reports the Daily Mail:
Natasha Kaplinsky has already been chosen to present the oneminute national news, aimed at younger viewers with a short attention span…
Horses for courses I suppose in the case of Ms. Kaplinsky.
An insider said: “Meetings are taking place at all the regional centres, We were told that some market research had been done and that the audience likes pretty young women reading the news – so that’s what we are going to have. “We were told this is not dumbing down – we are just connecting with our audience better.”
Yeah right. One of the big issues with the BBC these days is too much concentration on style and presentation – and not enough on substance and gravitas. Audience research also tells the BBC that a large part of the public is opposed to the BBC tellytax – are they going to pay some attention to that research too?
“Viewers will, of course, still be able to watch the Ten O’Clock News later to get more in-depth news and analysis.”
Of course it’s not so long ago that viewers had the choice of two decent evening news programmes – one at 9pm, the BBC’s Nine O’Clock News, and ITN’s much missed News at Ten.
Shortsighted execs at ITN were allowed to do away with News at Ten for a while, until they realised what a mistake they had made. Then along came the predatory BBC, acting in its own interests rather than the public’s interest, finishing all hope of News at Ten ever returning by moving the Nine O’Clock News to 10pm as quickly and as unseemly as they could. So much for public service television.
I don’t know why The Mail has such a downer on this new service. The idea is more news and to try and reach an audience we just don’t seem to be getting to at the moment.
Personally I always feel the great thing about TV is the pictures. They can instantly tell a story. But it’s also the downside of course. Wear a nasty tie and people will spend 30 seconds talking about that and miss what you are saying.
So with such a short bulletin I think it perfectly sensible that it’s as slick and smart as people want and to also give people what they expect to see in terms of presentation. Then hopefully they’ll concentrate on the news.
What is there to concentrate on in a one minute bulletin though David?
It does smack of dumbing down – the idea that someone can think they are informed about what’s going on in the world by watching 60 seconds of Ms. Kaplinsky fluttering her eyelashes reading out pureed mush for the masses is laughable (BBC recipe mush – most of the masses aren’t as dumb as the BBC presumes they are).
Still, it’s an opportunity to shove in more of those tedious (and selective) BBC adverts, sorry, trails (the ones that your viewer research shows are widely detested) on either side of the new bulletin!
P.S. Doesn’t anyone else miss News at Ten? Bong! Sandy Gall with the Mujahideen in Afghanistan, Bong! Sir Trevor McDoughnut, Bong! The funny bit at the end, Bong!, etc.? It used to be a great alternative to the BBC’s Nine O’Clock News. Alas no more.
I don’t know why they don’t go the whole hog and do it topless or just show girl on girl action interspersed with the odd item of news.
The upside of this is that news girlies like Kate Silverton don’t now have to spend a couple of years on programmes like The Matthew Wright Show, spouting left wing nonsense they niether believe in nor understand in order to get a job on the BBC.
One minute bulletin equals one more minute of Labour/left-wing propaganda!
“I don’t know why The Mail has such a downer on this new service”
Maybe if everyone in the country wasn’t FORCED to pay for these crazy ideas we really wouldn’t care.