10-09-2023, 09:16 AM
(10-09-2023, 12:47 AM)bilky asko Wrote: Even with the context, that is an excruciating watch. Surely it's less excusable as the news has already broken?
Of course it’s clearly pretty embarrassing to watch, and evidently they still don’t have the right resources for breaking news.
It’s not something I would actively watch anyway, but if I was and saw there was a big story breaking, I would be switching over as clearly they can’t really do major breaking stories justice.
I think the most seasoned of presenters, however, would probably struggle with being plonked on air 10 minutes early and told to discuss a piece of breaking news that they hadn’t actually heard because they getting mic’ed up etc and weren’t listening to that news come in. The presenter then not unreasonably assumed there might be something ready on the autocue, only to find it’s their script for their show in 10 minutes time, and they’ve been given no paper copy.
Although clearly this shows the danger of using ‘personalities’ with no formal training as your presenters, especially when your operation is pretty small, I do think the gallery put the presenter in a pretty unreasonable position there.
A more experienced presenter might have ad-libbed or filled time until the autocue was updated or they were given a paper copy, but it’s pretty difficult when you don’t have the actual story!
It’s easy to forget that in live TV news terms most of the ‘presenters’ are effectively random people they’ve picked up off the street, not helped by what seems like a pretty chaotic gallery and production situation.