´óÏó´«Ã½

'How do we report someone else's journalism which we haven't backed up ourselves? We can't ignore the story because we know our website audience would be talking about Madonna and would want to know what we had to say about it' m shaw.' as a regular 'user/addict' of the ´óÏó´«Ã½ website and i can assure you that madonna's marriage is not on the tip of my tongue, and feel insulted at the suggestion i may be interested. the ´óÏó´«Ã½ should leave the trash talking to the experts at the sun and report on more newsworthy items

I suppose it will be fashionable to divorce now.

i always thought madonna wouldnt last in any marrage that fails to get her what she wants. example her marrage to sean penn was aimed at her breaking into hollywood big time , but her performances were lackluster at best.
so they divorced and she moved on untill her latest marrage that i thought was yet another attempt at the hollywood big time and since there has been no major developements i was expecting sepperation, i can only say whatch our mr jackson etc you may be lined up next.

But for a good proportion of our audience, these stories are as relevant to their lives as any political intrigue or bank implosion.

The ´óÏó´«Ã½ has made cutbacks because of the licence fee settlement, but it can still afford to employ journalists to cover a story which doesn't affect the lives of the vast majority of the ´óÏó´«Ã½'s audience. Completely abolish entertainment news and cover stories which affect us instead of treating us as if we are less important to you than celebrities. If I announce that I am to divorce my wife tomorrow or if our marriage goes on the rocks, you won't devote so much as a page of your website, or a minute of your output on radio or television to it. If I am wrong, please let me know and I'll send you a press release about my marriage. Then we'll see whether ordinary folk matter to you as much as celebrities.

Matthew Shaw:

it is always important to established the facts.

If this story is as relevant to your readership as bank implosion then God help us all. This is supposed to be a news site, not a gossip page.

Oh Please they are only human after all!
If it dosen't work.... it dosen't!
To say it was another attempt at " hollywood big time" I disagree! She can hold her own!

Let's be positive, 80% of divorces end in happiness.

Although i don't like to see stories of so called "celebrities" covering front pages of our Newspapers ;

i think it is better than seeing Doom and Gloom reports and scremongering

as we all know that At least 50% of the problem, 'lack of confidence' has been caused by the media hype and scary graphics.

My 8 year old daughter saw a picture of Madonna on the front of the paper I bought today and asked me what the story was about. I explained that Madonna had split up from her husband. She looked bewildered and asked "why do I need to know about that ?". I agree with her. We don't know the individuals in this marriage break down, and there are children involved. How can it be in any ones interest for more than a short factual report, at most ?

'Madonna is arguably the most famous woman in the world'

after HM The Queen.

30 years ago, this story would have gotten a one line mention on ´óÏó´«Ã½ lasting about 15 seconds after it was broken to all the other news media. Let's call this for what it is, ´óÏó´«Ã½ pandering to the pop culture to gain audience share. Rather than try to raise the standards of its audience by maintaining its own high standards, it has dumbed itself down to the lowest common denominator. This is merely one more piece of evidence for the degradation of the quality and integrity of what was once the most respected news source in the world to its current low status of media rag. Is the story downloadable on a podcast too? Wouldn't surprise me one bit. Teeny boppers can listen to it while skateboarding through town.

I can't say this really impacts my life one way or another, but I don't agree with the demands that the ´óÏó´«Ã½ should stop reporting all entertainment stories. If nothing else they provide a bit of light relief between the endless genocide, global recession and US election that is 'the news'. I like going to the cinema, I like to read and I like music so a few stories covering these are perfectly welcome.

This kind of blog entry is confirmation that the ´óÏó´«Ã½ has surrendered to commercialism and turned into a tabloid.

How did this news enrich my life? In what scary universe does this information rank with global financial meltdown?

You do realise that the media is a plaything to these attention seeking celebrities. Even so, I felt your expression that this was 'fantastic', came over as mind-numbingly callous. What about the children?

Your assessment of relevance and priority is warped. Please take note of the comments so far which expose how immature your approach is to public service broadcasting. You are not providing what people want.

Shock! Horror! Entertainment section has story that's not important. How many of the stories in the ´óÏó´«Ã½ entertainment section, or any entertainment section for that matter, are actually important?

The sports section doesn't contain anything you really need to know either. If United win or loose it's not going to change your life.

This comment has been referred for further consideration. Explain.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

So called "Celebrity" tittle-tattle should never appear on the ´óÏó´«Ã½ ticker, or front news page.

Im going to stick my neck out for Matthew Shaw, please feel free to chop away at it.

A substantial part of the ´óÏó´«Ã½ output is entertainment based, and I have absolutely no problem with being presented with the option to read entertainment news on the ´óÏó´«Ã½s website.

Furthermore, with the exception of the minority of people who await the arrival of the detector van, we ALL pay our licence fee, and therefore it is essential, in my opinion, to provide information and news that cater to as broad a spectrum of interests and topics as possible in order to provide value for money for all.

But then, this article isnt about that, its about the ´óÏó´«Ã½ taking a punt on a story that hadnt yet been publically confirmed and how they felt it appropriate to deal with the speculation about this story.

I am glad that the ´óÏó´«Ã½ presents a wide selection of news coverage - and that it doesnt pander to a selective group of people. If you bring someone to the site with a less serious piece of news, they browse and can learn more about more serious news too.

Keep doing what you are doing ´óÏó´«Ã½ - you seem to manage a decent balance, long may it last.

Why do we have to suffer the nonsesne about whatever this or that 'celebrity' or pair thereof get up to.

I got divorced many years ago it never went into print, so why after all the column inches of Madonna, and her tribe, over the last, seemingly, innumerable years, do we still have to be inundated with her problems.
The media in this country are celebrity mad, and are forcing all the rubbish into our eyesight on a daily basis.

My wife has just bought about five or six magazines to read on her flight to Australia,
in every one there was a picture of Madonna in some so called folk garment.

Needless to say she has decided to forget the mags and has opted for a thick novel instead.

I suggest the 'reporters' who constantly issue this trash should be sat in a static position with their eyes glued to a monitor, and force fed all the media reports on Madonna and Richie since they got together.

Yes, the whole seven or eight years worth.

Maybe then they will get an inkling of just how the public are sick to the back teeth with their crass reporting.

It's almost as bad as with that other clothes horse/breeding mare, Diana.

"Madonna is arguably the most famous woman in the world."

-On Blue Peter's 50th anniversary show they said the same thing about the Queen. Who is right? Blue Peter or Matthew Shaw? The ´óÏó´«Ã½ is confusing me here.

The argument about whether to report Madonna's divorce is one thing, another issue is the amount of prominence the story is given. Should the ´óÏó´«Ã½ really put the story on the front of the news page?

All that was necessary was a quick statement saying they were getting divorced - all the speculation and rumours are totally unnecessary. Yes, I'm interested they are getting divorced, but its not life or world changing, and doesn't deserve to be on the front page, and I am not at all interested in the boundless rumour mongering and mud-slinging. I come to the ´óÏó´«Ã½ for intelligent, indepth reporting of important issues - not for cheap gossip. If I want that, I'll go to Sky.

The media are not dissimilar from pharmaceutical companies or any other business including charities. Even the ´óÏó´«Ã½ has to satisfy its investors. No organisation in a free market can claim to be acting as a philanthropist would.
Society thrives on scandal, depravity and horror as long as it is not in my back yard. Individuals gain some authority by believing there are others worse off than themselves. This is the nature of competition and survival of the fittest.
Why could the justice system not find some way of preventing the ‘130mph biker’ from being a danger to the public AND offer some vent for his clearly incredible talent and energy? Why are smokers treated like scum instead of offering a mutually acceptable option for us all to get along together?
Wake up and smell the coffee or dumb down and become another sheep. There is so much life out there and most of it is pent up or misdirected, not bad.

I am sure that "the millions" glued to celebrity revelation have several competent outlets for their passion without needing license payer money squandered on a ´óÏó´«Ã½ version of it. And isn't your analysis of a "scoop" a little revealing of a wish to compete rather than to stick to quality news?

I rather suspect that the Ritchie family would have preferred a little more sensitivity on the subject than have ANY media outlet splash it all over their front page - but that is the price paid for being a celebrity I guess and any relationship is made of highs and lows.

As has been hinted elsewhere all this is just distraction from the very real issues that churn people around in their everyday lives and that the ´óÏó´«Ã½ never even ventures into. When the ´óÏó´«Ã½ had a "mind of its own" all was reasonably well in the ´óÏó´«Ã½ Centre but now we have copycat practises which are painful to watch and frustrating to endure.

And the ´óÏó´«Ã½ prides itself on being a serious new site? Talk about dumbing down.

Every time you see a news report or story about entertainment etc, you get comments about the ´óÏó´«Ã½ "dumbing down" or pandering to worthless news / tittle tattle.

The truth is, as another commenter pointed out, the ´óÏó´«Ã½ has to strike a balance. Some people want serious news and hard hitting debate, some love their Eastenders and Come Dancing.

There's nothing wrong with either. We all pay the licence fee, and we all want different things from the ´óÏó´«Ã½. The ´óÏó´«Ã½ doesn't have to chase audinence figures and high ratings since it's a public service but if it didn't get good ratings the argument would be why does the ´óÏó´«Ã½ produce that particular program.

I love the ´óÏó´«Ã½. It's here to inform, entertain and educate and it does the job well across all it's outlets. I like Newsnight as well as Little Britain - serious discussion as well as comedy and pure entertainment. It's a good balance, and I'd say EVERYONE will find something to like at the Beeb :-)

The website is amazing, the programs consistently excellent, and the newsgathering world class. Sure, you are forced to pay, and if you had a choice you probably wouldn't - but the airwaves would be a poorer place without it.

Long live the ´óÏó´«Ã½!

And to get back on topic - you should have no qualms about reporting news from other sources as long as the sources are named and any doubts on veracity are included.