The overuse of screens is a big issue - they are quite harsh to look at and really mess with the lighting of the set. Everything is too bright now. The old 2010 sunrise set with the glass logo panel was much softer on the eye than the bright blue backdrop they use now. Bring back the softness and warmth!
Agreed, especially when the majority of the time theyâre just showing the same backdrops.
Would love to see a set design where the focus isnât about the screens, but it wonât happen - the networks value too much the versatility it brings with everything having to have a dual function and purpose.
This was the best one, simple, understated but looked great. Depth, not a screen. Screens are lazy set design if not used with anything else.
Not a completely unusual idea. When ITV This Morning moved their studios they recreated an illusion of the windows that overlooked the River Thames (and made them larger). The overall shape and layout of the set, while brand new and redesigned, was otherwise kept largely the same.
Obviously recreating even part of the Martin Place windows wouldâve been more expensive and complex because they were so large, but it would definitely set them apart at the performance area of the studio.
Thatâs just it. The abundance of screens has made set designers, and those who decide on these designs, lazy.
Tbf thereâs nothing stopping these designers from using the screens more creatively, but for whatever reason they donât. They just put a show graphic on them and call it a day. (Not knocking the designers themselves. Theyâre only working to the brief theyâre given.) I get it from a versatility point of view but it seems to have stifled creativity somewhat.
I think the Sunrise set is particularly bad because the main desk is almost in the corner of the studio and the surrounding area is so dark. Again, it looks fine in a tight shot but the wide shots kill any morning vibe they might be going for. Itâs all so soulless.
CBS Evening News latest set is a pretty good example of a newly completed set filled with screens which has been done extremely well, and still retains the versatility.
It can be done, itâs just not cheap, and the networks wonât stump up the cash evidently.
Loved the 2010-2016 graphics. Nice, simple and easy to read
P.S: There was an F-bomb dropped
Weekday breakfast ratings for the three programs compared to the same period of 2024 starting in week 5 when the national ratings started. The bump for all shows in week 10 is courtesy of TC Alfred.
Shows that Sunrise has been rating well above 400k during 2025, but was below that threshold last year. Today is steady compared to last year while News Breakfast is rating lower than 2024.
Love these graphs.
Yes. I think heâs brought more fun to the show.
Does anyone else think Nat is a bad interviewer? Just something about how she interviews, comes across very scripted. Donât get me started on the gotcha questions.
Another Sunrise host you donât like and trying to discredit? I see a pattern forming.
I thought Nat did well with her interviews with politicians, keeping them to task whether they are labor or liberal. I think if anything she is more genuine then her precious predecessor ,.
Its her job. If you want news reporters answer hosts to lick the politicians and not take them to take may I suggest you go to Sky News. The liberal party best friend.
Does anyone else think Nat is a bad interviewer? Just something about how she interviews, comes across very scripted
If it were so scripted, the delivery would be cleaner
hosts to lick the politicians
Yuck. No thanks. ![]()
Yeah Nat has been on the show for over two decades and people are suddenly finding ways sheâs not capable at doing the role. Itâs all bullsh*t.
I donât think itâs sudden at all?
There have been many posts on here over the years about her capability and conduct during interviews.
She is one of the reasons I prefer Today over Sunrise.
My take on Nat is that she asks the right questions but her delivery and presentation is a bit all over the place. She was much better reading the autocue as the newsreader.


