91Èȱ¬

Question is: will you listen? The HYS board is regularly full of complaints about "TV for mummies" and proto-GMTV, but it continues. Why try to be like GMTV when the 91Èȱ¬ is supposed to be distinctive?

I remember the launch of Breakfast TV very well indeed. It was 2 days after my 18th birthday. My then boyfriend had bought me a small colour portable tv for my 18th, and I had it in my bedroom. I remember waking up, switching it on, and hearing that very distinctive opening music.

Only seems like yesterday...

I do remember it well! I had just started university in Manchester the previous September and was living in a room in a student house. I set the alarm early and watched the first Breakfast Time on a 14 inch portable with a dodgy aerial.

It was an exciting time in TV: Channel 4 had just launched, there was lots of vibrant new comedy and music, pop videos. Compact and lightweight broadcast video equipment was making all kinds of new programmes possible.

I think you were slightly economical with the truth this morning when you said Selina Scott and friends were in the 'old studio', as I believe Breakfast Time actually came from Lime Grove which was demolished in the 1990's?

Also that exercise thing live at Waterloo this morning was so staged and feeble, with no comparision to the stuff that the Diana Moran used to do. Extracts of which were shown.

Otherwise it was a fun look back.

I've nothing against Breakfast on 91Èȱ¬ 1 but I do object to it being on News 24 as well. With only a few minutes in the morning to catch up before leaving for work, having the regular news service would be great.

I understand it may be a cost saving device to use a simul-cast in the morning, but it switches back over at 8.30.

Why not earlier? Why make the switch before the program ends? Why simul-cast at all?

I was only three when Breakfast Time launched but I do vividly remember the old studio from my childhood in the 80s. Watching the 25th anniversary special, everything from the logo, the Keep-Fit and even the way the weather was presented all came flooding back. Strangely though, it was the old blue clock in the bottom of the screen which brought back the strongest memories for some reason. I can't believe it's already so long ago.

I love being able to catch the news in the mornings, and wouldn't dream of getting it from any other channel.

Some of the features are great, the low carb family was good, as was the trainee police dogs. But I do find some of them really irritating, particually the ones that relate to other 91Èȱ¬ shows that can't possibly be considered informational. A feature on a Panorama episode, fine; but one on Strictly Come Dancing!

I like Tim's idea of having straight news on 91Èȱ¬ 24, but only if it can be fixed so that regional news slots doesn't show the London news.

Anyway - happy birthday!

"Breakfast" now is so difficult to watch with its incessant 91Èȱ¬ plugs masquerading as news items- one weekend I counted SIX 91Èȱ¬ programmes being teased in programme items. They probably turn their nose up at GMTV, yet GMTV never latches onto reality shows like Breakfast does. (They are *obsessed* with "Strictly". They can't go 2 days without getting one of the judges/former competitors on).

GMTV has always been the better, more entertaining option. Its reporters are more watchable as well rather than the lacklustre lot on Breakfast who seem to think they're wacky and hilarious(Richard Westcott clearly the worst example).

Nowadays, I find the Breakfast programme annoying because it contains two contradictory elements. On the one hand it repeats most items every half hour for viewers who only see part of the programme and on the other hand it repeatedly advertises one-off items to be broadcast in 60 or 90 minutes time. Even if I were interested in the one-off items, I wouldn't have the patience to sit through the repeat items.

At that time of the morning, I can imagine there is a significant number of people who would indeed prefer a "more traditional new programme", as the 91Èȱ¬ used to show. News 24 is not an option, as Tim Sculthorpe (11:48) points out.

'Breakfast' is an awful creation; saccharine, plodding, and as a news service lacks completely any depth or rigour. Whenever I watch it, the presenters seem to be promoting -- by means of a chat on the sofa with a cast member -- the next episode of Casualty/Holby City/Eastenders, or whatever drama they have just spent thousands on. This would be fine, if there were an alternative.

I don't watch anymore - all I'm after is a quick update of the news (important news)& a business update.
The pieces delivered are so poor or dumbed down there is hardly any value in the program - CNN has more informative news for goodness sake.
Hang your heads in shame 91Èȱ¬ 1.

So back to Radio 4 for me.

I can't start my day without watching 91Èȱ¬ Breakfast, I have a long commute to work and hence I wake up rather early, and I enjoy my morning coffee watching the news and other features. Only thing I regret is that I have to leave home at 7:15 and not follow the program longer.

Happy 25 Years!

Yeah, Happy Birthday Breakfast, etc.

Look, please stop plugging 91Èȱ¬ programs on the show, it's really boring and shamelessly immodest. The show should be for news and interesting topical items, not a regular slot for some B-list celebrity to tell the nation how badly they're doing in a dancing competition.

Reading the other comments as I write, it seems I'm not the only one that thinks this.

I really wish News 24 had an alternative to Breakfast in a morning.

On most days there is around 6-7 minutes of actual "news" at the top of the hour, followed by countless plugs for 91Èȱ¬ programs, obsessing about the environment, pointless chat with the weathergirl/business bloke/roving "reporter"/debates and very little content of substance.

Please bring back a newsdesk, Moira and some decent content. I don't want pointless chat in the morning, I want all of the days news in a 15-20 minute chunk. As others have said, I don't think many people watch the full two hours, so repitition isn't a problem (although money could be saved by recording interviews/debates rather than making the person do the same interview live three times in a morning).

Alison, thanks for illustrating so clearly the thinking behind 'Breakfast' and why it continues to offend so many of us - and no, I do not watch it these days, I prefer to catch up on the news. If you're going to quote viewing stats at us (up to 5 million???) you must at least link to where we can all see these figures. This is as informative as one of your 'stories' about supermarket carrier bags. Simple solution though - just go back to News 24 being News 24 and keep your Tabloid TV on 91Èȱ¬1 for those who prefer to pretend that none of that nasty stuff is really happening.

Happy birthday Breakfast TV! One of my earliest memories was getting the farming prices from Barry Chambers on the Look North Leeds regional opt out. Not sure if agricultural information would make it on to television these days!

Breakfast news is not news!!!!

I am sorry but there is nothing on the programme that actually resembles news.

Sky hass news stories! The others do news.

91Èȱ¬ has a progamme at 7 in the evening for silly plugging of programmes the one show.

Please can we have actual news please?

I would avoid Breakfast TV especially GMTV, if I wanted to be treated like an idiot then I would watch it. The 91Èȱ¬ could learn alot from TVE(Spain) breakfast programme plus it's paid by Advertising and not patronising in anyway. The only choice for me is the Today Programme on Radio 4 or the World Today on the World Service.

Any chance of putting the tribute part shown after from 8.30 on the website for viewing please?

I was enjoying my fix of nostalgia, but only caught the first 15 minutes as I had to go to work.

I am intrigued to know what one of TV-AM's famous five, Angela Rippon thought of Breakfast Time, as clearly history showed us that Aunty Beeb managed to steal their Thunder.

I personally feel that the mix was right from day 1, and when the Newsdesk approach was introduced, that blend was lost for good, albeit the last few years have seen a renaissance.

The Regional News opt outs used to be at 15 minutes before and past the hour, I recall and when they changed it seemed a backward step as you ended up with a huge chunk of National News and Local News on the half hour, and then a huge vortex to fill with other items.

The music still stands the test of time and fits with the rising of the sun and it was nice to hear it again, with the original ident which it was meant for.

I see from an interview last week Dermot Murnaghan
was not so keen on the constant exhortations to 'contact us'.

From the Independent;

'He (DM) is also unconvinced of the news value of the stream of emails and texts forwarded each morning to the 91Èȱ¬ Breakfast hosts, among other news presenters. "We are getting obsessed with that these days. We say 'send us your emails' on air. It's interesting and nice to know people are watching but do they add to the great sum of things? Mmm, you know ...not generally."

Why, incidentally, does your website pretend he still works for you?

Congrulations on 25 years of BREAKFAST on 91Èȱ¬ 1....

i lived in the united states of america, i have watch BREAKFAST
many times on C-SPAN during the September 11, 2001 and other major stories!

Again Congrulations..

I watch the news on ceefax of a morning,the morning news programmes waffle on about all sorts of rubbish
brainless celebrities,giving there opinions about nothing important,
Breakfast TV AWFULL!