The Eternal Breakfast Debate in a New Place

[Stan Drews]

This is why it's important (in my view!) to keep plugging away at people higher up than Radio 3 management with a clear message. (And not to be put off by the few, but regular, hostile jibes that are made here). The BBC high-ups are strongly inclined to support their own until the message becomes undeniable. Like aeolium, I haven't listened to Breakfast (or Essential Classics) in the normal run of listening. But I listen from time to time - rather like Pabmusic did - just to check on details, so that people don't try their other trick: "If you don't listen, you can't criticise." (If you do listen you increase the reach)

I'm attempting an analysis of the BBC's quarterly 'Performance' statistics (such as they are). The headlines when the new figures are published usually report that the BBC is performing very well - in fact improving. One figure I haven't seen quoted is Radio 3's record on 'Distinctiveness' - a key measurement for a public service broadcaster. Last quarter it was Not Bad, but prior to that it showed the station sinking lower. Over the entire 3-year period for which we have statistics, it comes averagely 7th out of 10 of the the UK-wide station. But the strategy is quite deliberate: short bits of music, presenter-led, chat with listeners and guests, regular news headlines, much like Radio 2; and snippets of undemanding familiar music like Classic FM. Because these are the stations that have 'potential' listeners - those who don't listen to R3 at the moment but who might be persuaded to do so if it's given a 'familiar', less 'daunting' style.

Radio is now rated a 'low involvement', secondary activity; so you aren't likely to find a large percentage of the schedule devoted now to what has been called the 'cultural and intellectual' level. Not in the classical field anyway.

This may not be the best place for the quote below (from the official BBC obit of 20/04/14) but I haven't been able to find any reference to McIntyre's demise elsewhere on the Forum.

Mr McIntyre had a quieter tenure [compared to that at R4] at the head of BBC Radio 3 from 1978 to 1987, during which time he phased out the laborious, analytical introductions that preceded each piece of music in an attempt to make the network more accessible. [My italics.]

Is this really an accurate account of the circumstances or is it an attempt, in hindsight, to show the current presentation style in a better light?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-27096000

[Eine Alpensinfonie]

To be honest, I wasn't trying to be funny.

[french frank]

This may not be the best place for the quote below (from the official BBC obit of 20/04/14) but I haven't been able to find any reference to McIntyre's demise elsewhere on the Forum.

Mr McIntyre had a quieter tenure [compared to that at R4] at the head of BBC Radio 3 from 1978 to 1987, during which time he phased out the laborious, analytical introductions that preceded each piece of music in an attempt to make the network more accessible. [My italics.]

Is this really an accurate account of the circumstances or is it an attempt, in hindsight, to show the current presentation style in a better light?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-27096000

I did catch the news and read the obit. Probably the main reason why there was little response was that, in fact, he didn't (as far as I know) have much direct input into the music programming: he was more of a 'speech' man, having come from Radio 4. I never heard that he was a key influence in altering the music announcements (Drummond was). He came over as a bit 'anti-music' His predecessor, Stephen Hearst, died a couple of years ago and this also passed unremarked. In those days people probably hardly knew the names of controllers ...

[teamsaint]

I did catch the news and read the obit. Probably the main reason why there was little response was that, in fact, he didn't (as far as I know) have much direct input into the music programming: he was more of a 'speech' man, having come from Radio 4. I never heard that he was a key influence in altering the music announcements (Drummond was). He came over as a bit 'anti-music' His predecessor, Stephen Hearst, died a couple of years ago and this also passed unremarked. In those days people probably hardly knew the names of controllers ...

Oh I don't know. They were usually from the right side of the tracks, and often only needed the shortest of nicknames to be recognised, as the Rev W Awdry demonstrated............

[antongould]

Can someone wake up ER - York Bowen is in the first half hour of Breakfast .......very useful these trailers aren't they???

[french frank]

Oh I don't know. They were usually from the right side of the tracks, and often only needed the shortest of nicknames to be recognised, as the Rev W Awdry demonstrated............

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/tvandradio/3591579/The-phat-controller.html

Interesting how much he was said then to have done has now been quietly dropped - or has dropped, like the 2.2m listening figures ...

[Old Grumpy]

Heard him on the programme for the first time today, he seemed to be dealing well and with the faintest dose of irony with the flummery (e.g. commenting on best tweet of the morning " 'My dog likes Ian Skelly, I don't' - ...one of you has excellent taste..."

Another fan, Ms AT from Uxbridge has written to Radio Times in praise of IS: "His easy unpretentious manner, with his slightly subversive remarks..."

Shame he's only on for the rest of this week.

OG

[antongould]

Another fan, Ms AT from Uxbridge has written to Radio Times in praise of IS: "His easy unpretentious manner, with his slightly subversive remarks..."

Shame he's only on for the rest of this week.

OG

Shame indeed IMHO

[underthecountertenor]

Shame indeed IMHO

I like IS a lot. However, if you were to listen objectively, you might well conclude that, if anything, he talks more, and more about himself, than (for example) PT (whom I also like a lot). It seems to me that double standards, and prejudice, are at play here.

[Old Grumpy]

I like IS a lot. However, if you were to listen objectively, you might well conclude that, if anything, he talks more, and more about himself, than (for example) PT (whom I also like a lot). It seems to me that double standards, and prejudice, are at play here.

Perhaps, perhaps not. I like them all really - but I do miss Penny Gore (with fewer news interruptions and no tweets!).

OG

[Radio64]

Perhaps, perhaps not. I like them all really - but I do miss Penny Gore (with fewer news interruptions and no tweets!).

OG

Let's not talk about Breakfast presenters who we miss. Please.

[Eine Alpensinfonie]

I don't miss any presenters. I only miss hearing full-length pieces of music without the constant irritation of inane chit-chat.

[Radio64]

I don't miss any presenters. I only miss hearing full-length pieces of music without the constant irritation of inane chit-chat.

Nope. Don't miss that at all.

(watches clips of The Palace on youtube)

[french frank]

I like IS a lot. However, if you were to listen objectively, you might well conclude that, if anything, he talks more, and more about himself, than (for example) PT (whom I also like a lot). It seems to me that double standards, and prejudice, are at play here.

I thought that comment worth investigating so I listened to Monday's programme. One thing I can confirm is that - if my additions and subtractions were correct - there were approximately 10 minutes more speech than when I last timed a programme, about two years ago, about 40 minutes rather than 30.

HOWEVER, most of that was made up of what now appear to be standard Radio 3 'regulars': News & weather, headlines/press headlines every 15 mins, five presenter trails (Trelawny, McMillan, McGregor, Rafferty and Sarah Walker (live) ). New since I last listened are the several listener requests in association with Bach Before 7, Best of British playlist, Georgian Gems and Neglected Composers (Wm Boyce, and a nice quip from Dr Johnson) and which all require listener details to be announced; and the mishmash of 'coming up' snippets. The phone-in was entirely giving information about the composer, new to me, John Hebden of York.

I noted all IS's contributions which were almost entirely giving information on the music/composers (e.g. on another 'unknown' to me, John Eccles); and notably, announcements about forthcoming Radio 3 programmes or programmes in the iPlayer. I would guess that Lambert's Romeo and Juliet was chosen/stored up to allow a mention of the Do3 play in the iPlayer. I would estimate that a total of no more than 2 minutes in all was devoted to comments about wisteria, cuckoos (I did not know about the arrangement of their toes) and swallows, and reference to txts, tweets &c were not very obtrusive. However, there were one or two Skellyisms: if he really was 'deluged' with emails from listeners eager to explain to him why Haydn's Drumroll Symphony (again a useful link to EC and the Haydn BaL choice) is so-called, Radio 3 listeners have lost their sense of humour.

So, double standards it may be, but 'presenter 'chat' does depend - crucially, as it happens - on the substance of what they are saying. I found Ian informative with light humorous touches. My guess is that the additional 10 minutes added to the speech content (assuming my figures are correct) had little to do with the presenter, more with either management or producer. The choice of music was pretty interesting and I think there were possibly fewer single movements, though the average length was, I think under 5 minutes. The longest was the Dvořák overture (one teensy carp: I might have allowed 2 or 3 extra seconds to lull listeners into that 'gentle awakening' ).

All in all, I rebut any accusation of 'double standards' or 'prejudice' in saying IS is very good in this particular slot.

[Old Grumpy]

All in all, I rebut any accusation of 'double standards' or 'prejudice' in saying IS is very good in this particular slot.

Amen to that, FF. He did seem to have trouble getting his words out, on occasion, though!

OG