News Breakfast

@nationalnews Michael is returning tomorrow morning.

1 Like

Paul Kennedy had his head shaved yesterday morning for World’s Greatest Shave to help raise money to beat blood cancer, Virginia also dyed her hair.
Virginia mentioned this morning just over $34,000 has been raised so far.

3 Likes

The presentation and set are lifeless and dull and dated.

“But it’s ABC, we don’t want Today and Sunrise clones” people say…

So look to Good Morning Britain for inspiration. Look to CBS This Morning. Look to the dozens of European Morning shows that sit somewhere between Today and a News Breakfast. And I’m not just talking about sets and GFX. But the tone, the pace, the energy, the format. The structure - it’s all bad.

But even looking past the dull presentation and lazy format - the content is really bad. My post above highlights. 11 minutes in and they had covered one story. With a day old story. The covered the US BlizArds with a guy on the capitol steps in dc - there was no storm there - and the questions and banter and information given were all lackluster.

It’s just not good television.

Why? You’re once again inventing a problem which doesn’t exist. Not every show needs flashy sets and a pacey formula to do its job and report the news. You seem to have a personal dislike for this program simply because it doesn’t appeal to you or doesn’t operate like the commercial sector.

“Why didn’t they get a new set after they’d spent $90mil on a new studio?” Well, because $90mil is already a significant chunk (9%) out of the ABC’s $1b dollar budget. How can a public broadcaster which last week announced 200 redundancies justify a new set for a breakfast show?

“Why don’t the ABC use a better formula, like x or y, which suit my personal tastes?” Because you aren’t the only person who watches it. I daresay that you, living in America, barely ever watch it at all. The show’s format isn’t to my taste either, but it is clearly aiming for an older audience, which isn’t lucrative for advertisers. The ABC has often done this; one of its clear mandates is to broadcast programming which isn’t financially viable for the commercial sector.

Judging by how ABC Breakfast has done alright in attracting a decent audience, I think the ABC can justify its format.

I’d like to see you justify changes to the format with more reasoning than simply: “I don’t like how dull it is.”

3 Likes

perfect excuse when you’re a male reaching a certain age…

@pelican

I think the problem most defiantly exists. I’m not the only one to say News Breakfast in bad television.

My emphasis is not on a “flashy set” at al; - that’s what you keep going back to not me. And as for the right pace and formula - I absolutely think a show need stop have the right pace for the time of day and the viewing habits or people who are watching. I don’t think you would suggest that 7.30 should have the same pace as News Breakfast would you?

In the mornings - people are racing around to get our the door. They are not sitting consuming TV in the same manner as 8pm. That’s why these shows got for 3 hours and loop the same content for 3 hours. They are not designed to be watched start to end. ABC knows this as they follow the formula. And I presume ABC viewers have jobs and kids and are rushing out the door and do not have time to sit glued to the telly. The news news to be delivered in a faster, punchier pace - so you can get all the info, news, weather you need / want to get out the door.

As pointed out above - I’m not just saying the show needs to be faster and flashier for no reason - as my post above laid out:

The other morning they opened with a 5 minute filed report on the Byron Bay Mum arrested in Bali. It felt like it had been produced the day before, and the pace felt more suited to Australian Story or 7.30. It was long, dragged out and required your FULL attention on the TV to understand the story. This is where a LIVE cross where the hosts can ask questions and interview a reporter and get the latest info in a faster pace suited to mornings is needed.

At about 6.07 they moved to the new weather guy. But not to say a quick hello and get to the massive storms hitting NSW that will impact people’s day. Oh no, they chatted to nate for about 5 minutes about his life, his hobbies, his time in the Naby and so forth. So 11 minutes in we have seen one story - that was taped yesterday.

This is just badly produced TV. You should know you audience, how they watch, and what news they need to know. News should be current, updated and up to the minute. And your opening story should be new content - not a dated report. And if storms are going to affect 5 million people that day in NSW - you should bring me that story and tele the weather and what I can expect and when it will hit. Not chat about the personal life of the new weather guy for 6 minutes - do that later in the show.

In 11 minutes on News Breakfast I got an old report from Bali - and the personal life of Nate. That is well produced breakfast TV? The pace is not a problem?

In 11 minutes I should get least 3-4 news items, I should know the forecast of the day. If there is sever weather I could know when it hits - and perhaps I should know the stock markets briefly.

And if you have a reporter in DC whilst a major blizzard hits the US - then he should be out in the field reporting from that. We knew of this storm 4 days before hand to fly him somewhere the storm would hit. Not place him on the steps of the capital on a beautiful spring day. That’s not the story.

I’m not for one second suggesting this show become anything like Today or Sunrise. But is one on Media Spy not able yto debate that a show can become a BETTER version of itself? Is News Breakfast such a fantastic show and format that it is abbe being improved or refined? Should ABC not be held to producing better televison - simply because its ABC and it doesn’t have to? It’s good just how it is? Nothing can be done better? IS ABC above criticism?

We will have to disagree. But don’t limit my posts to wanting a flashy set. That is a small part of my criticism of this show.

As for the $90m - explain to me how a TV network can spend $90m on brand new studios (and offices) and not make the HD in 2017 after they just made a huge song an dance about launching ABC HD. Come on - that’s just ABC being ABC. In the real (not govt) world you can spend $90m to upgrade something and install old technology.

I’m all for flashy TV productions however as I get older I really do appreciate the pace and time set aside for discussing real issues and not just grabs. I guess as a work from home person I have the time to sit back and enjoy News Breakfasts for what it is. It doesn’t have snappy bites like the other stations and that suits me fine. I find it really refreshing and am usually able to take away solid information about the news of the day and broader issues. Plus, I love Virginia and Michael - as do most of their Facebook page. Keep up the great work News Breakfast and don’t change ^

Again, you are quietly displaying that you’re out of touch with what the ABC is trying to do.

Old people aren’t rushing out the door like 18-39 year olds are. The format works for who its designed for.

Or there is another link in the chain at Melbourne which needs an upgrade before HD, which I think would be more likely. Cameras aren’t the only thing which need to be HD in order for HD to be shown on-screen. Production, graphics, links, play out and cabling all need to be in HD every step of the way before HD is possible for the viewer.

1 Like

I think you are over simplifying my argument.

Problem is - the problems go beyond the set and pace.

Firstly, Guthrie and Finlayson are on record saying that ABC’s mission and purpose is to appeal to ALL Australian’s and recently she is increasingly on record as saying ABC TV and their news broadcasts in particular must do a better job at appealing to younger people.

Where are you getting that News Breakfast is designed for “old people” - who said that, I’ve never read the hosts, the EP or Guthrie say that is the objective of the goal. In fact I think ABC would want to think the exact opposite.

I think it’s you out of step with ABC and Guthrie’s stated goal. She’s been on a massive role lately about appealing to a wider demo of people and a focus on younger people

Right, and when 70% of the breakfast market are already satisfied with the commercial alternatives, you look at what the other 30% want and go there.

Further, the ABC does appeal to all Australians… through its various different programs and services. There is no requirement that every program please everyone. I don’t envisage how that’s possible.

1 Like

Well when you’re running ABC I’ll take your invented in your head mission that News Breakfast targets just old people who arrant running out the door - a little more seriously.

Until then I’m going to measure the success of the show against what the managing director is on record as saying.

Indeed you are right that every show cannot appeal to all people - but I believe every show should do a better job at trying to appeal to a broader demo than 55+ - and Guthrie agrees.

@pelican

Can you at least tell me why I’m wrong, particularly with regards to how all programs can’t please everyone and the ABC has multiple services for appealing to broad demographics?

I’d say ABC Local Radio is the format you’re looking for if you want a fast paced ABC breakfast show.

OIAll programs can’t appeal to all
People - you are right.

But a flagship national morning show on the flagship ABC channel should be appealing to more people
Than just over 55s

And it’s not. The ratings show its not. Guthrie has said it’s not. And looking at their ratings I’m
Not the only one. ABC news shows have a higher median age than any news on TV. That’s not good. They should be providing a news alternative to 7 and 9 that appeals to a wide demo of people - not a news alternative that appeals to Just over 55s

But you said the goal of the show is to target old
People.

So that doesn’t jive with the ABCs goal as a whole, nor Guthries for the whole
Of the company. Nor the news division.

So that’s why you are wrong.

I’m 38 and I enjoy news. I can’t stand 9 and 7 news. ABC has a 24 hour news channel - and flagship news shows at 6am, 5pm and 7pm

Yet none of them appeal to me. They all
Feel
Old fashioned, slow, overly focused on international news, and a bit too “ty hard” they all come off so snobbish and elitest - when really they have nothing to be so cocky about. - the quality of ABC programming is just ok.

I want to watch abc. I want to consume ABC news. And as a 38 year old who is overly interested In consuming tv and tv news - you would
Think I am exactly the kind of person abc should be tying to appeal to. Yet they are not.

Across 4 channels - there is not a single peace of news programming that appeals to me.

I’m 20, and it’s interesting that I don’t consume much TV news. I’d probably listen to more ABC via radio than TV, and I think they’re fine.

The 7pm news I think is fine. It’s the flagship, and it sets the agenda. Most of the time it strikes a good balance between local and international news. In fact, I’d go the other way from you in saying it often places too much emphasis on crime reporting at the expense of other areas. I don’t particularly see how having too much international news is a criticism; a lack of international news makes viewers insulated from the world around them like the drones who watch only commercial news.

It’s probably a little too staid at time, but I think it’s important for the ABC to maintain a quieter tone than commercial competitors.

Rather than me “being wrong” and you being right, I think it’s more so that we have differing expectations for what service the ABC should provide.

I think too often ABC news includes news BECAUSE it is international - and not actually because it is newsworthy or if interest to their audience

The same way the Logies always includes “international stars” even when they are duds

I’m all for international news that is relevant. I’m afraid it’s not always that way at abc

I’m the same age as you, yet the ABC style appeals to me and has for a long time. It has nothing to do with our particular age, but taste and maturity.

Then why does no one under 55 watch abc news?

I think that’s a question they are exploring if true. But I don’t think it has anything to do with the general tone or length of its content and I dare say a huge amount of the Sunrise and Today audience is above 55. Perhaps a new generation is watching their ABC News Breakfast online in snippets, which I do too. Or perhaps its just perception.

1 Like

It’s reality. I see the daily demo ratings. Wish I could
Post