The Eternal Breakfast Debate in a New Place

[antongould]

I quite enjoy this programme. Sets me up for the day. I have had a few requests put in as well, eg handel's Chaconne in G and john Gardner's Tomorrow shall be my dancing Day!

Well said/done bbm I say ...... runs for cover .....

[Eine Alpensinfonie]

I suppose people wanting to hear their names read out on the radio is the television equivalent of standing behind an outside broadcast being made and waving to the camera!

[Eine Alpensinfonie]

I quite enjoy this programme. Sets me up for the day.

I enjoyed the latest Beano annual. but I wouldn't recommend it for Radio 3.

[french frank]

No one has ever disputed that there is an audience for this type of programme (i.e. there will be people who will enjoy it). That isn't the issue. The point is, Is it arguably 'worthy' of Radio 3, or has it just been deliberately, cynically, introduced to give 19 hours of programming attempting to attract non-Radio 3 listeners?

I just don't know the answer to that

[antongould]

No one has ever disputed that there is an audience for this type of programme (i.e. there will be people who will enjoy it). That isn't the issue. The point is, Is it arguably 'worthy' of Radio 3, or has it just been deliberately, cynically, introduced to give 19 hours of programming attempting to attract non-Radio 3 listeners?

I just don't know the answer to that

I don't know either but I have a suspicion, nothing more, that it is the type of Breakfast offering the majority of R3's potential audience want ......

[gurnemanz]

No one has ever disputed that there is an audience for this type of programme (i.e. there will be people who will enjoy it). That isn't the issue. The point is, Is it arguably 'worthy' of Radio 3, or has it just been deliberately, cynically, introduced to give 19 hours of programming attempting to attract non-Radio 3 listeners?

I just don't know the answer to that

They might think it's OK for them to take this line because there are plenty of other sources available nowadays (internet radio) for those who don't want that style of presentation, but it is hardly fair on those who don't have access to internet stations (which includes car drivers). The only other British over the air classical station, CFM, is not a genuine alternative because its style is similar to morning R3.
To be fair to all they would need two stations - one offering the present morning Radio-3-lite type of schedule and one offering the music-only "Through the Night" style, but through the day. They won't do this, of course.

[BBMmk2]

No one has ever disputed that there is an audience for this type of programme (i.e. there will be people who will enjoy it). That isn't the issue. The point is, Is it arguably 'worthy' of Radio 3, or has it just been deliberately, cynically, introduced to give 19 hours of programming attempting to attract non-Radio 3 listeners?

I just don't know the answer to that

Probably a bit of both, I would say!

[french frank]

I don't know either but I have a suspicion, nothing more, that it is the type of Breakfast offering the majority of R3's potential audience want ......

Which prompts the response: Yes, it's the type of offering the potential audience wants, assuming the potential audience wants this type of programme.

Given that 91% of the 15+ population listens to the radio at present; and that breakfast programmes are the ones which reach the largest number of those listeners, what programmes are the 'potential audience' listening to at present, and why would they prefer Radio 3 with CFM-style presentation to their current choice of station? And what about the present audience (or recently present)?

[Old Grumpy]

I don't know either but I have a suspicion, nothing more, that it is the type of Breakfast offering the majority of R3's potential audience want ......

It may be what they want, but is it what they need?

OG

P.S.

It's certainly what I need when driving to work, but I must admit I do not listen much on other days.

[Serial_Apologist]

Which prompts the response: Yes, it's the type of offering the potential audience wants, assuming the potential audience wants this type of programme.

Given that 91% of the 15+ population listens to the radio at present; and that breakfast programmes are the ones which reach the largest number of those listeners, what programmes are the 'potential audience' listening to at present, and why would they prefer Radio 3 with CFM-style presentation to their current choice of station? And what about the present audience (or recently present)?

I would have thought the "potential audience" to be defined as those seen as material for manipulation to desired ends irrespective of quality, as many of us traditional R3 fans would define quality.

[french frank]

It's certainly what I need when driving to work, but I must admit I do not listen much on other days.

Which sums it up very nicely: should Radio 3 be providing something more in its classical programming than what listeners 'need when driving to work'?

I would have thought the "potential audience" to be defined as those seen as material for manipulation to desired ends irrespective of quality, as many of us traditional R3 fans would define quality.

Far be it from me …

Self-evidently there is a much larger audience for a 'music to drive to', 'music to cook to', 'music to do the ironing to', and we may well be doing one or none of those things as we listen. But should Radio 3 work on the assumption that content and presentation must be modified to take into account the fact that people are likely to be distracted at any moment, or only half concentrating some of the time, or only wanting a background wall of music? Or should they assume they still have to aim at those listeners (even if the minority) who have high critical standards, are hoping to hear something new and interesting, want to learn something worth knowing about the music played; and who don't want the trivialisation which results from content which is of very little interest to anyone but the contributors?

[antongould]

Which prompts the response: Yes, it's the type of offering the potential audience wants, assuming the potential audience wants this type of programme.

Given that 91% of the 15+ population listens to the radio at present; and that breakfast programmes are the ones which reach the largest number of those listeners, what programmes are the 'potential audience' listening to at present, and why would they prefer Radio 3 with CFM-style presentation to their current choice of station? And what about the present audience (or recently present)?

By potential audience I mean those who currently listen to R3 and/or CFM plus those who are thinking of doing so ...

[french frank]

By potential audience I mean those who currently listen to R3 and/or CFM plus those who are thinking of doing so ...

If that 'potential audience' wants what is currently being offered to them, what is it about the members of this forum that makes you and Bbm the rare ones who actually like it - or at least find little to complain about? In other respects, members seem to cover a fairly wide range: why should so many here want more depth, quality, expertise and less 'light entertainment'?

[Sir Velo]

It may be what they want, but is it what they need?

OG

P.S.

It's certainly what I need when driving to work, but I must admit I do not listen much on other days.

And if you heard a full Mozart piano concerto or Haydn symphony uninterrupted would that totally ruin your journey?

[Serial_Apologist]

By potential audience I mean those who currently listen to R3 and/or CFM plus those who are thinking of doing so ...

The latter (among hypothetical others we're not informed about), rather than the former, surely? If current listeners are potential listeners they can't by definition very well be potential listeners, can they?