I think one of the arguments for having Kate Humble on AW is that the BBC are obviously trying hard to feature more women in a TV-field that's traditionally been dominated by men and they're trying very hard to get away from the rather nerdy, tweedy image that scientific natural historians have often had.
Sadly, the TV companies seem to have had great difficulty finding good female presenters and they keep going back to the same bubbly, jolly, patronizing people who are very child-friendly but never really seem to demonstrate any genuine personal knowledge of what they are talking about. Sure they can look good on camera and repeat what the researchers have spoon-fed to them but they don't seem to have much expertise in any particular field.
I wish they'd go to places like the Natural History Museum in London where there are excellent female scientists and curators who would be very good in front of the camera and would come with a wealth of knowledge. Some fresh blood would also give the programme makers some new ideas and subject matter to film. The new Darwin Center cocoon exhibit is really nice because they used real staff members in their videos - not slick presenters. Some don't come over very well but I was struct by how natural some people were when talking to camera.
