Jump to content

Talk:TV-am

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Somebody requested a photo of the TV-am tower. TheGrappler 17:03, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The 'Big Five'

[edit]

Article edited to remove the reference of Peter Jay as being a presenter. The other member of the 'Big Five' was in actual fact Robert Kee, who presented the 1st program on TV-am, Daybreak, at 06:00 on 1 February 1983

Tgsh2005 3 July 2005 22:14 (UTC)

Philip Schofield

[edit]

The article quotes Scofield as having been involved, however his own Wikipedia page says:

"Aged 19, Schofield moved with his family to New Zealand, where he made his television debut presenting the children's music programme Shazam! on 23 February 1982. He also spent two years working for the Auckland-based station Radio Hauraki.[2] In 1985, Schofield returned to England, where he became the first in-vision continuity presenter for Children's BBC"

Poggs (talk) 17:21, 8 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Major Clean Up

[edit]

Hopeful to clean up this page soon, IF anyone has any useful refs etc place leave them here. --Crazyseiko (talk) 20:46, 28 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

ITV

[edit]

My understanding is that TV-am was an ITV franchise. This article dances all around that fact without actually stating it. It needs to be stated upfront, in the opening sentence or paragraph. Softlavender (talk) 15:10, 3 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

"Improvements" by CrazySeiko?!!!

[edit]

CrazySeiko starts his/her improvements with the comment "What a pile of crap and rubbish...Some major improvements really are needed on this page". Let's see what "major improvements" have been made (errors or dubious areas are in bold, comments or correction in italics):- [1]

Low-key forerunner added yesterday. "In 1987 technical staff at the station..." becomes "In 1987 the technical staff at the station"; not gramatically wrong, but unnecessary and arguably a subtle difference in meaning.


[2] Here's where it really starts...

"A broad room [boardroom] battle ensured [ensued] on 13 march [capitalisation] 1983"

"On the same day Angela Rippon and Anna Ford come [came] out publicly"

"Greg Dyke was brought in as director of programmes, to helped [help] build an audience, [(was that comma meant to be a full-stop?)] He moved David Frost to Sundays, and was replaced by sports presenter Nick Owen [Greg Dyke was replaced by Nick Owen?!!] to front Good Morning show [Good Morning Britain?]"

[3] "Australian business tycoon Kerry Packer took a substantial minority interest in the company, ["and" missing?] in early May appointed his own Chief Executive [no capitalisation needed], Bruce Gyngell"

"The station overhauled is [its] children's Saturday morning programme [programmeS?]]"

"Intraindustry dispute" [Not sure if it's a mistake- should it be "intra-industrial dispute"?- but it's certainly pointless jargon]

[[4]]

"Michael Parkinson(whose weekend show was the only success the station was having" (fine) becomes "Michael Parkinson [[Parkinson's]] weekend show become [became] the only success the station [is there a word missing here?!], largely because the BBC did not broadcast on weekend mornings"

"Michael Parkinson become a director of the company and joined the broad [board] of management"... and presumably joined them in the "broad room"?

[5]

"On the First [no capitalisation needed] day of broadcasting, included a interview with Lord terbet [Any relation to Lord "Capital T" Tebbit?!] about the current unemployment, [..] Within two weeks of the launch the ratings were a distorter ["Distorter"?! Does he mean "disaster"?]

Anyone wanting to point out mistakes *I* might have made above, should remember that (a) this isn't the article itself and (b) I'm not the one who arrogantly called the *existing* content "a pile of crap and rubbish" and appointed themselves to make "major improvements", yet littered the article with grammar, punctuation et al far worse than what was there before.

Enough said. Can someone else please take a look at the *factual* content these "improvements" made and and see if the underlying content is worth keeping despite its awfulness? I've had enough of this for now.Ubcule (talk) 19:44, 10 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Thank you for your comments. Maybe if you spent the time resolving the minor grammar issues you have raised, instead of writing a long complaint list, this page might have improved a bit before now. I have made all the changes you have suggested expect one which was non on the page. Further more, the page and content was crap and rubbish and give very misleading information, including such gems as
  • Peter Jay was forced to resign when he refused to dismiss some of his star presenters; .
  • His replacement, British politician Jonathan Aitken, fired Angela Rippon and Anna Ford and threatened to dismiss Michael Parkinson; it was his cousin and both were sacked for speaking out against the management.
  • Anna Ford refused to be moved, leading to her dismissal,
  • Rantzen never joined TVAM because she was pregnant I will add in a Ref for that.

May the fact you have not undone the edits is because you know refs have now been added in, and some of the incorrect rubbish have been removed. I appointed my selves to make "major improvements", I had no choice, No one else has bother there backside to make any attempt to enhance this page, not even your good self. The article is more factual and has more refs. Yes my grammer skills are some what poor at least I made an effort to get this page improved unlike some..... --Crazyseiko (talk) 21:47, 10 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

As you'll see from my last paragraph, I said "Can someone else please take a look at the *factual* content these "improvements" made and and see if the underlying content is worth keeping despite its awfulness?"
In short, while I was (justifiably) annoyed at what came across as the very sloppy spelling, punctuation and grammer of the replacement material (which failed to meet your own self-appointed high standards), I was *not* about to dismiss the possibility that the underlying factual content might be worth keeping without checking it (and possibly gettings others' opinions).
Since I didn't feel like doing it at the time, I left that comment at the end.
If your criticism of the article related to the factual content (which is a legitimate concern), it would be better to have made this clear rather than slinging general insults at the article.
Yes, I probably could have corrected the mistakes directly, but the text was littered with them and as such I didn't feel the responsibility to fix someone else's work when they apparently couldn't be bothered themselves. Also, I felt that they gave a very bad impression of the reliability of the underlying material. No, factual reliability and grammatical/spelling quality don't always go hand in hand, but references to "Lord terbet" and the "Good Morning show" came across as lazy or inaccurate. (When I commented above, I was going to spell it "Lord Tebitt", but I wasn't sure that was correct either, so I double-checked online and it was Tebbit- mistake avoided.)
Anyway, under such circumstances, I had no desire to legitimise (what *might* have been) poor quality content. As I already pointed out, I'd had enough at that point, but I wasn't about to revert anything until I'd given the factual content a fair crack of the whip.
If your changes improved the factual reliability of the article, then fair enough- I'd rather have a factually-accurate article than a slick but inaccurate one. But I'd still rather people tried to get all aspects right to the best of their abilities.
If you have genuine reasons for these problems with spelling and grammar, then I apologise, but as I said, your attitude at the start didn't help.
Ubcule (talk) 19:44, 11 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Thank you for your further comments. I do have legitimate concerns about this page. I even made them clear 14 months ago , if you look further up to "Major Clean Up" Feb 2013. Since that time no one single proper overhaul of this page has taken place, by anyone. Beside the fact, two Documentaries have been produced, books, website, newspapers are freely available:

This is part of the reason why I come back to this page, to my horror apart from some addition details, the major sticking points about this page remained and its become rather clear no one has bother to deal with the actually bread and butter details in this page. It was very surprising to see some real clanger clogging up this page. The page

The changes have improved the factual reliability of the article, which I hope will spur other to try and get the other section improved aswell, since it still requires some major improvements and enhancements to allow it to reach a decent level, especially in the Bruce Gyngell section.

I do have genuine reason, with my grammar and spelling problems. You my will be correct my attitude did not help, but I was pretty hacked off nothing had been done about this page, and I felt its being left to rot, alas this is not the first page nor will it be the last page to rot away online but surly after 14 months, something would have been improved. I dare say you were as hack off about my complaints as I was about the lack of improvements.

Thank you for letting the legitimise content, to get an airing. --Crazyseiko (talk) 23:36, 11 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 3 external links on TV-am. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 12:23, 7 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 3 external links on TV-am. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 21:43, 9 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on TV-am. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:34, 5 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Actually shows in TVAM kids programmes

[edit]

The following is series that were broadcast in the Kids programmes, not sure if these should be included

Live Action

[edit]

Paragraph from Treachery?: The Power Struggle at TV-am

[edit]

After only two editions on air, Ford was struck with flu and Michael Parkinson stepped in to cover for her. The ratings slide was halted for the first time since the launch and even edged slightly up in the second week of the new team. As Parkinson was hosting the weekend show, sports reporter Nick Owen stepped in for Parkinson on Fridays and Mondays. Rippon was castigated by viewers and the media for her blatant hostility to Owen on air. When he made an error in a link, Rippon stated "You see, it's not as easy as you think." When Ford was fit to return to work, Peter Jay asked her to step aside as the combination of Parkinson, Rippon and Owen was worth continuing to help the ratings. Ford refused, stating that if she stepped down, it would be too easy for the media to pin the disastrous start to the station on her. Rippon's behaviour and Ford's refusal to step aside caused great anger with the TV-am board and director Jonathan Aitken believed Jay incompetent for not removing them both.[1]

The issues around this, is the month of March. Its stated Nick never moved from Sports to Sofa until 4th April 1983, and the points raised with ippon were made then. Pete Jay left to 2 weeks earlier. So if this is correct why is contradict what the newspapers where saying at the time? also TVAM was big news and there nothing about Anna having flu, that would have added more fuel to the fire surly? --Crazyseiko (talk) 14:07, 11 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The above paragraph is incorrect, Nick never stepped in for Parkinson, his first time WAS April 83 , Frost did come back to cover Ann for that week she had flu but was back the following Monday. This is why it was taken out and the rest ofthe page with ref were revised. --Crazyseiko (talk) 21:55, 16 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The original source was not a "Lie" and please do not call editors liars on this site. If you wish to provide another source justifying your edits, please do so, but in the meantime, do not remove considerable amounts of sourced and verified information simply because you don't like or agree with it. That's not how wikipedia works. If you remove the information again without providing alternative sources to justify your edits, then you will be in breach of wikipedia's 3RR rule and will face a violation warning. MWEditorial (talk) 07:31, 17 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
And just in case you want to persist in calling editors liars and disputing verified sources... check out this BBC2 programme made about the history of TV-am. Start watching from 20:00 in and hear and see Nick Owen and his own words. A lie?https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wKI-ZGouXUA MWEditorial (talk) 08:08, 17 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]


First off I will be sending this to an admin or etc, as its pretty to clear to all that your failed to even communicate or use this talk page to improve this page. What is even odd is your created this Fallacy that I called "editors liars" I which I never did, I said the source is a lie, please highlight where I said editors were liars. Edit of " 13:55, 11 June 2022‎ " never say Editors. edit off " 21:49, 16 August 2022‎" again never mentioned Editors ???

Paragraph above is still problematic, because its contradicts other source and yet NO one has used this talk page to explain why. I have reread the paraph and to make an olive branch.. it looks like the bit (talk) isn't happy about being mist out is this bit " Rippon was castigated by viewers and the media for her blatant hostility to Owen on air. When he made an error in a link, Rippon stated "You see, it's not as easy as you think." [1] " Im more than happy to put that bit back in, so one of the sections would say this:

So it would say ""On 5th April 1983 sports presenter Nick Owen become one of them main presenters working one week each with Anna and Angela initially only for the month of April [2][3] Rippon was castigated by viewers and the media for her blatant hostility to Owen on air. When he made an error in a link, Rippon stated "You see, it's not as easy as you think." [1] Just 2 weeks later both Anna and Angela being sacked with Lynd Barry being brought in as stop gap measurement before with Anne Diamond joining from the BBC to become his new co-presenter, From Early June. ""

However these are the bit which are still causing issues:

  • After only two editions on air, Ford was struck with flu and Michael Parkinson stepped in to cover for her. The ratings slide was halted for the first time since the launch and even edged slightly up in the second week of the new team. As Parkinson was hosting the weekend show, sports reporter Nick Owen stepped in for Parkinson on Fridays and Mondays.
  • When Ford was fit to return to work, Peter Jay asked her to step aside as the combination of Parkinson, Rippon and Owen was worth continuing to help the ratings. Ford refused, stating that if she stepped down, it would be too easy for the media to pin the disastrous start to the station on her. Rippon's behaviour and Ford's refusal to step aside caused great anger with the TV-am board and director Jonathan Aitken believed Jay incompetent for not removing them both
  • Ford refused, stating that if she stepped down, it would be too easy for the media to pin the disastrous start to the station on her. Rippon's behaviour and Ford's refusal to step aside caused great anger with the TV-am board and director Jonathan Aitken believed Jay incompetent for not removing them both.

Anna Fod had the flu and went on the sick on Tuesday 1st March 1983 she returned on Monday 7th March 1983. Ann and Rippon continued to present Good morning Britain until Tuesday 5th April 1983 ( Monday 4th was Easter Monday so only kids programmes were on air) when Nick owen was promoted to the sofa from Sport desk, and nick presented one week each with rippon and Ford, and the pair were both sacked on 18th April [4]

How could Nick Owen step in for Parkinson on Fridays and Mondays when nick first day wasn't until April? Anna was only off air for four days and was back the following Monday. It is believe David frost covered Tuesday and Parkinson Wed- Friday, lus his Sat/sun show, so no one needed to cover his editions. How can Peter Jay asked Ann ford to step down for two people that wasn't even presenting during the week? in fact the Anna had only worked one day of the revised format. How can Jay sacked Rippon's for her behaviour if Jay was sacked two weeks earlier on 18th march. What is even strange is Anna made a public appeal to keep jay in his job, yet Jay wanted to get rid of her, why would anyone do that? [5][6][7]


I'm still waiting on Third opinion, etc However, I have reverted the page to what I suggested in the first place, to help stream line it with ONE Major difference, I have NOT removed the questionable paragraph, as I said above I make an Olive branch, I have moved the section about rippin being castigated by viewers to the bit where nick started work in April. The remaining parts of the very questionable paragraph is still on the page. I hope third opinion will appear soon to get the above points I have raised to be resolved. --Crazyseiko (talk) 19:48, 22 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I am removing the Third Opinion request. There have been three editors involved in the dispute, and there is more hostile back-and-forth than asking of questions, so that it is hard for a volunteer to figure out what the question is anyway. Civility is the fourth pillar of Wikipedia. Robert McClenon (talk) 05:26, 25 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I have added in new sourcem more information and can easily rebuke some of the weird points that paragraph made, includes the fact the ratings stayed up that whole week Anna had returned, so how can someone be told to step aside if there actually doing a good job by someone who had already been sacked, since the ratings had a weeks delay. plus Nick owen did not present until April. --Crazyseiko (talk) 10:52, 28 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ a b c Cite error: The named reference Leapman, Michael 1984 was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  2. ^ Barker, Dennis (5 April 1983). "TV-am fades out Frost in bid to be ordinary". The Guardian.
  3. ^ "Frost 'will stay' with TV-am". The Times. London, England. 4 April 1983. p. 1.
  4. ^ Barker, Dennis; Wainwright, Martin (20 April 1983). "TV-am sacks Ford and Rippon". The Guardian (1959–2003). p. 1.
  5. ^ Move to oust Jay at ailing TV-am. The Times (London, England), Friday, 18 March 1983; pg. 1
  6. ^ Jay ousted as backers move to save TV-amBarker, Dennis;Simpson, DavidThe Guardian (1959–2003); 19 March 1983; P1
  7. ^ TV-am shake-up expected after Peter Jay quits. The Times (London, England), Saturday, 19 March 1983

Breakfast Television Centre

[edit]

This article claims that the TV-am studios were sold to MTV in 1993. The Breakfast Television Centre article claims it happened in 1988, with two sources to support that. If that's true, it begs the question, where did TV-am broadcast from between 1988 and 1993? Which date is correct?  Dr Greg  talk  13:32, 27 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

TVAM was still in the same building when it finished broadcasting in Dec 1992. Its weird MTV have gotten this date so wrong. The only possible idea is MTV rented some space within the building from 1987 then when TVAM stop broadcasting MTV nipped in to buy the whole building? TVAM history site say they never sold the building until 1993: https://www.tv-am.org.uk/tv-am-studios https://www.dezeen.com/2015/08/26/postmodern-architecture-tv-am-television-studios-camden-london-terry-farrell/

while this book say the studios were sold to MTV in MArch 1993: https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=bqqGDAAAQBAJ&pg=PA381&lpg=PA381&dq=tvam+studio+camden+sold+to+MTV&source=bl&ots=HbptXn5zPC&sig=ACfU3U1pGXkMaNkEmdZ8mIwEgcB5tdu29A&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwj6lbrTy-f5AhWYFMAKHYu4CYM4FBDoAXoECCIQAw#v=onepage&q=tvam%20studio%20camden%20sold%20to%20MTV&f=false and in fact Television News: Liquidation looms for TV-am ... director of the new ITV Network Centre. And cable and satellite music channel MTV is currently in advanced negotiations with TV-am over its studios in Camden Town, north London. The TV-am board is also reportedly con sidering selling its 50 per cent stake in ... Published: Thursday 28 January 1993: Newspaper: The Stage --Crazyseiko (talk) 18:07, 27 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The MTV Europe and BTC articles both make this error, most likely at the hands of the same editor. MTV’s own reference only referred to being in Camden in 1988, which could have been anywhere, not necessarily Breakfast Television Centre, which was obviously not available or sold until 1993 as your other sources indicate. Have updated the articles accordingly. Bonusballs (talk) 18:52, 27 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Someone on a forum was able to bring this up: https://www.ofcom.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0025/217870/Cable-Authority-annual-report-and-accounts-1987-88.pdf P28: MTV were in Camden from the start at 20-23 Mandela Street. London NWl ODU, This is where the cross paths happened. --Crazyseiko (talk) 19:31, 27 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

New addition

[edit]

Michael Parkinson went to Australia in early June 1983 for the summer with Henry Kelly taking over his weekend duites.[1][2] David Frost was given the Sunday slot from 28th August initially for 8 weeks[3][4] with the belief Parkinson would return to his full duties in October, By November Parkinson return to TVAM but was only given the Saturday slot after Frost had increased the viewership on Sundays[5] Parkinson finally to leave the station in early February 1984 with the company making plans to cut over 40 jobs[6][7][8]

In September 1983, TVAM finally joined the Television contractors associations, which give the addition benefit of providing cross promotional content between the 15 regional ITV companies and TVAM.[9] The continuing increase in viewership had still not resulted in an increase in advertising revenue, and throughout October speculation rose the company would collapse at any second. The situation was resolved in November when a new refinance package come into effect with new shareholders including Ladbrook's and the owners of the Daily Express who ejected over £4.5 million into the company.[10][11]

It seems the above new content is causing one member to have kitten. C (talk) 07:51, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:Crazyseiko please check your work before publishing. Typos such as 'duites', 'TVAM' and the wrong choice of words such as 'ejected' should be avoided. Please conform to WP:MOS rather than using terms such as '8 weeks'. Changing its to it's or it's to its the wrong way is a waste of competent editors time. SovalValtos (talk) 19:03, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ The Times: Friday 27 May 1983. TV-AM picks Henry Kelly. P2
  2. ^ Belfast Telegraph. Saturday 11 June 1983. P12
  3. ^ The Times. Saturday 6 Aug 1983. Million TV-am viewers P2
  4. ^ The Stage: Thursday 18 August 1983 Looks for new capital, switches presenters. P20
  5. ^ Daily Mirror: Saturday 12 November 1983. Frosty come-back? P15
  6. ^ Daily Mirror: Thursday 19 January 1984 - Husband Perky quits TV-am. P3
  7. ^ The Stage: Thursday 02 February 1984. TV-am now considers staff cuts P17
  8. ^ The Times: Thursday 9 Feb 1984. TV-am's future hangs on acceptance of job cuts by David Hewson P9
  9. ^ The Times: TV-am joins the establishment Author: By a Staff Reporter Date: Wednesday 24 Aug 1983
  10. ^ Fleet saves TV-am in £4.5m package Author: David Hewson Date: Tuesday 1 Nov 1983 P1
  11. ^ The Times: Thursday 9 Feb 1984 Station's Three turbulent years. P2

Children's programmes

[edit]

A couple of things with the Children's programmes section. firstly I have delinked Cartoon World as that page was a redirect to Universal's Islands of Adventure which has not connection to the TV-AM programme. Secondly, the acquired programming only has two entries - The Transformers and Challenge of the GoBots. However should some of the many cartoons shown over the years as part of Good Morning Britain not be included? If memory serves correctly these aired for about 5 minutes at c 7.20am and included such things as The Ruff and Reddy Show, 1950s Casper the Friendly Ghost episodes and Pixie and Dixie and Mr. Jinks among others as well. Dunarc (talk) 21:35, 8 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:TV-am&oldid=1198822386"