Radio Times revisited

[Dave2002]

Andrew

That is interesting. Thanks for reminding me that I need to press on "show more" to get fuller information. I missed that. So looks as though there is still no need to buy Radio Times.

[johnb]

I always buy the RT and would feel at a loss if I wasn't being able to peruse the R3 listings at leisure, without sitting at some goddamn PC. I've never really understood why people baulk at buying the RT - but that's just me.

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

I always buy the RT and would feel at a loss if I wasn't being able to peruse the R3 listings at leisure, without sitting at some goddamn PC. I've never really understood why people baulk at buying the RT - but that's just me.

I've just cancelled my subscription - after thirty years of buying it, I find it ill-informed, poorly-written and over-priced. I can think of much better ways to spend the cover price.

[Nick Armstrong]

Must say that I'm pleased to see BBC Four promoted to the main television pages, alongside the 'main 4' channels. (Now that BBC3 is no longer a TV channel, Channel 5 has been demoted to the following pages and their mass of secondary / freeview / cable stations. C5 must be furious).

I still find RT a useful way of flagging programmes that need to be recorded to the PVR (never really watching live TV any more, other than sport or news, and 'own recordings' being generally easier to navigate, pause, ff, etc - and indeed in some cases, retain as DVD copies - than 'catch up').

So it's a boon to me to have BBC Four more prominently featured.

[french frank]

(never really watching live TV any more, other than sport or news, and 'own recordings'

Can't find the relevant thread so … had an email, an email, from TV Licensing this week. Went online to confirm I still didn't need a licence but couldn't find my reason (i.e. I don't watch television programmes). 'Only watch Catch Up' (but I don't watch it), 'Don't have TV receiving equipment' (I do - my computer(s)), 'I only use my computer as a games console' (). So I humbly ticked: "I only watch Catch Up".

I think there was another menu item that didn't apply, but I've forgotten it.

[ardcarp]

Must say that I'm pleased to see BBC Four promoted to the main television pages, alongside the 'main 4' channels. (Now that BBC3 is no longer a TV channel, Channel 5 has been demoted to the following pages and their mass of secondary / freeview / cable stations. C5 must be furious).

I still find RT a useful way of flagging programmes that need to be recorded to the PVR (never really watching live TV any more, other than sport or news, and 'own recordings' being generally easier to navigate, pause, ff, etc - and indeed in some cases, retain as DVD copies - than 'catch up').

So it's a boon to me to have BBC Four more prominently featured.

I wish they wouldn't relegate Radio programmes to a ghetto at the back of RT. Why not have them along with the TV pages in date order as (IIRC) they used to be eons ago. I'm forever scrabbling back and forth to find out what I'm missing.

[Nick Armstrong]

I wish they wouldn't relegate Radio programmes to a ghetto at the back of RT. Why not have them along with the TV pages in date order as (IIRC) they used to be eons ago. I'm forever scrabbling back and forth to find out what I'm missing.

This is clearly all part of a long continuum... Coincidentally this evening, I caught the start of 'I'm Sorry I'll Read That Again' on Radio 4 Extra. The first mini-sketch involved

"the 'New Look' Radio Times"... which was said to be

"easily understood by the average listener with exceptional eyesight and a microscope.

Rumours that the new print and layout of the RT is difficult to read have been fully explained by a BBC spokesman:

[John Cleese]: This is all part of our cunning plan to boost radio. If people try to read the deliberately misleading information in the new Radio Times, they’ll undoubtedly hurt their eyes and won’t be able to watch television, so they just MIGHT listen to radio."

The show was first aired in 1970....!

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b007jqws

[Petrushka]

This is clearly all part of a long continuum... Coincidentally this evening, I caught the start of 'I'm Sorry I'll Read That Again' on Radio 4 Extra. The first mini-sketch involved

"the 'New Look' Radio Times"... which was said to be

"easily understood by the average listener with exceptional eyesight and a microscope.

Rumours that the new print and layout of the RT is difficult to read have been fully explained by a BBC spokesman:

[John Cleese]: This is all part of our cunning plan to boost radio. If people try to read the deliberately misleading information in the new Radio Times, they’ll undoubtedly hurt their eyes and won’t be able to watch television, so they just MIGHT listen to radio."

The show was first aired in 1970....!


http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b007jqws

I remember listening to that very episode back in 1970 and used to love ISIRTA. That and Round the Horne were classic Sunday lunchtime listening in the late 1960s.

[jean]

Must say that I'm pleased to see BBC Four promoted to the main television pages, alongside the 'main 4' channels. (Now that BBC3 is no longer a TV channel, Channel 5 has been demoted to the following pages and their mass of secondary / freeview / cable stations. C5 must be furious).

The Guardian Guide has been doing that for months, so they've had time to get used to it!

[LHC]

The Guardian Guide has been doing that for months, so they've had time to get used to it!

I very much doubt that Channel 5's target audience reads either of the Guardian or the Radio Times, so it won't make any difference to them at all. Of course, if it was dropped from the Sun's or the Express's TV guides, that would be a different matter.