Posted: 27/05/2014 at 15:11
I don't see why we can't discuss the merits or otherwise of presenters when their performance is so key to our enjoyment or not of any programme and our desire to learn about how, what and when to do things to make our gardens more beautiful and successful. It can surely also be done without being rude to each other or about the people being discussed.
For me the main problems with GW and Chelsea coverage is that, since AT retired from GW, the programmes have been brought in house to the Beeb where the assorted producers and camera people who are not plant or garden specialists and who are carving out a career in the Beeb more often want to show how clever they are rather than how clever the plants or gardeners are.
When GH and AT were at the helm GW was made by a specialist production company, as is Beechgrove. Their motivation is to make good gardening programmes to satisfy the audience and thus keep the contract, and their careers and incomes, renewed. If a private company had presided over the halving of the core audience, they'd have lost the job whereas the Beeb team that's lost all those GW viewers just carries on regardless.