Originally posted by french frank
View Post
The Eternal Breakfast Debate in a New Place
Collapse
X
-
-
-
Originally posted by antongould View PostYes if the station moved in the direction desired by the Forum members their listening hours may well increase but I feel overall listening figures would be down.It isn't given us to know those rare moments when people are wide open and the lightest touch can wither or heal. A moment too late and we can never reach them any more in this world.
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by french frank View PostWhich poses another question : should the BBC start with a concept of what Radio 3 should be (and do), or do they start by thinking about how they can persuade more people to listen, and be prepared to lower standards in order to increase listening? Isn't this integrity v. cynicism?
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by french frank View PostWhich poses another question : should the BBC start with a concept of what Radio 3 should be (and do), or do they start by thinking about how they can persuade more people to listen, and be prepared to lower standards in order to increase listening? Isn't this integrity v. cynicism?
Comment
-
-
It really isn't impossible , or undesireable , to have a programme that includes a range of generally shorter works, with possibly some well chosen non classical works sympathetic to the general tone and style, a little listener interaction ( helps keep the numbers up and it actually isn't the crime of the century to want to phone in to your favourite station) , have some interesting snippets of arts and music news, at a time of day when an awful lot of people DO seem to like the radio on as a soundtrack to their morning routine or activities. And having it thoughtfully and professionally presented, with an eye to informing and educating, is also possible.
There are a lot of hours in the day for other styles of presentation of music, and if there are many people who both crave ,and don't have any other way of hearing hour long pieces of music at that time of day, then I would be surprised.
R3 presumably needs to have an access point for new listeners too. A popular time for listening, when attention spans are often understandably short, seems a good place to start.
But perhaps all that has already been said at some point in this thread.I will not be pushed, filed, stamped, indexed, briefed, debriefed or numbered. My life is my own.
I am not a number, I am a free man.
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by teamsaint View PostIt really isn't impossible , or undesireable , to have a programme that includes a range of generally shorter works, with possibly some well chosen non classical works sympathetic to the general tone and style, a little listener interaction ( helps keep the numbers up and it actually isn't the crime of the century to want to phone in to your favourite station) , have some interesting snippets of arts and music news, at a time of day when an awful lot of people DO seem to like the radio on as a soundtrack to their morning routine or activities. And having it thoughtfully and professionally presented, with an eye to informing and educating, is also possible.
There are a lot of hours in the day for other styles of presentation of music, and if there are many people who both crave ,and don't have any other way of hearing hour long pieces of music at that time of day, then I would be surprised.
R3 presumably needs to have an access point for new listeners too. A popular time for listening, when attention spans are often understandably short, seems a good place to start.
But perhaps all that has already been said at some point in this thread.
As it happens what is currently making me switch off throughout the day is the excessive trailer trash, and sadly, for whatever reason, the radio doesn't always get switched on again once that's happened as I don't have a remote control to make such censorship easy.
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by teamsaint View PostBut perhaps all that has already been said at some point in this thread.
The main argument is that the BBC should provide unique services, not provided elsewhere. Radio 3 provides a mish-mash (as described by teamsaint :-P) of programming presented elsewhere, mainly on CFM and Radio 2 and dismisses any suggestion that there is an audience which takes classical music more seriously.
Radio is not like television where people expect to channel-hop in search of the programmes they think will be enjoyable. Once Radio 3 becomes that kind of listening where you have to check up each day for a programme that sounds good, listeners will lose interest.
As Richard Osborne once lamented as regards changes to Radio 3: "Will an informed audience even exist in thirty years time?" Well, that was about 15 years ago and the answer to his question seems headed towards a No. Because if Radio 3 is not nurturing such an audience, no one else will. It does not need entry points for people who want 'generally shorter works, with … non classical works … a little listener interaction … snippets of arts and music news… a soundtrack to their morning routine." That's like opening up universities to six-year-olds. It's adopting the commercial mantra 'ratings by day, reputation by night', where you broadcast your popular programmes when everyone wants to listen and put anything serious on when no one wants to listen. If Radio 2 still had these kinds of programmes, Radio 3's entry points would be for those who wanted to know more, wanted more demanding listening. As it is, as other services focus more and more on light entertainment, Radio 3 has to take on more responsibility for the rock bottom basics.
Why isn't there a station to take the arts and music to a more demanding level? Or is this the same question as the one about degrees?It isn't given us to know those rare moments when people are wide open and the lightest touch can wither or heal. A moment too late and we can never reach them any more in this world.
Comment
-
-
I really don't see why an " accessible style" Breakfast time format precludes having the station also putting out a wealth of programmes that " take the arts and music to a more demanding level ".
Or, put another way , the accessible format of Breakfast should itself set high standards, in terms of researching the music played, quality of information given, sensitive links into other ( more demanding?) programming, and so on.I will not be pushed, filed, stamped, indexed, briefed, debriefed or numbered. My life is my own.
I am not a number, I am a free man.
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by teamsaint View PostI really don't see why an " accessible style" Breakfast time format precludes having the station also putting out a wealth of programmes that " take the arts and music to a more demanding level ".
Or, put another way , the accessible format of Breakfast should itself set high standards, in terms of researching the music played, quality of information given, sensitive links into other ( more demanding?) programming, and so on.
Comment
-
-
Seems to me that a good quality Breakfast format is more like running a university open day for interested 16/17 YO students than "opening up Universities to six year olds."
And personally speaking,as somebody who spends a lot of time learning about music, and listening to music that is new to me, I'd still welcome a mixed Breakfast time format along the lines I described, ( but to my mind of better quality than the current offering) , because it would work for me. And I suspect a lot of other people.I will not be pushed, filed, stamped, indexed, briefed, debriefed or numbered. My life is my own.
I am not a number, I am a free man.
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by teamsaint View PostIt really isn't impossible , or undesireable , to have a programme that includes a range of generally shorter works, with possibly some well chosen non classical works sympathetic to the general tone and style, a little listener interaction ( helps keep the numbers up and it actually isn't the crime of the century to want to phone in to your favourite station) , have some interesting snippets of arts and music news, at a time of day when an awful lot of people DO seem to like the radio on as a soundtrack to their morning routine or activities. And having it thoughtfully and professionally presented, with an eye to informing and educating, is also possible.
There are a lot of hours in the day for other styles of presentation of music, and if there are many people who both crave ,and don't have any other way of hearing hour long pieces of music at that time of day, then I would be surprised.
R3 presumably needs to have an access point for new listeners too. A popular time for listening, when attention spans are often understandably short, seems a good place to start.
But perhaps all that has already been said at some point in this thread.
Comment
-
-
<< As Richard Osborne once lamented as regards changes to Radio 3: "Will an informed audience even exist in thirty years time?" Well, that was about 15 years ago and the answer to his question seems headed towards a No. Because if Radio 3 is not nurturing such an audience, no one else will. It does not need entry points for people who want 'generally shorter works, with … non classical works … a little listener interaction … snippets of arts and music news… a soundtrack to their morning routine." / FF >>
Nail > hammer > bash.
Comment
-
-
Or R3 could just vote itself into oblivion.
It needs to nurture ALL of its actual or potential audience, ( not just those already at the" university") because most people/ fee payers couldn't care less about it.I will not be pushed, filed, stamped, indexed, briefed, debriefed or numbered. My life is my own.
I am not a number, I am a free man.
Comment
-
Comment