The Eternal Breakfast Debate in a New Place

[arancie33]

she was probably tweeting - you don't think she listens to the show do you ?

I have long wondered what they get up to when the music is playing. On the evidence of the last couple of mornings it certainly isn't reading their lines in anticipation of the next bit of talk. Yesterday she made a right dog's dinner of summarising the newspaper headlines; today Sinéad Morrisey's prize winning poetry collection was announced as "Parallex" before a hasty correction. Neither example life threatening, of course, but just completely unprofessional.

[AndyJW]

The A minor prelude wasn't actually cut short, it was the start of the G major prelude that follows, basically someone was a little bit late with the stop button and instead had to quickly fade. Mind you it does sound that CBH didn't realise that it was the start of the next prelude!!!

I was in the shower at the time and didn't realise - but still!

[Old Grumpy]

Not radio 2.5, not even radio 2.0, but the Light Programme this morning!

Trevor Duncan
The Girl from Corsica for orchestra

Orchestra: Ron Goodwin and His Concert Orchestra.

Two Sides of Ron Goodwin, EMI, 10

The spoonerised Best of British debacle was quite fun though.


OG

[underthecountertenor]

I caught Breakfast this morning - And now we have the Classical Chart, let's see the new entries of those cds you've all been buying ....... Do they honestly think R3 listeners buy chart stuff?

It's entirely up to you, of course, whether you listen to the 'Classical Chart' (actually the specialist classical chart) section or not. But, had you done so, you might perhaps have reconsidered your rhetorical question. Have a look at this week's chart, and then explain why 'R3 listeners' (assuming that it is possible to homogenise them) would not buy any of the 'stuff' appearing in it. http://www.officialcharts.com/specia...-albums-chart/

[Honoured Guest]

To be fair to Anna, she was using "R3 listeners" as shorthand for "Friends of Radio 3 (FoR3)", meaning people who believe that Radio 3 "should" broadcast nothing of general appeal, which includes the entire contents of every week's chart, unless perhaps the FoR3 were all to purchase multiple copies of the same recording to gift to each other at Xmas.

[french frank]

Have a look at this week's chart, and then explain why 'R3 listeners' (assuming that it is possible to homogenise them) would not buy any of the 'stuff' appearing in it. http://www.officialcharts.com/specia...-albums-chart/

The Charts company has improved this particular chart since they first started it and a large percentage of the CDs were crossover. But it is surely the context which people object to - the notion that you might buy a CD because 'it's riding high in the charts'. That is - admittedly - what you're supposed to do, because charts are one of the music industry's main marketing tools.

However, CD Review also features the latest recordings, and in a more critical context. So the question returns to the original topic: the Breakfast programme is being targeted on 'new' Radio 3 listeners who might listen to Breakfast, but not CD Review, and the charts feature might shift a few more units off the shelves. And 'R3 listeners' who take a more critical approach to buying and listening might, in general, be dissatisfied at having one weekly programme (CD Review), as against Breakfast's 7-a-week (followed by Essential Classics whose official brief is to keep hold of that same Breakfast audience and pull listeners over from Radio 4).

[arancie33]

(followed by Essential Classics whose official brief is to keep hold of that same Breakfast audience and pull listeners over from Radio 4).

I doubt if any R4 listeners with a grain of interest in classical music would have been pulled this morning. Nicola Benedetti on Desert Island Discs or Rob Cowan's rabbitting on Essential Classics? No contest IMV.

[David-G]

As a non-Breakfast listener, could someone explain to me what this Chart discussion is about?

[Don Petter]

As a non-Breakfast listener, could someone explain to me what this Chart discussion is about?

As a non-Breakfast listener, they won't be able to?

[french frank]

As a non-Breakfast listener, could someone explain to me what this Chart discussion is about?

An alternative reply

On Tuesdays the Breakfast programme features the Specialist Classical Chart (as opposed to the non-Specialist Classical Chart). Someone, probably the producer, selects notable new entries, or fast risers. You can also download a podcast of that feature, because the music industry has no objection to their products being advertised. Otherwise, classical music is excluded from downloads on R3, other than a couple of minutes per 'song'.

In Tune used to feature the Number 1 on Monday evening - no idea if it still does.

There might have been some sort of protest from someone because when the In Tune feature began, it was the same André Rieu disc for weeks on end.

[Sir Velo]

In Tune used to feature the Number 1 on Monday evening - no idea if it still does.

There might have been some sort of protest from someone because when the In Tune feature began, it was the same André Rieu disc for weeks on end.

Ironic since someone was bemoaning recently on Facebook the fact that Rieu had been cold shouldered by Radio 3.

[Domeyhead]

I have long wondered what they get up to when the music is playing. On the evidence of the last couple of mornings it certainly isn't reading their lines in anticipation of the next bit of talk. Yesterday she made a right dog's dinner of summarising the newspaper headlines; today Sinéad Morrisey's prize winning poetry collection was announced as "Parallex" before a hasty correction. Neither example life threatening, of course, but just completely unprofessional.

There was a time when the newspaper extracts were at least musically themed. Now there is some imbecile programme controller ably supported by tweeting superficial button jockeys who think it appropriate and necessary to intersperse periods of great music with some random horrors from the BBC's metropolitan world conscience (ie the Guardian) or its news editorial policy ( The Independent) before announcing in a brighter voice, "And now, Haydn......." It is nothing more than a mirthless manifestation of Chris Morris's savage satires on "News Facts" for no purpose or benfit and is like being hit in the face with a bucket of ice cold water for daring to relax into enjoyment of music or art for its own sake. These pointless irrelevant factoids both from the papers and even the entire Radio 3 news output do not inform, they do not educate, nor do they enlighten. They don't actually serve any purpose other than to fill an innocent listener with an uneasy feeling that the BBC actual disapproves of their daring to appreciate serious music at all.

[teamsaint]

There was a time when the newspaper extracts were at least musically themed. Now there is some imbecile programme controller ably supported by tweeting superficial button jockeys who think it appropriate and necessary to intersperse periods of great music with some random horrors from the BBC's metropolitan world conscience (ie the Guardian) or its news editorial policy ( The Independent) before announcing in a brighter voice, "And now, Haydn......." It is nothing more than a mirthless manifestation of Chris Morris's savage satires on "News Facts" for no purpose or benfit and is like being hit in the face with a bucket of ice cold water for daring to relax into enjoyment of music or art for its own sake. These pointless irrelevant factoids both from the papers and even the entire Radio 3 news output do not inform, they do not educate, nor do they enlighten. They don't actually serve any purpose other than to fill an innocent listener with an uneasy feeling that the BBC actual disapproves of their daring to appreciate serious music at all.

Oh they serve a purpose all right.
They keep news agendas bubbling along nicely, serving to keep us fearful and divided.
and the agendas are not set in fleet street, they are just the channels. The agendas are set much higher up.

Start your day with a (complete) Bach Cantata (of your own choosing), and make your world better step by step.

[Bax-of-Delights]

There was a time when the newspaper extracts were at least musically themed. Now there is some imbecile programme controller ably supported by tweeting superficial button jockeys who think it appropriate and necessary to intersperse periods of great music with some random horrors from the BBC's metropolitan world conscience (ie the Guardian) or its news editorial policy ( The Independent) before announcing in a brighter voice, "And now, Haydn......." It is nothing more than a mirthless manifestation of Chris Morris's savage satires on "News Facts" for no purpose or benfit and is like being hit in the face with a bucket of ice cold water for daring to relax into enjoyment of music or art for its own sake. These pointless irrelevant factoids both from the papers and even the entire Radio 3 news output do not inform, they do not educate, nor do they enlighten. They don't actually serve any purpose other than to fill an innocent listener with an uneasy feeling that the BBC actual disapproves of their daring to appreciate serious music at all.

The last few days I've taken to reading for 30 minutes or so before rising from the pit. As R3's Breakfast is primarily intended as a background to the nation's ablutions and feeding before leaving for work I have let it run on while concentrating on the written word. This morning however it had to be silenced as the blether became overwhelmingly intrusive. Ms Burton-Hill, now yclept "Clemmy" on a permanent basis it would appear, just can't stop wittering on about twittering, texting, emailing or reading out from The Guardian or the Independent (today's offering was how the CBI is launching a campaign to warn the populace about the dangers of leaving the EU which, given that the BBC's Media Action group receives EU money to espouse widening of the EU, would appear to be a little bit more than subliminal propagandising).

And has anyone noticed the over-use of the superlatives? Many of the performances/performers are "superb", "marvellous", "wonderful", "transcendental" and, for heaven's sake, "stonking".

[Domeyhead]

Oh yes Bax - all young BBC presenters are now trained to gush the adverb "incredibly" into whatever breathlessly exciting information they are imparting. It is no longer sufficient to use a simple adjective such as "interesting", "gifted", "talented", or "enjoyable" as on their own these mere grammatical tools just don't convey the exuberance - nay the incredible exuberance - of this world of superlatives in which these overexcited empty vessels dwell.
I may produce an incredible histogram of "Clemmy's" fantastic adverb counts on BBC Breakfast to show how incredibly fast the incredible word count rises to an amazing peak through the week.