308 replies to this topic

[junemeatcleaver]

For some strange reason, CNN decided to give disgraced former tabloid newspaper editor and reality show judge, Piers Morgan, his own show starting January 17th.

Looking at the show blog and Twitter, he's annoying me already.

[King Cat Sam]

Speaking of annoying - I heard him say that Madonna would be banned from his show because she is simply annoying !

[Baba Yaga]

That comment alone makes me want to watch him. He's absolutely right.

[selhars]

I have to admit, Piers does absolutely nothing for me as a host. His delivery in flat. And, I just don't see him as a great interviewer. I see no reason to tune in. Even if it's a guest or topic I might like, HE is the turn off.

I could watch Charlie Rose, Don Lemon, Anderson Cooper, the late Tim Russert, Mike Wallace, Ed Bradley, Morley Safer -- heck even Chris Matthews, Bill O'Reilly or Glen Beck -- interview GUESTS I might not think I'd want to get the time of day from -- because they're good interviewers who can get something out of the guest.

I just don't see that with Piers. His Oprah interview will tell me a lot. Also the first time he has to do an interview on a breaking story -- like the Tucson tragedy or Haiti will be telling . I just don't think he has the background for it.

[Liane81]

Piers does nothing for me either - something cold fish (and tabloid-y about him - no surprise given his background) there. But he has gotten UK top figures (like the former prime minister) to open up about things that other interviewers couldn't, so I'll give him a try, starting with the Oprah interview. Will be curious to see if he panders to her or really presses with some serious questions.

[Lisette]

Not excited about Piers Morgan at all. I wish they'd kept the original idea of replacing LK with Bob Costas. Too bad Costas' first official subbing had to be on the Anna Nicole Smith situation--which he refused to do.

I don't think anything will be "too tabloid-y" for Piers (and I'm already tired of the ad where he brags that he "made Simon Cowell cry"), but...I'll give him a chance.

[NYdreaming]

I don't plan on watching unless I see something in passing. It just looks like another CNN mistake. (Let's see - their previous venture - Parker-Spitzer- hmmm) Heard him talking about Gordon Brown the other day - does he understand who his audience is? With all the available talent, I believe they could have easily found a good LK replacement.

[Scorpiosrule]

BORRRRRRRING. I couldn't watch past 20 minutes, with Oprah blathering on about herself and how she wouldn't talk about certain things...blech.

And I like Piers! Dammit.

[ReillysRevenge]

Yeah, I thought about bailing when she started off with her nutty, new-age, oprahspeak, but things got better. I'm glad I stuck around to hear her talk about the baby she lost at 14. I don't ever remember her talking as openly about it before.

So, pros: he does get some interesting stuff out of his guests. Cons: he lets them go on a little too long with their nonsense. And he laughs too often with them. But then, the laughter might be part of his sinister plan to get the guests to spill.

[Liane81]

Cons: he lets them go on a little too long with their nonsense. And he laughs too often with them. But then, the laughter might be part of his sinister plan to get the guests to spill.

I thought one of his worst 'cons' was that he kept taking it back to himself -- sharing HIS experience, HIS idea, etc. Maybe he was nervous with Oprah (he seemed to sure kiss up pretty big-time), but when I tune in to see someone interviewed, I want only to hear about THEM, not about the interviewer (and yes, I'm aware that Oprah interjects herself into her interviews a lot too, but then she's more of a talk show host/pontificator in my book).

And yes, the constant laughter was a bit annoying. Might watch again, but I don't find him particularly compelling as a person and his rabbit teeth and the way his upper lip curls up when he says a word beginning with "p" is off-putting.

[selhars]

We'll have to see if this show has any hard news interviews.
The night of some bad event, at least Larry would have on law enforcement, or the family of a victim, or lawmakers related to the breaking news item. He didn't do only celebs and tabloid.

[Fishyswa]

Strike One. The constant laughing was totally annoying to me. After the first few times, it was all I heard. I'll watch again to be fair but this first interview didn't impress me one bit. Even simply his manner of speaking just doesn't command attention, at least it didn't command mine.

I thought one of his worst 'cons' was that he kept taking it back to himself -- sharing HIS experience, HIS idea, etc. Maybe he was nervous with Oprah (he seemed to sure kiss up pretty big-time)

Ditto.

[lissy]

But then, the laughter might be part of his sinister plan to get the guests to spill.

I think so too. He's trying to seem relatable to whomever he's interviewing if that makes sense. I enjoy his sense of humor and was intrigued by the interview but felt it was awkward. Even Oprah seemed to me to be surprised to be there with him! He was kissing up to her way too much and seemed intimidated by her. I like him and wish him well but have mixed feelings about his interviewing style(so far).

[grainofsalt]

Not sure who I couldn't handle more Piers or Oprah.

Since he tapes his shows (Oprah is not the only show that will be taped, I think they all are) it means that he won't have to handle the breaking news. They can bring in AC or anyone who is on call.

That is too bad because if Piers was good at handling breaking news, it would add to his credibility here in the states. When all you know about a guy is that he was with a tabloid in London and obnoxious on Celebrity Apprentice, his bona fides are in question.

[MMorningstar]

The Oprah interview was mildly interesting. But I didn't need to hear Piers ask Oprah how HE did in the interview.

[neuilly]

BORRRRRRRING. I couldn't watch past 20 minutes, with Oprah blathering on about herself and how she wouldn't talk about certain things...blech.

And I like Piers! Dammit.

Couldn't have said (written) it better myself. I like him and this was just way too giddy. I resent him calling her our queen, and Oprah really needs to drop her "messenger" message. Not all of us like some of her messages or agree with her feelings. Her success is monumental; so is her self importance.

Note to Piers; still like you...so please, drop the blatent ass kissing. It's off putting.

Edited by neuilly, Jan 18, 2011 @ 10:34 AM.

[Liane81]

But I didn't need to hear Piers ask Oprah how HE did in the interview.

Oh god, that was cringe-worthy. It was like watching a school kid ask the stern headmistress how he did. Even Oprah seemed to cringe. And once again, it was all about HIM.

And word to the call-out about him calling her "America's Queen." Gag.

[oldbabe]

giddy

blatant ass kissing

cringe-worthy

Sums it up for me.

I like Piers and wanted his first interview to be good, but he was a groveling sycophant throughout.

It was funny (and not in a good way) that they made a bet on which of them would get the Michael Vick interview. Then Oprah pronounces how it's not about winning for her, she's not in a competition, if it's meant to be it will happen, blah, blah. And she actually believes it.

Edited by oldbabe, Jan 18, 2011 @ 11:19 AM.

[braggtastic]

I'm not interested in hearing Oprah interviewed, so I think that was a poor choice for his first show. I will watch Howard Stern & Ricky Gervais if I find out which nights they're on. I think Ricky is Thursday, but my on screen guide is not helping - get that fixed, CNN!

[Baba Yaga]

I believe - don't bet the rent - that Howard Stern is on tonight (Tuesday). I'd also love to see Ricky Gervais. Will celebrities be all Piers does? I hope not.

[junemeatcleaver]

Piers said he and the show are working on getting President Obama on the show.

[Lisette]

Piers said he and the show are working on getting President Obama on the show.

Oprah. President Obama. It's the school of "impress by the BIG NAMES who'll come on your show rather than the interesting and NEW conversations that will ensue."

Larry King was always genial and supportive, but he didn't grovel and fawn over the guests, not like this.

I wonder if Piers is -smart- enough to have a good "chat" show for American television (and, yes, Anglophile as I am, I was still turned off by his interview by AC on 360 where he tried to name drop...Gordon Brown...to impress us."

Don't care.
Which is the same way I feel about (yet another) interview with Oprah or Obama (and Howard Stern may get Piers some press, but I doubt he'll be anything different than..Howard Stern is everywhere).

I'm guessing the "Madonna ban" will end in a year, when she finally comes on the show to a record number of viewers.

[Liane81]

Does anyone know if Piers' show will be taped? I wasn't always a fan of Larry, but did like the live aspect and the caller phone-in -- gave the show some energy. As someone else said, while Larry was always supportive of his guests, there was no drooling over them like Piers did with Oprah.

If Piers plans to tape all his shows, they feel - based on the one show - like the poor man's version of a Diane Sawyer or Barbara Walters special, except that Diane doesn't fawn like that and even BaBa doesn't go there like Piers did.

[junemeatcleaver]

I hope this first week with all the stars is just a way to hook viewers and Piers moves on to real world topics, current news and interviewing so-called normal people. I admit I don't like Piers in the first place, but I can see his show getting boring real fast if all he does is celebrities and politicians.

[selhars]

If it's true that most of his shows will be taped, then that just puts another nail in CNN's news coffin for me.

How can you be a news network as great as CNN is/was and not have an nightly show -- like what Larry King Live WAS -- flexible enough to do breaking news of the day -- or celeb, or topical news - depending on the day, and what's happening THEN.

It's crazy for CNN to let that go.
If the show is live you can drop a segment. If it's taped and you need to update a breaking story but not have it go the whole hour what are they going to do -- join the taped show in progress. That's crazy.

The show needs to be live MOST of the time. Immediacy is the draw!
I always tuned in to see who was on that night - what updates LK had, etc....not for a taped interview from a week ago.

If they'd picked Don Lemon, Bob Costas -- or someone else in the first place instead of Piers -- they'd HAVE someone experienced and flexible enough in BROADCASTING who could DO all kinds of interviews -- news or other.

Edited by selhars, Jan 18, 2011 @ 3:18 PM.

[King Cat Sam]

Oprah truly does take herself for a real therapist. Well, after all she is responsible for Dr Phil.

[Scorpiosrule]

Okay, I missed the first half, but tuned in because, well, I was waiting for The Good Wife to start, and holymoly! Piers suffers from Oprah disease! In that he kept fucking cutting off Stern, every single time Stern tried to answer a question; he'd go off on a different tangent, and just, cut Stern off. Annoyed the fecking hell out of me.

He's horrible. I really didn't think he'd be this bad. But, ugh.

[Liane81]

I watched tonight to see if Piers would be any better. But no. The only reason the show was any good is that Howard Stern is entertaining and essentially ran the interview himself.

I think one issue with Piers is that - and I could be wrong - he's never done a talk show like this before -- he did a 3-part interview series for the BBC several years ago and then a public affairs show (co-hosted with another person) which did horrid in the ratings and which went off the air. He was a tabloid editor who then became a judge on Britain's Got Talent and then on America's Got Talent. In between, he did another series of interviews for one of the British channels, but I don't get the sense that they were a regular, nightly program like this --- and that can be a whole 'nother animal from the shorter series that British TV does.

So essentially CNN has taken a guy who has no real, in-depth interviewing experience (IMO) and is mostly known in the US for being a judge on a talent show and then on Celebrity Apprentice. No wonder they're going down the tubes even faster with every new host/show they launch.

Edited by Liane81, Jan 18, 2011 @ 10:37 PM.

[azultoz]

Piers Morgan was not in the news game, and, came from celebrity reality tv.

He does't seem to have a talent to get to what makes a good interview, or, discuss current topics that might be of interest to his audience.

Essentially, he's Robin Leach, with a talent for getting himself noticed, but, with no background for a worthwhile show of current people in the news; or, the ability to want to make people tune in.

I give him a year, 6 months if CNN really ever gets a clue. Why they hired a Brit to anchor a USA current topic show is beyond me. Not that being Brit is what makes him so worthless, but not ever being a reporter, is a big detriment to try to pull off this kind of show. He has neither the background or personality or charisma to pull it off.

[Not4Me]

I'm guessing the "Madonna ban" will end in a year, when she finally comes on the show to a record number of viewers.

I'm guessing she doesn't really give a damn to be honest, because why should she? For someone who insists she's so irrelevant, he can't stop mentioning her everywhere in order to create hype around his show.

In many ways it's fitting CNN would get the former editor for the sleazy The Mirror and News of the World to replace perennial softball "journalist" Larry King. I guess getting fired for releasing false photos of British soldiers beating an Iraqi prisoner doesn't automatically disqualify you for a journalist job on CNN. Who knew?

Edited by Not4Me, Jan 19, 2011 @ 12:15 AM.