(04-11-2014 20:23 )Goodfella3041 Wrote: ... indispensable to the channel, not just for how they look or move on set, but also for the effort and imagination that they put into their performance on the phones.
Not to excuse for dull/lazy performances but I suspect the ones perceived to be more entertaining have to be "self-starters", and are maybe just more naturally "on" all the time ; ie. (let's be honest)better at being actresses.
Not necessarily something everyone can always learn, or even learn to fake well imo : needs some actual personality to work with.
It is actually a presenter's job imo - it's just a bit more exposed than your average TV presenter is expected to be
.
And there's a real difference between good, naturalistic presenters, that appear to be genuine, spontaneous and enthusiastic - ad-libbing etc - and those that are obviously working to a script or can't really "think on their feet" on the mic or phone.
(Would they be called "autocue-ties" ?)
And with that it's also tricky not to grate/alienate : one person's good presenter is another's grinning babbling idiot. I'm not just taking Babe Channels here. Then add in that they've actually got to have the looks for the job. Pretty hard to find I would think. So most will get the gig on looks and have to try to pick up the verbal dexterity and engaging with the camera skills as they go. If they're bothered.
I imagine also a lot of the callers don't necessarily give them a lot to work with a lot of the time.
(Certainly not the ones I've been in the queue behind the few times I've called anyway!)
Probably easy to underestimate the skill it must take to appear sexy and "on" for long periods when you're stuck between a couple of tatty plywood walls staring at a hairy-arsed techy and are just getting silent calls or monosyllabic grunters ?
But if a dull caller is met with a dull response on screen, then there's no show there to entice other callers.
And if there's no show then there's no callers.
I also imagine there's a fair amount of just being told to "hard sell" pics & videos and BSX etc at every opportunity to try to make up for when it's quiet on the phones.
Which also won't always necessarily be totally down to what's happening on screen I would suggest - you're always going to get slow nights and slow times of night when everybody's just asleep/not in yet/not watching altogether cos there's something else going on : even for the "best" or "popular" performers, whatever your definitions of those are?
The good ones though imo just plough through that and do some spells of interesting movements to try to drum up calls, and just do short but maybe slightly more regular bits on mic to fill the gap and drum up business. They need a good producer to work with them then imo and help with a bit of a camera movement - I know that's not to everyone's taste and I'm not taking frantic zooming but a few more close ups and pans etc rather than just static babe on the spot waving phone combined with static camera . That doesn't do it for me and I suspect not many others either.
All imo.