Oh I disagree... I think age is immaterial. In my opinion the choice should always always be 'who is the most qualified for the job?' This may not necessarily be the most knowledgeable, but the person who can best 'get it across' to the subject audience. Which is surely the whole point? Young or old, who cares, as long as they are good? Some of the younger presenters I've seen appear not yet to have graduated away from talking to children. Presenting is an art and I would suggest they refrain from more adult productions until they have.
Yes of course we need knowledgeable presenters, but change is inevitable whether we like it or not. The young though have a right to these jobs as well, this idea that intellectual content must only come from those well versed over many years in their subject forgets that we all have to learn.
What I was arguing about is the need to make way by older people for the young to get a foothold in the market.
I can get just as ratty as anyone else about the 'youth' and the way tv is going downmarket, but it's subjective, it is just society moving on in a different manner whether I like it or not...
Wish I'd never put this news up in the first place;)
Don't be Moss. Like it or loathe it there IS a place for younger presenters on programes such as Time Team because the 'old and wise' are not always that and often stuck in the past themselves and simply towing the safe party line. Fresh ideas are always welcomed, jeepers we have enough of them here as it is, and there's nothing wrong with alternative reasonable views from a presenter with a sprinkling of knowledge. Much is all educated guesswork anyway and I think JP have got to realise that over the years.
Dr Who finds it easy, but older politician's wearing jeans look weird, so giving Mick Aston's jumper to someone under 30 may or may not work...