote was pretty much a forgone conclusion too. It was a weird week where there's a lot happening - but what's happening is so dull that nobody's really looking to know more about it.
In general GMB was unlucky as most of the major events were happening in the evening, so it's call in guests and speculate on day's events or let Piers off the leash for a bit to save worrying about filling the time which I think is what is happening a bit. Basically fill the 6-3:30 section with a bit more than just the competition VT and chatter
Piers has stated several times recently that while BBC presenters have to remain impartial and not reveal their political persuasion, ITV presenters are allowed. That's not quite true, is it?
Piers has stated several times recently that while BBC presenters have to remain impartial and not reveal their political persuasion, ITV presenters are allowed. That's not quite true, is it?
I believe there is a good case to argue for the lines being too blurred between ITV News and Good Morning Britain. The graphics are of a very similar style and the ITV News (and ITV) logo are displayed throughout the programme.
Presenters and reporters (
with the exception of news presenters
and reporters in news programmes) may express their own views on matters of political or industrial controversy or matters relating to current public policy.
I would argue that Piers would fall under the title of ‘news presenter’ given the program is a breakfast news show. ITV, however, could argue that Charlotte is the ‘news presenter’ and Piers is simply a ‘presenter’. That would be a rather feeble argument though, given that Piers still presents news items.
Piers interjecting his own opinions into news items he is delivering would probably breach this guideline:
Quote:
A personal view or authored programme or item must be clearly signalled to the audience at the outset.
Ofcom don’t exactly seem like much of a threat though, so I doubt ITV are too concerned at the moment.
