The Eternal Breakfast Debate in a New Place

[Nick Armstrong]

Any chance this thread could be merged with, say, "Scotland to charge for plastic bags", at least until all the feverish excitement dies down?

Absolutely none!

[Radio64]

Any chance this thread could be merged with, say, "Scotland to charge for plastic bags", at least until all the feverish excitement dies down?

HAHAHA .. love the humour generated by this thread .. you couldn't make it up.

I'm off to listen to Breakfast again .. on Listen again ..

[Eine Alpensinfonie]

I agree, Sir. CBH is, for me, in a select group of two presenters who make me switch off (the other being SR). In my glorious reign, PT and IS would share breakfast duties, with SK and... wait for it... SMP covering In Tune. ( I maintain SMP is wasted on the dreadful "The Choir", but would do rather well on In Tune).

It isn't the presenters that's the issue. It's the programme itself. As for SM-P being 'wasted on the dreadful "The Choir"', she was the one who dragged this previously excellent programme down into the gutter.

[Radio64]

It isn't the presenters that's the issue.

that's good to know.

[french frank]

this previously excellent programme

To be fair, it was never the same once they abolished Choirworks on the grounds that 90 minutes of choral music was a bit of a no-no on Sundays. And I don't think presenters can do a lot to improve a duff format. The 'Breakfast' format [as in The Choir] is a duff format.

[Black Swan]

I briefly tuned in even though, I said I wouldn't and got the Cambridge Buskers busking Rossini and then of course to hear as a new mother CBH is always looking for a good lullaby. Enough, on with the Madonna CD in the car....

[Eine Alpensinfonie]

To be fair, it was never the same once they abolished Choirworks on the grounds that 90 minutes of choral music was a bit of a no-no on Sundays. And I don't think presenters can do a lot to improve a duff format. The 'Breakfast' format [as in The Choir] is a duff format.

Agreed on most points, but SM-P did make The Choir significantly more cringeworthy.

[clive heath]

I'm wondering why the Godowsky piece played by Marc André Hamelin is missing from today's playlist.

[MLF]

It isn't the presenters that's the issue. It's the programme itself. As for SM-P being 'wasted on the dreadful "The Choir"', she was the one who dragged this previously excellent programme down into the gutter.

Actually I think there are two issues: the presenters and the format. While the format is not what I would have chosen, it was rendered immeasurably better, IMHO by IS. As for SMP, I have enjoyed her work before - and I cannot believe she is the author of the current dreadful format of the Choir.

[Eine Alpensinfonie]

Actually I think there are two issues: the presenters and the format. While the format is not what I would have chosen, it was rendered immeasurably better, IMHO by IS. As for SMP, I have enjoyed her work before - and I cannot believe she is the author of the current dreadful format of the Choir.

I'm sure she isn't the author, but she fires the bullets.

[Nick Armstrong]

I'm off to listen to Breakfast again .. on Listen again ..

[french frank]

I'm sure she isn't the author, but she fires the bullets.

And I think the format probably imposes a certain presentational style. It certainly wouldn't be up to a presenter to 'decide' that programmes should include tweets or listener contributions (as voiceovers when music is playing).

My timings of Breakfast suggested that the 150-minute programme invariably had 30 minutes of presenter/speech contribution. And as the programme is intended, primarily, to appeal to (and not 'intimidate') new listeners we surely can't expect much by way of interesting input (notwithstanding IS's valiant - if not always strictly musical - bons mots). The Choir has gone the same way.

I would suggest that the Love/Hate relationships that (all?) radio listeners have with presenters is whether they establish a sympathetic rapport with their audience - and for me, the non negotiable is intelligence. I don't mean whether the presenters possess intelligence, but whether they communicate it. It seems that the brief is often not to do so.

[kernelbogey]

[...] a sympathetic rapport with their audience - and for me, the non negotiable is intelligence. I don't mean whether the presenters possess intelligence, but whether they communicate it. It seems that the brief is often not to do so.

A useful distinction. But the brief would surely not be 'Don't present intelligently', but 'Present at the level of chat'. The sort of discourse one might have with a neighbour, however intelligent, while waiting for an early morning bus, maybe.
(EDIT: And of course Radios 1 & 2 have delivered big audiences in return for this formula.)

[MLF]

I don't mean whether the presenters possess intelligence, but whether they communicate it. It seems that the brief is often not to do so.

Nail on head.

[Radio64]

Nail on head.

OUCH!