The Eternal Breakfast Debate in a New Place

[Norfolk Born]

On this morning's programme - sorry, 'show' - the 'Holiday Classic' story involved a narrow boat becoming jammed in a French canal lock while Butterworth's 'Banks of Green Willow' was playing on a cassette recorder on the deck of the boat. Shortly afterwards, Martin Hanley referred to the last movement of Mendelssohn's violin concerto as 'sounding as though it poured straight out of the composer without touching the sides'. Possibly subconscious, but an amusing link.
However, I shall be back with Radio 4 for the start of 'Today' tomorrow - 'Breakfast' is simply the least worst option at that time of day on a Sunday.

[Lateralthinking1]

Interesting. I am moving at that time of the morning on weekdays from 4 to 3. It isn't because the content has won me over. I just can't bear wall to wall news any longer.

[Old Grumpy]

Interesting. I am moving at that time of the morning on weekdays from 4 to 3. It isn't because the content has won me over. I just can't bear wall to wall news any longer.

It's the wall to wall news (much of it repeated during a one hour commute) that drove me from R4 to R3 in the morning. I personally find "breakfast" refreshing and interesting during my journey to work. I agree though a bit more music and a bit less chat would be a good thing.

[Suffolkcoastal]

Actually lateralthinking, Nessun Dorma isn't broadcast nearly as many times as 'che gelida' which accounts for around a quarter of the Puccini broadcast on R3. With Vaughan Williams, around half of the broadcast works are made up of just 6 pieces and I think we could all guess what they would be, also incidentally the same ones that always feature in CFM's Hall of Fame mmm....

[french frank]

I agree though a bit more music and a bit less chat would be a good thing.

That seems to be something that even people who otherwise quite like the programme seem to agree on. I wouldn't mind speech content if it was about the music and genuinely aided appreciation.

[Serial_Apologist]

But the same music, over and over again, replacing the chat??

[french frank]

But the same music, over and over again, replacing the chat??

That's a point. An account of a Three Men In A Boat boating holiday followed by one movement from Eine Kleine Nachtmusik? Or the whole of Eine Kleine Nachtmusik?

[Serial_Apologist]

That's a point. An account of a Three Men In A Boat boating holiday followed by one movement from Eine Kleine Nachtmusik? Or the whole of Eine Kleine Nachtmusik?

[MickyD]

The brassy overture to Jule Styne's "Gypsy" followed by Britten's "Hymn to the Virgin" - wow, that's one hell of a leap even for the mixed bag that Breakfast is!

[Lateralthinking1]

I have read a lot of this thread now. I think there are many unknowns. For example:

1. How much movement from station to station has been quite irrespective of the changes they have made? Might not the increased numbers of listeners be down to:

(a) A higher percentage of the population now being over 40
(b) A greater willingness to re-tune created by digital and more stations
(c) Interest created by more television coverage - BBC4
(d) The turning away from other stations because they themselves aren't liked as much
(e) Classical music no longer being seen by many as inaccessible.

2. Who listens to Classic FM? 6 million? Is this really believable? I don't know anyone who listens to it. Is the assumption that it is in direct competition with R3 a ridiculously lazy one? Might it not be that there is a sharper dividing line between those who will accept commercials and those who won't? Where people are prepared to listen to both, do they travel more in one direction?

3. Age and music. What studies have been undertaken to determine why the audience for R3 has always increased with age? What does this say about the development of music appreciation, human behaviour, etc? Doesn't it make modernization a rather false concept? As for the very young, where is the evidence that changes can dramatically increase listening figures?

[Norfolk Born]

Some of my friends and acquaintances listen to CFM, but never listen - and have never listened - to Radio 3.
Why should listenership figures for the former be less believable than those for the latter? And is it surprising that John Suchet attracts more listeners than his lower-profile BBC competitors?
Further proof - were it needed - this morning that the two stations are becoming indistinguishable from each other. 'At least,' I used to tell myself, 'Radio 3 doesn't play single movements from Vivaldi concerti' ...well, it did this morning, just before 10.00 a.m.

[Lateralthinking1]

Hmmm......my dental surgery WAS a CFM place. It is now strictly Smooth.

[Old Grumpy]

I'm sure there are plenty of people who listen to both Radio 3 and CFM from time to time - I certainly do. I listented to CFM quite a lot during the Mozartathon earlier this year! I agree the adverts are tedious - one reason why Radio 3 is better.

[french frank]

Might not the increased numbers of listeners be down to

What increased numbers? Classic FM's numbers have increased since the station began in 1992. Radio 3's haven't (though as a proportion of the population they have fallen a little i.e. they haven't quite kept pace with the rise in population.

2. Who listens to Classic FM? 6 million? Is this really believable?

Some of the figures quoted are believable, some, like R3's, are station spin. But, yes, in the region of 5.5 - 6 million listen each week, somewhat down on their peak of a few years back. They seem to have reached a plateau, but remember, Classic FM still has the largest audience of any national commercial station, which I think is good news, on balance.

Is the assumption that it is in direct competition with R3 a ridiculously lazy one? Might it not be that there is a sharper dividing line between those who will accept commercials and those who won't? Where people are prepared to listen to both, do they travel more in one direction?

Several issues there. The BBC will say that all radio, all media, all alternatives are 'competition' because they are competition for people's limited time, even if they offer very different services. CFM is one competitor: 45% of R3 listeners listen to CFM; but over 70% listen to R4; and I forget the figure for R2 off hand; I think it's between 30% and 40%. (The BBC is statistically illiterate and points out that whereas R3 'loses' 45% of its listeners to CFM, CFM only 'loses' 15% of its listeners to R3; they fail to realise that the percentage ratio will correspond to the ratio of listeners. CFM has three times more listeners, R3's percentage ratio will therefore be three times greater than CFM's. In the end it's the same 850,000 individuals.) What is meant by 'travelling in a particular direction'? If someone here, an R3 listener, says they [sic] also listen to CFM, they are both 'an R3 listener who listens to CFM' and 'a CFM listener who listens to R3'. I understand that there is little evidence that CFM listeners 'graduate' in significant numbers to R3. It's even less likely, logically, that R3 listeners give up R3 totally for CFM.

Age and music. What studies have been undertaken to determine why the audience for R3 has always increased with age? What does this say about the development of music appreciation, human behaviour, etc? Doesn't it make modernization a rather false concept? As for the very young, where is the evidence that changes can dramatically increase listening figures?

This isn't limited to R3: R4's average listener age seems to be going up, and is not hugely lower than R3's (54 as against 59). Younger people generally are listening to less radio, especially children now that there are more TV programmes for them. The only way that listening figures could be said to change dramatically is when there is a significant change in programme strategy: R1 lost well over a million listeners when it narrowed its target audience to 15-24; it has now regained them on retargeting on the 15-29+ group. There is also the most dramatic case: the rise of 6 Music's reach which was 99% a matter of publicity and increased awareness of the station's existence.

[Lateralthinking1]

frenchfrank - Thank you for your considered comments. They have clarified certain points for me.

Numbers: I had in mind the number of listeners to Breakfast on R3. Am I right in thinking that it is generally upwards?

Appeal of CFM: Initially I was surprised to hear that CFM had the largest audience of a national commercial station. Then I thought about it and realised that many of the others were offering similar things to each other. The commercial stations do not identify clearly enough whether they are national. In London, we tend to see them all as national! I have Smooth, Heart and Jazz FM in a group and there are others. Capital, Heart and Kiss FM perhaps compete for the younger listeners. But all the buy-outs and the syndicated services are not things I wish to comprehend. I suppose something like Planet Rock would be niche.

Competition: I don't doubt the business people think that "all alternatives are 'competition' because they are competition for people's limited time." However, it makes no sense whatsoever to me. You hardly need to spend much time at all listening to a station to register. Surely rather than looking at other stations, it would be better to consider how to get more people to spend a bit of time listening to R3 instead of using that time for other leisure activities. Find the overlap between values and content there.

Direction: By direction, yes, I did mean graduation. Again, I'm not surprised by your view that little of that occurs.