Good Morning Britain - the launch

The point he is making is that the fact the show was on air for 18 months doesn't mean that the show was given 18 months to "bed in". They didn't sit there for 18 months, making no changes, and then decided on the turn of 18 months to pull the plug.

Odd if that's the case, as surely their core audience is the enormous number of people currently watching BBC Breakfast - who clearly do like news in the morning. If not, why go to the trouble of poaching Susanna?

If I can try and get the thread onto track again, and before it bursts into all out arguing, the thing is, ITV have a dilemma. Do they do a fully news show, like Sky News' Sunrise, or do they go for a News show with a bit of lifestyle and entertainment thrown in after 8.30am, which is BBC1's Breakfast, or do they go for a programme that is a combination of news, features, lifestyle, and entertainment, which is what GMB is. People will always criticise no matter, but ITV must be applauded for not duplicating entirely either Breakfast, or Sunrise.

If I could wind the clock back to 1983, when TV-am launched, in their franchise application, they stated, and Peter Jay repeated this in TV interviews over the years, their idea was to provide a TV version of a quality newspaper, in all of its aspects, from the front page right to the back.

With todays GMB, what ITV is doing is trying to provide a TV equivelant of a newspaper, like The Mirror, in all of its aspects, from the front, to the back. News, Sport, Entertainment, Lifestyle, Business.

I still watch BBC Breakfast, but, that doesn't mean that what ITV are trying to do is rubbish; there will be people who prefer it, each to their own as it were. The issue facing ITV is not to panic, and tinker with things too much. There may well be things that need changing, such as ben introducing the presenter of the regional news, or is there a need for four presenters, but, the format of the show should not be uprooted and changed in less than 6 weeks.

I know the point he/she's making and they know the point I'm making. I didn't resort to insults to make my point though. I feel it's perfectly valid for me to express an opinion that GMB will take 18 months to bed in.

Well said. I really admire ITV's boldness with this new format, especially as a commercial broadcaster.

However, not much progress is made on a discussion forum when salient points that go against your argument are countered by repeating your argument. It's not as if your viewpoint is indefensible or necessarily wrong, but it seems like the reasoning is misinformed.

I think you're misrepresenting my previous posts and I disagree that salient points were made, as I discussed. You may feel my reasoning is misinformed but offer nothing to back up this conclusion and I beg to differ. I've now said a number of times that this particular conversation should be concluded as it isn't serving to advance the thread. My core point, made without the insults I was subjected to, remains. To repeat it brings the focus back to the issue at hand. I feel that GMB will need around 18 months to bed in. I'm more than happy to leave it at that.

I didn't see much of GMB this morning, how did the program go with the chair swaps and having 3 ladies?

Did John do the regional handovers even though he was in Sean's seat?

From what I saw after Susanna left to interview Tom Cruise, whoever was doing the astons at the top of the hour got the names completely in the wrong order...

Your questions are a tad tedious.

Yeah, I mean what is going to change about the format if 3 ladies and 1 man presents? Its not as if everything turned pastel pink and beige colours...

And bizarre. If you want to find out then there's this thing called ITV Player where you can watch the whole programme at your leisure!