Broken News

A number of reviewers here feel that "Broken News" is somehow a shallow rip-off of Chris Morris's work on "Brass Eye" and "The Day Today". I couldn't disagree more.

There's no bigger fan than me when it comes to Chris Morris's brilliantly scabrous spoof news work from the 80s and 90s, but come on folks! Just because a new generation of writers and performers wants to explore a similar strand of comedy/satire, that doesn't make them rip-off merchants. Nobody's pretending that they're the first people to have ploughed this particular comic furrow (and actually, neither was Chris Morris: he was very much following in the footsteps of arch prankster Victor Lewis-Smith). I'm sure the writers of "Broken News" would be the first to acknowledge the debt they owe to such pioneers.

In fact, what the BN team have created is something deliciously sophisticated and different. Unlike Morris, whose news parody tended toward an exaggerated, cartoonish style, BN's chief strength is in subtlety of detail: it looks and sounds so utterly (and hilariously) like the real thing!

Anyone who enjoyed "Broken News" as much as I did should also check out the same team's BBC radio show, "The Sunday Format", which uses similar techniques to parody the content of British Sunday newspaper supplements. Brilliant stuff.

It was just plain rubbish! There was something missing from it, it had the sureness I usually like, some talented actors, it looked very realistic, but I just didn't like it! It is naturally going to be compared to The Day Today, which was far superior. I guess that worked by taking news programmes, and multiplying their existing elements by 100, instead of just using the same format as a regular news broadcast, but adding strange stories. TDT also had those fantastic names, and the complete lunacy of the finance news. Just go and buy The Day Today DVD, it's a great set with brilliant extras. I can't see any signs of this show improving on it in any way, which is a shame, as it looked really good in the trailers. But I guess the clips shown there were just the best of a bad bunch. I wanted to like this, but shall probably never watch it again.

What some of the people commenting on this series don't seem to understand is that this is not a sketch show.

The fact that none of the characters are particularly memorable, the fact that the news stories are not particularly surreal and the fact that each "channel" starts to feel repetitive even before the end of the episode are all deliberate.

As with "People like us", John Morton is able to avoid focusing on the superficial humour (the "jokes") at the expense of the deep humour (satire).

And that is all there. The bad grammar, the lack of scientific knowledge and basic research of the average journalist, the milking of non-events to fill hours of airtime, the patronising xenophobia of some US networks, the obsession with "live" coverage for the sake of it, the overly dramatic music, the distortion of facts so the reporter can end his story with a "witty" catchphrase or cliché. It's all there.

There are also plenty of jokes and nonsense, but I suspect most of those are just there so you won't mistake the show for a real news network. It's their way of saying "unlike the 'real' news networks, we are still sane enough to realise that this whole thing is ludicrous".

Some of the references will only make sense to people working in the field, but anyone who has spent 10 minutes zapping between different "news" networks will be able to relate.

Be warned, though: there are no pauses to let you laugh and no punchlines telling you when to laugh (a lot of people can't seem to understand humour without the latter). If you laugh, you miss something. In fact, even if you don't laugh, it's hard not to miss something (another obvious reference to the information overload - or "noise" - in modern news broadcasts).

To be watched with a progressively widening mental grin.

Having been house bound with a remote, Freeview television and more channels being seeming to be added daily with nothing new at all to see, this expressed my my exasperation with TV today. I had not had so much fun in ages.

One hopes that media types rightly cringe at the wicked accuracy with which they were targeted. More TV airtime has left programmers with a very large amount of time to fill with very little worthwhile, Anbody forced to watch "fast breaking news" for any length of time will appreciate the banality portrayed in this show.

I am not sure however, that the joke is sustainable beyond its run - it is effectively a one-gag trick. But for a limited run - I think this is a worthy and very funny parody of the lamentable TV we are spoon fed.

Enjoy

It is perhaps inevitable that Broken News will be compared to The Day Today. Although The Day Today is probably the funnier of the two shows, I don't feel that this means Broken News should be written off as a waste of time. Both shows may be satirising the same subject, but they choose different ways to do it. Broken News perhaps stays closer to the real thing while The Day Today chooses to get a bit more surreal with the stories they report. Despite the similarity between the two shows, I don't get the feeling that Broken News is trying to copy The Day Today.

The back of the DVD box says the show satirises "the on-screen world of rolling news where there's too much airtime and not enough news to go around". That's a pretty accurate summary of the show and some of it is cringingly familiar. The recognisability of it makes it even funnier, especially when you then go back and watch the real news and see those things happening there. Some of the parody is actually pretty close to reality.

The show holds up to repeat viewing quite well. Many of the jokes are quite subtle and it's easy for them to slip past you the first time. There are also the ticker-tape messages scrolling across the bottom of the screen which you tend not to read the first time you watch an episode. I found these particularly funny in the "hijack" episode (which is also my favourite episode).

The large cast did help to lend an air of reality to the whole thing and virtually all of them were convincing. Having real Americans playing the American newscasters was also a nice touch which could have easily been overlooked.

My only complaint was that the same jokes did get used in several episodes. In some cases this worked well, but in other cases I did feel like hitting fast-forward. However, the "channel hopping" format of the show actually works in its favour here as it helps segments appear longer than they really are without drawing a joke out for too long.

If the BBC commission a second series, I hope they add more writers. I think there's certainly scope for more, although the stories would probably be more surreal in order to avoid going over too much of the same material from the first series.