Chris Evans launching of “The Terry and Gaby Show” on Five in 2003

Chris Evans launched The Terry and Gaby Show on Five in 2003, in an attempt to compete with ITVs This Morning. In less than a course of study it had been axed.Looking in detail at an episode from for each one prove, let on the codes and conventions of the twenty-four hour period TV genre, and suggest why The Terry and Gaby Show failed to putz the popularity of This Morning.After looking at each of the episodes I prepargon that the presenters in each one were quite the same. In both of the shows they pass water a man and a woman presenter and in both of the shows they seem rattling chatty and friendly. I theorize that in TAGS the presenters (Terry and Gaby) ar better cognise and also thrust been in lots of antithetical shows craping together in the past. I think this shows that they should be satisfactory to work together very intimatelyspring and this should help the show, but as they know each other well it could confound them to a greater extent than(prenomina l) relaxed and so this could spoil it s combustly as they talk to each other quite than the auditory sense. In both of the shows the presenters atomic number 18 smiley and happy which is earnest because this should help citizenry be more than(prenominal) relaxed watching the show.It also makes it more personal to the lot watching. For TAGS I think the presenters are more well known and more famous they are well known for few of the shows they need been in and this could make great deal more alike(p)ly to watch it. In TM the presenters talk to the audience more rather than talking to each other, which pull up stakes definitely help the show but the presenters of TM (Fern and Philip) are non as well known and non as famous so people might rather see TAGS. I think that the presenters have nothing to do with TAGS being axed. I feel that the conventions for daytime TV presenters are that they have to be chatty, happy and friendly. Terry and Gaby are well known for being in lots of shows but most of the shows they are in are similar. In all of the shows they are in they are smiley happy and chatty which is the same in TAGS. This is probably why they were elect for the show in the initiative place.You havent real(a)ly differentiated the presenters in harm of their brand image they are not identical PHthither are lots of different types of items featured on daytime TV the conventions for daytime TV are Celebrity news and interviews, real support stories, Gossip/News and competitions. In TAGS they had all of this stuff but their celebrities were not as famous as in TM. I think this is in general because TM had been Going for oftentimes longer and so was more known in the celeb world this means more famous celebrities are more likely to agree to be on TM because it was more well known. In the episode of TAGS we watched the celeb they interviewed was mostly on the nose on the show so he could advertise any(prenominal) other show which was coming o n channel5. In the episode of TM we watched they had a different variety of celebs interviewed which could be another reason it was more popular than TAGS.In TAGS the competition prize was just a DVD player and the competition was very easy to coiffe they probably did this so that more people would ring with the answer mesmerise would give them more money and as it was easy it would attract more viewers. This obviously didnt work which is probably because the prize was not as wide either. In TM the competition was harder to get but the prize was a holiday, which is much better than TAGS and could have helped them get more viewers. I think that the competitions didnt have much to do with TAGS getting axed. For both of the shows They had someone on who spoke about celeb news and gossip and a bit of shape news.I think that in TM it was much more edifying and detailed and in TAGS it was much more comedy rather than real news and information. I think they mainly did this because the y were trying to target a puppyisher audience by making it more up set out and new. They tried to do this by putting in things to encourage young student viewers as well as the older generation. TM is more targeted at an older generation because they have things In to magic spell to older people. I think that TAGS made a mistake by doing this because it is more likely that people who are older are press release to be watching a daytime TV show so this could have been one of the main reasons TAGS got axed.The conventions for the title sequence for a daytime TV show are loud merry euphony, colourful and light settings and just some thing happy and jolly. The title sequences for both of the shows are very different in TAGS it shows Terry and Gaby on their way to work and shows the way they are travelling. It shows that Terry is on a bike and is make pass to work and Gaby is being driven to work in a swish car she goes in the back of the television centre and Terry goes finished the back.In TM it has different coloured squares running along the sort out some of these have different clips from the show, some have different reposeful objects in them and some just have colour. Both of these are very colourful and fulgid and both have very happy cheery music in but they both are very different. For TM I think that it has a better title sequence because first off it has better more catchy music that everybody likes but in TAGS the music is cheery but a bit boring and only some audiences would have liked it. I think that this could have been one of the reasons that TAGS got axed because people might have seen the title sequence and then thought that the show was not for them.I think that the set in TM is much more calm and reposeful which is good because in daytime TV it should be relaxing so they can relax from whatever course they are doing and sit down and not have to watch anything to bright and confusing. For TAGS the set is very bright and up beat an d much more colourful. I think it is the convention of daytime TV to have a very bright set and to have it set up like someones living room with a sofa to make it look more homely. I think that the set for TM is much more relaxing and homely and that in Tags it is a bit too bright and colourful. This could have defiantly put people of watching the show. In TAGS They have a studio audience unlike TM who havent. I think that TAGS having an audience is good because it includes the viewer more because there are normal normal people on the TV too but it is also good for TM not to have an audience because it means their wont be any background noises or laughs at the wrong time which could taunt people.Rather vague, little use of media terminology (Mise-en-scene etc). PHBy surface-to-air missile IlesSam, you have not properly addressed the points I raised from your first draft. Detailed examples are lacking (no mention of specific guests), nor do you make much reference to media concepts or theory (celebrity brands, mise-en-scene).You do identify some of the codes and conventions of the genre and engage in some limited analysis of the strengths and weaknesses of each text.