TV Home Forum

Morning Live

(September 2020)

This site closed in March 2021 and is now a read-only archive
SP
Steve in Pudsey
If this is true it does seem like it's giving a lot of ammunition to the BBC bashers, but I think there is a legitimate question about whether the BBC should be trying to take viewers from a well established show.

To me, the license fee should be being used to produce something distinctive, not this kind of cynical "me too" effort.
CO
commseng
Surely the BBC and all broadcasters should be trying to attract viewers (or listeners) from other stations.
It's competition.

ITV do not have the copyright on people presenting programmes during the morning, so if the BBC or whoever want to try something, why should they be stopped?
JF
JetixFann450
I don't think it's that bad for the BBC to take a crack at morning TV again after what BBC News already currently does, if anything the show has been running for nearly 20 years and a change in format could end up alienating viewers, but at the very least it would make morning BBC not look like "wallpaper TV" with the idea that they're simulcasting from BBC News (Channel).

Not to mention it's a bit ironic that they're trying to compete with ITV with a new morning show when two of their own hosts from the One Show previously ended up getting poached on ITV's new breakfast show, Daybreak. Confused
AD
adamiow
Given that they axed Victoria Derbyshire due to budget cuts, whilst I appreciate it is a different type of show, launching another live show in a similar time slot is a bit rude. Clearly, if Victoria had offered to add some fluffy content and chatting with celebs, the show might have survived!
SP
Steve in Pudsey
Yes and no. The BBC isn't like other broadcasters, because of the unique way it's funded.

Part of the justification for the license fee is that it funds programmes that aren't viable on a commercial basis. Putting on a very similar show to that on a commercial channel doesn't really fit with that.
CO
commseng
Yes and no. The BBC isn't like other broadcasters, because of the unique way it's funded.

Part of the justification for the license fee is that it funds programmes that aren't viable on a commercial basis. Putting on a very similar show to that on a commercial channel doesn't really fit with that.

Not every programme has to be impossible to show on a commercial channel.
Would Casualty (to pick one programme at random) be impossible for Channel 4, or Sky One to make?
No.
Should the BBC be prevented from making it or any popular programme?
Absolutely not.
NL
Ne1L C
If this is true it does seem like it's giving a lot of ammunition to the BBC bashers, but I think there is a legitimate question about whether the BBC should be trying to take viewers from a well established show.

To me, the license fee should be being used to produce something distinctive, not this kind of cynical "me too" effort.


Well put. The question I have though is what could be classed as distinctive for morning tv?
BR
Brekkie
Given that they axed Victoria Derbyshire due to budget cuts, whilst I appreciate it is a different type of show, launching another live show in a similar time slot is a bit rude. Clearly, if Victoria had offered to add some fluffy content and chatting with celebs, the show might have survived!

Exactly - VD could easily have been reworked for a more mainstream BBC1 audience without going too far down the This Morning/One Show type route, and would at least be a point of difference to This Morning.

Personally I'd rather they finally listened to what a few reports have suggested they should do and restore a proper Saturday morning show to BBC1 and rework Saturday Kitchen as a daily show.
CO
commseng
If this is true it does seem like it's giving a lot of ammunition to the BBC bashers, but I think there is a legitimate question about whether the BBC should be trying to take viewers from a well established show.

To me, the license fee should be being used to produce something distinctive, not this kind of cynical "me too" effort.


Well put. The question I have though is what could be classed as distinctive for morning tv?

Celebrity Porn Starts. Join Anneka Rice and Jan Leeming as they attempt to make a hard core adult video.
Also featuring Rylan and Graham Norton. Viewer discresion advised.
UHF only (not Wales).
uktvwatcher and Ne1L C gave kudos
NL
Ne1L C
If this is true it does seem like it's giving a lot of ammunition to the BBC bashers, but I think there is a legitimate question about whether the BBC should be trying to take viewers from a well established show.

To me, the license fee should be being used to produce something distinctive, not this kind of cynical "me too" effort.


Well put. The question I have though is what could be classed as distinctive for morning tv?

Celebrity Porn Starts. Join Anneka Rice and Jan Leeming as they attempt to make a hard core adult video.
Also featuring Rylan and Graham Norton. Viewer discresion advised.
UHF only (not Wales).



Here are the head lines!
MA
Meridian AM
There was also "The Morning Show" on BBC1 around 2003 which, I think, launched with more a focus on news.

I suspect you know who will have something to say about the BBC launching a new magazine format straight after BBC Breakfast.


Why can't the BBC offer an alternative instead of trying to be what it's not, commercial...


Lack of new ideas and it's cheap to make.
IS
Inspector Sands
If this is true it does seem like it's giving a lot of ammunition to the BBC bashers, but I think there is a legitimate question about whether the BBC should be trying to take viewers from a well established show.

It'll be up against Lorraine in the 9:25-10am slot by the sounds of it. That's not exactly established, Jeremy Kyle was the opposition there for a long time. And as I say they've had live magazine programmes there on and off for years.
Last edited by Inspector Sands on 20 September 2020 1:17pm

Newer posts