Talking to the audience
Last month on Breakfast, we asked people watching at home to get in touch if they were interested in being part of our 'Audience Panel'.
I'm not quite sure what we expected, but we were surprised by the level of response. More than three thousand people emailed us, to say they'd like to take part. Yes, when you consider that five million people watch Breakfast every day, then it's a small percentage of our viewers. But we're absolutely delighted that it's aroused the interest that it has.
We've spent the last four weeks going through those expressions of interest, trying to select a panel that's as representative as possible of our audience demographic. This has been tricky because we haven't really asked for that much detail from our viewers. It's basically been name, age, location and profession. That said, what we're setting out to achieve here is not precise market research, but has much more to do with identifying the things that work for our audience.
We've already had some initial feedback on the programme from those three thousand people who responded. Perhaps unsurprisingly (as they are already Breakfast viewers), most were generally positive (and sometimes very kind) about what they watch every morning. Most value their news briefing, many want the programme to feel "warm" or "friendly", there was particular praise for Declan's ability to communicate some of the complexities around business and finance, there was a desire to understand what stories mean "for me" and there was an appetite for international stories and perspectives.
The next step, having decided on our panel, is to send out our first batch of questions. We're working on them right now, but we intend to have a couple of programme specific questions and at least one supplementary enquiry pegged to an 'issue' of some kind.
There are two real tests for us. One is making sure that we don't annoy those people who have agreed to be on our panel. The second is making it all mean something. If we can't prove that we have responded to some thing or some theme that has emerged from the Panel, then we will have failed.
Comments
I infer from the above that you are only going to select people who have praised the programme. Is that correct?
no, richard. i would imagine they have selected those from all across the board. Who would learn anyhing from being told how great they are?? And if you have negative feedback for the programme it has been welcomed in the past and will be in the future. I would infer from your comment that you wrote a negative comment regarding the show, not feedback, and you haven't been selected. Is that correct?
nd (post 2). I am not clear on the distinction you are making between 'negative feedback' and a 'negative comment'. Could you explain?
only three thousand out of five million. I should like you to ask the five million
do you think the bbc is controlled by gov & polititions?
do you think that newscasters hold back on some of the quistions they could and should ask because they are dictated to?
and yes I watch bbc from 5 to 7 every morn again at 6 in the evenning
I can assure you that it's not just positive comments - I am a regular e-mailer to Breakfast and whilst quick to praise what is good I'm equally quick to criticize and correct what is wrong. I am now a member of the Audience Panel and will continue to be a devil's advocate.
In terms of news coverage viewers in Scotland get a very raw deal from your programme. A great many of the leading news stories deal with English matters, particularly in relation to education, NHS, Council Tax etc. All these matters are dealt with separately in Scotland. A few minutes every half hour for a "regional" bulletin is insufficient.
At the moment we are basically watching English Television. As for the Sport - don't get me started - absolutely dreadful.
As a final point, I may be a lone voice but I find the "warm" approach to the news irksome. Some of the attempts at humour are embarrassing. Perhaps you should leave that approach to the Penny Smith's of this World and give us a bit more stiff upper lip (very English).
Sorry to be negative but Breakfast is getting below GMTV these days.Why can't we have a programme more news based with less of the chatter between all the presenters? Much of the time they seem to ignore us altogether. And, pardon me, but how much time and money does your sports reporter spend trying to find silly things to do? Why isn't he out getting sports stories?. It's all London and home counties based and it's time we had 15 minute regional opt outs instead of the current 2 or 3 minutes every half hour. And why are the news headlines preceded by gunfire so we have to grab the remote to turn the sound down? We don't need all this music in a news based programme
(sorry about all that, but you asked for our views)
After looking at the video of the audience panel and the staff on the Breakfast show, how can you say that you truely represent the general public. From what i was seeing,i would say the average age was 28. It seems to be if you are over 40 at the ³ÉÈËÂÛ̳ you are past it. How this differs from the major US and european networks.
yes just like the rest of the country the minority and pc rules. i for one am not naive. how can a few be a fair representation? it is though when it suites the media. a democracy is based around all. look around, it might sound corny but one day you the media will be judged through the evolution media of the Internet, which will not be suppressive. the news on the news, i can see that day snowballing very soon. this does not represent all. at the start of each program the rep should state loud and clear that the program is dreamy liberal tosh! chuckle!chuckle!
p.s. i love the people, power to the people, not the media. :)
I am flattered to think that my age averaged 28.Barry needs a maths lesson:70+50+24=144 divide that by 3 and our average age is 48.I am sure Bill and Sian would also be flattered.As to our visit,the ³ÉÈËÂÛ̳ Breakfast team went out of their way to show us everything that went into the making of the programme.What we- the audience - see when the programme is aired is a slick seamless VERY professional final product.What we don't see are the hundreds(literally) of components and people that go into the final product.I can assure you all it is an "eyeopener" and an opportunity that I wouldn't have missed.Thank you ³ÉÈËÂÛ̳.JOHN ADAMS
There were 3 of us chosen to represent the Audience Panel; a tough task, given that there are 100 in total on the Panel. We were given the opportunity to go behind the scenes of the making of ³ÉÈËÂÛ̳ Breakfast and to see exactly what goes on, starting from 6a.m. to the finish, 9.15a.m. Our visit meant that we were able to see everything that goes into the making of the programme such as the initial news, to the sport and weather input, to guest appearances, and to last minute detail changes, e.g. when guests get stuck in traffic and cannot appear at their scheduled time. It is a well-oiled operation and it gave the 3 of us a
chance to discuss detail with the Editor, David Kermode, and Producers alike, all of whom were receptive to our questions. As our film showed, every email and every text gets seen; every comment, idea, suggestion or criticism, but as in life, not everything can be replied to, adhered to, answered, or agreed with. I am grateful for being given the chance to see behind the scenes and, yes, it truly was an eye-opener.