The Eternal Breakfast Debate in a New Place

[Ein Heldenleben]

The frantic pushing of BBC Sounds hasn't helped since it has added to the volume of dross to be directed at us, not least by exhortations to listen again almost before the programme in question has finished, despite the fact that there will have been at least one such public service announcement during the programme itself.
During the morning schedules there will be presenter initiated references to items/programmes later in the day/week, often used as a hook for a piece to be played or theme to be followed up. That seems a good way to draw attention to such things and has the merit of not being intrusive or repetitive.

The problem that those like me who aren’t keen on overtrailing have to contend with is that trailing like advertising works, the adverts for BBC Sounds work and it works through repetition because that how you pick up light listeners and there are a lot of them. The committed listeners will be using Sounds already and , though irritated by the constant plugging that won’t stop them. I haven’t seen the figures but I wouldn’t mind betting that like iPlayer BBC Sounds has been very successful . The iPlayer is so successful I suspect that in 5 - 10 years BBC One and Two will be download brands rather than broadcast channels .
The number of people put off by trail irritation is much smaller than you might think . It’s very important not to argue from your own personal experience. Just to rub salt in the wound it’s very often the least polished and most cliched ads that have the most impact - the Shake and Vac woman , those ultra annoying Crest toothpaste ads in the 70’s...they are all part of industry legend.

[Ein Heldenleben]

Lord Lever's dictum re advertising was that he knew he was wasting half his money but which half. However I suspect it being run by marketing means that no check is made on its success but that maybe yet more money should be spent to 'improve' the production + also to give the punters 'better access' ie more repetition. FF's suggestion will go down like a lead balloon - the producers of these annoyances are well paid, well connected and deaf to all comments (but this is all too typical of BBC management).

Apologies for contradicting you but a great deal of Money and time is spent analysing both the impact of adverts and broadcast trails . The problem is that it’s very difficult to prove cause and effect . Advertisers use constant market polling to measure advert impact and spend a fortune on it . Broadcasters don’t have quite the deep pockets of the advertising industry but they will be measuring trail impact frequently.

[french frank]

FF's suggestion will go down like a lead balloon

It did

RW said trails were a topic that 'never came up' in focus groups. I suspect the focus groups were run like the R3 Facebook page. Listeners can't start topics, they can only respond to topics raised by R3. We used to be able to when it first started (as the 'replacement' for the messageboards), but they quickly nipped that in the bud.

To add to that: The point of my suggestion was that it would be useful for listeners. But the BBC is only interested in what will serve the BBC. So, the whole fiasco over their messageboard was because they only wanted us to post on programmes where our comments could be 'fed into' - live- programmes, like Breakfast, In Tune, the ill-fated 'Burnside'. And, of course, Classical Forum was changed to Classical Music on Radio 3. To say nothing of R3's Facebook and Twitter which are two more marketing tools.

[Ein Heldenleben]

It did

RW said trails were a topic that 'never came up' in focus groups. I suspect the focus groups were run like the R3 Facebook page. Listeners can't start topics, they can only respond to topics raised by R3. We used to be able to when it first started (as the 'replacement' for the messageboards), but they quickly nipped that in the bud.

To add to that: The point of my suggestion was that it would be useful for listeners. But the BBC is only interested in what will serve the BBC. So, the whole fiasco over their messageboard was because they only wanted us to post on programmes where our comments could be 'fed into' - live- programmes, like Breakfast, In Tune, the ill-fated 'Burnside'. And, of course, Classical Forum was changed to Classical Music on Radio 3. To say nothing of R3's Facebook and Twitter which are two more marketing tools.

Can’t speak for Radio three but the three things that were most complained about in tv were
-unannounced schedule changes (By a country mile)
- bad language
- inaccuracy and bias
trails were never complained about . To be honest I think trails largely just wash over people but don’t tell the marketeers. You wouldn’t believe the power they had. I think the BBC is relatively restrained though . An Ex colleague produced a major series for Discovery - the marketing budget was almost the same size as the production budget- it was literally millions .
Marketing and advertising budgets for major Hollywood releases will be a huge proportion of the total spend. It’s pretty much like nuclear escalation - because the opposition have a lot of missiles you have to have a lot. That’s why we are assailed by marketing messages from the moment we wake up ( except in this forum) . There is now more noise than content ...all predicted by McLuhan and Adorno . Meanwhile most composers haven’t got two cents to rub together.

[french frank]

Can’t speak for Radio three but the three things that were most complained about in tv were
-unannounced schedule changes (By a country mile)
- bad language
- inaccuracy and bias
trails were never complained about .

It was a bit bizarre - when the Parliamentary Select Committee carried out its general survey about the BBC (when Radiocentre, the industry body, complained on behalf of Classic FM about R3 'aping' CFM features), the Green Paper had a particular mention about BBC trails, that 'consumers' (aka listeners and viewers) said they were on too frequently. This seemed to go against what RW had said, although several Radio critics such as Gillian Reynolds and Robert Hanks had written articles about it.

Mysteriously, when the White Paper was published the reference had been altered: there had been criticisms about trails but the BBC, as a Public Service Broadcaster, had a duty to inform the public as widely as possible about what it was providing. In other words, the BBC had submitted its response to the Green Paper and got the criticisms squashed.

[french frank]

Further to my previous post, I've dug out the 2005 info on the DCMS review of 2005

DCMS, Green Paper March 2005

p. 5 Key reforms

The BBC needs to change to meet the public’s concerns. While the BBC has a high overall satisfaction rating (75%), the public is far from uncritical. 33% of people believe the BBC offers poor value for money. A third think its TV programmes are getting worse. People question the number of repeats, the amount of onair trailing for BBC programmes, the perception of ‘dumbing down’ and the lack of accountability to licence fee payers.

BBC Response to the Green Paper 2005

p 71 Cross-promotion (6 paragraphs defending ‘on-air promotional activity)

The BBC supports the proposal for more research to be conducted in this area, but it is worth reiterating that on-air promotional activity is a vital means of delivering the BBC’s mission.

[...]

In addition to its role in building awareness, on-air promotion guides users through the increasingly complex world of media services. Some promotional activity is aimed at pointing existing audiences in the direction of content and services that they might find of interest, given the content or service they have just used – such as a trail after Panorama for a Radio Five Live phone-in on the same subject. But promotions also have a role in helping users to find new, unfamiliar and potentially challenging content that they might not otherwise find. Through clever use of promotions, new subjects can be made accessible to new audiences.

DCMS White Paper 2006

p 36 Cross-promotion

The Government believes that it is important that the BBC should continue to promote its services on-air so that licence fee payers are aware of specific programmes and the breadth of the BBC’s overall offering. [...]Research by BBC and Ofcom suggests that the BBC’s on-air promotion is not excessive in comparison with other broadcasters, and that viewers and listeners generally find on air promotion helpful, though there is a small number who are annoyed by it.

So that's trails protests dead and buried.

[Ein Heldenleben]

It was a bit bizarre - when the Parliamentary Select Committee carried out its general survey about the BBC (when Radiocentre, the industry body, complained on behalf of Classic FM about R3 'aping' CFM features), the Green Paper had a particular mention about BBC trails, that 'consumers' (aka listeners and viewers) said they were on too frequently. This seemed to go against what RW had said, although several Radio critics such as Gillian Reynolds and Robert Hanks had written articles about it.

Mysteriously, when the White Paper was published the reference had been altered: there had been criticisms about trails but the BBC, as a Public Service Broadcaster, had a duty to inform the public as widely as possible about what it was providing. In other words, the BBC had submitted its response to the Green Paper and got the criticisms squashed.

I think you are seeing a conspiracy where there isn’t one. (Cross post update - I think the final sentence of the DCMS P36 sums it up accurately -“ a small number are annoyed . “
It’s a fine balance between properly informing people and boring them. The problem is the more outlets , the lighter the viewing and the more you have to trail to reach people . In tv there used to be trail tvr points - the number of times ( and places in the schedule ) where you had to trail to reach 5 , 10 , 20 percent of the viewing population. Even in the nineties and noughties , when the networks had much higher audiences, I was always surprised how many slots you needed just to reach 10 percent several times . In Radio , with very many more outlets no doubt they use different metrics. I’ve noticed that most R3 trailing is pre 12 - I guess after that there’s little point.

[french frank]

I think you are seeing a conspiracy where there isn’t one. (Cross post update - I think the final sentence of the DCMS P36 sums it up accurately -“ a small number are annoyed . “

There are 66m people living in the UK - what counts as a small number depends on how many it's a number of. There were enough to merit a mention in the Green Paper. But few enough to be dismissed in the White Paper - once the BBC had explained its reasons.

[Ein Heldenleben]

There are 66m people living in the UK - what counts as a small number depends on how many it's a number of. There were enough to merit a mention in the Green Paper. But few enough to be dismissed in the White Paper - once the BBC had explained its reasons.

I’m guessing a small number is under 200 - you could always FOI it ....

[cloughie]

I’m guessing a small number is under 200 - you could always FOI it ....

...and they’re all over 70 so the Beeb don’t care!

[oddoneout]

I think you are seeing a conspiracy where there isn’t one. (Cross post update - I think the final sentence of the DCMS P36 sums it up accurately -“ a small number are annoyed . “
It’s a fine balance between properly informing people and boring them. The problem is the more outlets , the lighter the viewing and the more you have to trail to reach people . In tv there used to be trail tvr points - the number of times ( and places in the schedule ) where you had to trail to reach 5 , 10 , 20 percent of the viewing population. Even in the nineties and noughties , when the networks had much higher audiences, I was always surprised how many slots you needed just to reach 10 percent several times . In Radio , with very many more outlets no doubt they use different metrics. I’ve noticed that most R3 trailing is pre 12 - I guess after that there’s little point.

Yup, it's tiresome having those concerts and longer bits of music that you can't insert a shouty Tom Service into... Suppose that's one reason for not changing the format of the morning schedule, the other being of course that the audience magically changes after midnight - sorry midday - into one that has longer attention spans, better memory and more brain cells so doesn't need constant prompts about what to listen to and how.

[french frank]

I’m guessing a small number is under 200 - you could always FOI it ....

Whereas 'a flood of requests' for Copeland's Rodeo on Breakfast would be … ? And 200 respondents to a consultation? The point is that there were enough of them to be mentioned in 'Key Reforms' in the Green Paper, and they were only a small number, worth a passing mention, 'And then again, too few too mention' in the White Paper as the BBC had it My Waaaaay. The government was persauadable and the BBC persuaded them.

That's all right. They think it's a good thing for a public service to be doing. Nothing sinister about that. It's not as though anyone is accusing them of doing on purpose, simply to annoy people.

[Ein Heldenleben]

Yup, it's tiresome having those concerts and longer bits of music that you can't insert a shouty Tom Service into... Suppose that's one reason for not changing the format of the morning schedule, the other being of course that the audience magically changes after midnight - sorry midday - into one that has longer attention spans, better memory and more brain cells so doesn't need constant prompts about what to listen to and how.

There’s little point because there’s fewer of them whatever their intellectual capacity .Only heard one trail this pm oh joy....

[Nick Armstrong]

Yup, it's tiresome having those concerts and longer bits of music that you can't insert a shouty Tom Service into...

Plus, on catch-up listening to Martin Handley, the ‘jump forward 20 seconds’ button on “Sounds” is a marvellous tool for avoiding, well, t...s

[underthecountertenor]

Plus, on catch-up listening to Martin Handley, the ‘jump forward 20 seconds’ button on “Sounds” is a marvellous tool for avoiding, well, t...s

It’s also a marvellous tool for some of us to avoid Martin rabbiting on about his conducting career and the momentous events in his garden.