TV and Radio   permalink

Sunday Live is Lame

This discussion has been closed.

Messages: 1 - 22 of 22
  • Message 1. 

    Posted by Elvis (U14571738) on Sunday, 1st August 2010

    Nicky Campbell must be watching at home laughing his head off, deciding how big a pay rise he should push for.

    The replacement Sunday morning show, fronted by Susannah Reid is just so bad:
    * the format doesn't work - you can't hear any of the webcam interviews
    * the polls are sun-reader level
    * the guests are boring
    * the debate doesn't exist

    I really think the beeb should cut their losses on this one and start showing repeats of the big questions. No fault on Ms Reid, but she has been landed with an awful creation.

    Anyone think this show can be salvaged?

    Report message1

  • Message 2

    , in reply to message 1.

    Posted by herdegerdeferdichickens (U9236360) on Sunday, 1st August 2010

    I totally agree its a awful format i used to listen to he big Q in bed and put my glasses on when i heard something interesting this just sends you back to sleep.. yawn... However if miss reid showed a little bit more flesh i might give it another gsmiley - doctor

    Report message2

  • Message 3

    , in reply to message 1.

    Posted by Interested (U14571768) on Sunday, 1st August 2010

    I really enjoyed the former programme and its host Nicky Campbell. DON'T like the replacement and Susannah Reid who seems too SLEF conscious and dominating .. as she was also on morning news programme. Nicky was more of a facilitator of others' views and I hope that he is missing only because on holiday and will soon come back.

    Report message3

  • Message 4

    , in reply to message 2.

    Posted by N (U14320630) on Sunday, 1st August 2010

    I so agree, i've been watching since it aired for debates that never came.....and it is certainly down to appalling ineffective as the presenter.
    Sorry, but Reid is boring as a news reader, i dont know how she does it but she manages to be quite boring and ineffective reading off autocue! Still i dont turn over the channel when i see her (as i do for kapinsky)
    So it is indeed the producers/editors fault for putting her on this programme. Bring back Nicky Clarke and for heaven's sake give him a payrise if you have to he's worth it!!!

    Report message4

  • Message 5

    , in reply to message 1.

    Posted by Essential Rabbit (U3613943) on Sunday, 1st August 2010

    I admit to having dozed off early in the first two programmes.
    I made a point of staying awake this week and was surprised to find it even worse than I had been led to expect.
    The format is awful and the production is an unprofessional fiasco.
    It reminded me of the spoof amateur local television stations you occasionly see on comedy programmes rather the the product of a multi billion public service.

    Report message5

  • Message 6

    , in reply to message 1.

    Posted by sirbaralot (U14095392) on Sunday, 1st August 2010

    I agree.
    The new programme is just not engaging. It does not have the live and heated debate from the cauldron of a live audience nor someone with the ability to challenge the views as they arise. (Sorry Susannah, I do not think this type of programme is for you.)
    While I applaud the efforts to use it, the bandwidth available to most is not yet sufficient to make the webcam links work satisfactorily to the high standards we expect of the BBC. The breakdown of technology is both embarrassing and a distraction from the debate.
    Cynically I assume that this is a cost cutting exercise as it is obviously cheaper and less effort than inviting a live audience to a public arena.
    The good news is that I now have free time on Sunday mornings.

    Report message6

  • Message 7

    , in reply to message 1.

    Posted by Maria (U14571798) on Sunday, 1st August 2010

    I agree. The show needs live debate of people actually on the show, not via webcam. It fails completely to generate the kind of excitement and passion we used to see in the old show. I also felt that the guests were not challenged enough by other people's views. I much prefer the old format with Nicky Campbell.

    Report message7

  • Message 8

    , in reply to message 1.

    Posted by Johnnie (U14424761) on Sunday, 1st August 2010

    I must be a tolerant guy but I think the programme is mediocre, not rubbish. 3 or 4 of the guests (over 4 weeks) were interesting. Miss Read is a humorous person - not suited for serious discussion. The show will limp on until Autumn and they will no doubt refuse to scrap the webcam and polls. I hope Susannah gets a chance at a Lorraine Kelly type programme.

    Report message8

  • Message 9

    , in reply to message 1.

    Posted by ROD (U14572099) on Sunday, 1st August 2010

    This programe is simply appalling ,and the webcam idea just does,nt work,and why they have cancelled 'The Big Question' until next year is utterly rediculous.
    I have never seen such an amateur load of claptrap in my life as this apology of a discussion format.
    For goodness sake bring back the Big Question now please,or is,nt the publics views of no importance.?

    Report message9

  • Message 10

    , in reply to message 1.

    Posted by maryfletcher (U14578818) on Sunday, 8th August 2010

    I think Susanna Reid presents Sunday Live very well. I prefer this to The Big Questions because on Sunday live we hear intelligent people expressing themselves eloquently and having time to think without being interrupted and cut short all the time. The balance of a few viewers giving their views is much better although web cams have some problems and e-mail would be sufficient.
    Additionally it must be cheaper without whole studio audience to arrange.
    Please keep it and Susanna Reid is excellent.

    Report message10

  • Message 11

    , in reply to message 1.

    Posted by Ewan Fowler (U14289629) on Sunday, 8th August 2010

    You've got to be kidding! The new show is far better than that load of mindless drivel! At least Reid understands what the role of the chair in a debate is.

    Totally agree that the webcam situation is dire - but it could be easily solved, just require webcam guests to have broadband and a microphone headset.

    We need religious programs with teeth, guests with something original to say and a moderator who doesn't let them get away with anecdotes, question begging or strawman arguments.

    Report message11

  • Message 12

    , in reply to message 1.

    Posted by Maeght (U13975753) on Sunday, 8th August 2010

    I find the Big Question tries to cover too many subjects and so you just get people making statements and very little actual debate and discussion. I watched the first couple of programmes of Sunday Live and didn't like it. I thought Susanna Reid was out of her depth and the webcam element judt didn't work. Maybe Susanna has improved in recent weeks but I haven't been tempted back to watch. I'd much rather have a programme somewhere in the middle, Sunday Live without the webcams and polls, with a few informed guests with different points of views discussing a few issues. I think the attempts to get the public involved spoil the programme for me I'm afraid. I preferred the old Heaven and Earth approach personnaly.

    Report message12

  • Message 13

    , in reply to message 1.

    Posted by Temporary_Screename (U14548770) on Sunday, 8th August 2010

    Sunday morning religious broadcasting is off peak and therefore attracts low funding and poor production values. Of course the show is rubbish.

    Report message13

  • Message 14

    , in reply to message 12.

    Posted by Elvis (U14571738) on Sunday, 5th September 2010

    On the point of infromed guests:
    * A couple of weeks ago one of the guests was moaning about how BA staff are the highest paid in the industry, when it's BAA staff that are going on strike.
    * Today one wise lady is suggesting that the cure for cricket's gambling ills is to ban spot gambling. How dim. All this betting is taking place in India where all gambling is already outlawed.

    And this week's poll - "Is money ruining sport" - well that's highly divisive, I bet no one can guess how that one will go.

    Report message14

  • Message 15

    , in reply to message 14.

    Posted by Elvis (U14571738) on Sunday, 5th September 2010

    And now she's comparing the govt in Iran to hitler and the nazis and just basically making stuff up. It is because of fools like this that the iraq war was so easy to sell to the media.

    Report message15

  • Message 16

    , in reply to message 1.

    Posted by Elvis (U14571738) on Sunday, 26th June 2011

    A year later, and te format is still lame.

    Report message16

  • Message 17

    , in reply to message 1.

    Posted by CromwellianBNP (U14919302) on Sunday, 26th June 2011

    Nicky Campbell must be watching at home laughing his head off, deciding how big a pay rise he should push for.

    The replacement Sunday morning show, fronted by Susannah Reid is just so bad:
    * the format doesn't work - you can't hear any of the webcam interviews
    * the polls are sun-reader level
    * the guests are boring
    * the debate doesn't exist

    I really think the beeb should cut their losses on this one and start showing repeats of the big questions. No fault on Ms Reid, but she has been landed with an awful creation.

    Anyone think this show can be salvaged? 
    I think the advantage of this style of debating is very beneficial to the BBC, as there is less chance of an audience bringing up an unsavioury subject, It`s always easier to control a debate the less people envolved. a good example would be if they had a debate on the Television Licence, for the poor and old people who have to choose between eating and heating would be a no brainer for the BBC, where as if you have a loaded debated between 3 well off luvvies, they would over whelmingly vote for it.

    Just remember the BBC gets paid no matter what they put on the TV.
    they dont have share holders like ITV channel 4 or sky for example.

    Report message17

  • Message 18

    , in reply to message 16.

    Posted by BryanHayes (U14919306) on Sunday, 26th June 2011

    The last 2 minutes of the programme proved the arrogance and bigotry of the tiny number of believers in liberalism.
    Ask everyone their views on foreign criminals being protected by the misuse of human rights protection. Allow a legal aid/human rights funding receiver, a refugee and a couple of middle class immigration apologists to soften up the viewers.
    92% of the people who texted the programme wish for protection of their commonsense ideals and the removal of foreign criminals.
    92% is solid proof that our citizens have had enough of worrying about the rest of the world. Even The Guardian comment forums show widespread dissent against liberal indoctrination.
    After the 92% against their liberal viewpoints the 2 losing panellists was an eye opener.
    One said the 92% need to look again and they may see things differently. ( "If you were as clever and as well read as me you would see you are wrong and would follow my lead")
    The other panellist shrugged his shoulders and said "poo bah!! it's just like the capital punishment argument" He obviously didn't live near Levi Belfield the pompous idiot.
    Even 92% are wrong in the indoctrinated minds of superior elitist middle class bigots.

    Report message18

  • Message 19

    , in reply to message 18.

    Posted by bluebelljag (U14151662) on Sunday, 26th June 2011

    Love this show.

    Report message19

  • Message 20

    , in reply to message 18.

    Posted by Surabaya Johnny (U1163609) on Sunday, 26th June 2011

    In reply to BryanHayes:
    92% is solid proof that our citizens have had enough of worrying about the rest of the world.  
    No, it's nothing of the sort. It's only 92% of those who bothered to text the programme. Hardly a scientific poll.

    Report message20

  • Message 21

    , in reply to message 1.

    Posted by BBC-account-holder (U14761700) on Sunday, 26th June 2011

    The original Heaven and Earth show with Juliet Morris and Dr Phil Hammond was far superior to anything that's been on since.

    It's dumbed down further and further as time has gone on, and that with all the nonsense and trivia that is shown on the BBC, the BBC decides to even cut the Religion and Ethics Messageboard is no surprise to me.

    Personally I feel the first thing the BBC should have abolished in budget cuts was Eastenders.

    The fact they have done things the opposite way around just proves that they are going down to following *the lowest common denominator*, appealing to the low gutter media level audience who read the gutter press, following the worst of public taste rather than leading the public taste as they should be doing.

    And with the BBC's assistance, the whole nation is turning into a soap opera, with all the scandal and low minded, bad and violent behaviour that you see in Eastenders and most other TV soaps.

    The progression of the world and society is actually a very simple thing to understand if you look at it simply instead of through a fog of useless, and impractical abstract false intellectuality.

    If you put the high minded people in charge of society, the society follows their lead and behaves better.

    If you put the lower minded, greedy, egotistical and vain people in charge of society, the society becomes the same as them and behaves worse and worse.

    It appears to me that the BBC is paying more and more homage to the low-minded than the high-minded, and the destruction of this message board is one of the example of that.

    Report message21

  • Message 22

    , in reply to message 21.

    Posted by Rabbac (U5273099) on Monday, 27th June 2011

    Sunday Morning Live is dreadful and unsavable. Miss Ried is fine but the guests are .. well who are they? and trying to watch/listen to webcam vids is laughable as are the "polls" they claim to do.

    Heaven and Earth was rubbish as well basically just catering to the vicar of dibly's of the world.

    At the least the big questions was semi-interesting and topical and some form of debate was to be found but usually the audience is simply stacked with christians of one form or another so they tend to shout down the less excitable athiests.

    I would rather watch paint dry that Sunday morn live, Its really is that bad.

    Report message22

Back to top

About this Board

The BBC Religion and ethics message boards are now closed.

They remain visible as a matter of record but the opportunity to add new comments or open new threads is no longer available.

Thank you all for your valued contributions over many years.

We will be introducing a new blog later in the year. Aaqil Ahmed, Commissioning Editor Religion and Head of Religion & Ethics, has a blog with more details.

or register to take part in a discussion.


The message board is currently closed for posting.

Opening times:
No longer applicable

This messageboard is post-moderated.

Find out more about this board's House Rules

Search this Board

Copyright © 2015 BBC. The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.

This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.