R4 Feedback covers Radio 3 - again

[french frank]

Well, what a disappointment that the segment only stretched to about 3 minutes in total. However, he said R. Wright would be in the studio in a few weeks time to answer any questions (and questions were invited) so it's obvious the plan has to be to email/write to Feedback with the questions we want answering and if enough people do that (concentrating on just two or three issues) then RW surely has to give some concrete answers?

I think we've learned something since we first decided to approach RW with grievances in 2002. As station strategy has been turned on its head since then, the grievances have changed too.

I would encourage people to listen to the Feedback programme and write in for the next programme, but would advise :

- against any sort of personality attacks - of any sort

- a separation between your own personal tastes and what you think detracts from Radio 3's core mission

- beware of the expression 'high quality': everything the BBC does is 'high quality' but that doesn't make all of it appropriate for R3

e.g.

populist gimmicks (Breakfast) - polls, charts, phone-ins, chat; single movements, few pieces lasting longer than 10 minutes &c., impression that you're listening to too much speech and that it's not relevant

too large a slice of the schedule aimed at attracting new listeners.

the replacement of expert/technical discussion of music by personal reactions (presenters, guests, listeners), memories, anecdotes; too many 'guests', too few experts

repetition of familiar pieces e.g. Dvorak's Slavonic Dances

jazz listeners might like to put in their complaints about rescheduling

Any other ideas?

[Paul Sherratt]

Frankly I don't believe for a minute this survey stuff where people say that they don't listen because R3 is 'intimidating'
Do they prefer being patronised or do they get so much of THAT from other stations that they don't know the difference anymore.
Pathetic !


PS

ff, looks like they've used you as a promo tool for the next one.

[french frank]

Hello Wallace

Good to see you. Please stay around and add your views to the debate.

ff, looks like they've used you as a promo tool for the next one.

I'll ask if they'll let me be in the main show too!

[Serial_Apologist]

[QUOTE=Ofcachap;84286]

Remember:
ROGER IS (W)RIGHT ... ROGER IS RIGHT ... ROGER IS ALWAYS RIGHT ... (and the clocks are just starting to strike thirteen).

Well, he's having to meet demographics to justify licensepayer input, innee? People are so UNCIVIL when they talk to him, aren't they? If you go to special schools that teach you how to talk to important people, which you really should do, them being important and that, you might just get a chance to get your point across. Or think you will. Don't kid yourselves, 'cos he'll always outwit you, don't you doubt it... and another thing: I just find it sooooooo SEXY, him being so smart and havin' all that power and that! I mean, if I was there I'd do all I could to speak to him, but he always makes me freeze - all that power, you know, it goes to the head... not to mention other places! (Nod nod! wink wink!). He really knows every note in the score you know - if you get my meaning - and I'm sure his organ in the Albert Hall is what must make the floor vibrate, giving us girls all those thrills.

Don't get me wrong - I'm sure if you did a refresher course on business-speak, with a government grant - oh, don't they do those any more? Sorree! - I'm sure you could learn to speak their language. It's spoken worldwide, you know - you really should muck up on your communication skills, ditch that frumpy look - it was my passport into all kinds of places you wouldn't want to know about!

But hey ho - what's the use me talking? You've all made up your minds anyway, and you'll never change things unless you learn how to compromise, like I have.

Byeeee! See y'all next year!

[Paul Sherratt]

But Serial, Roger isn't the boss !
The boss is that forty something former UK marketing manager for Pepsi Cola.
With sod all knowledge of public service (or indeed any ) broadcasting.

[Andrew Slater]

Congratulations, FF

An excellent start to bring in more comments. It's a pity that both questions weren't put, but the other one can be asked later ....

[Serial_Apologist]

But Serial, Roger isn't the boss !

OOOh - got the wrong bloke, did I? Deary me - me getting all worked up about him, too. Where did I put that BBC management structure chart, now...

[Paul Sherratt]

>>Where did I put that BBC management structure chart

The re-cycling bin* ?


* aka BBC4

[Serial_Apologist]

>>Where did I put that BBC management structure chart

The re-cycling bin* ?


* aka BBC4

[french frank]

Any chance we could stick to the topic?

[Anna]

I've been having a look at the R3 FaceBook page about the Breakfast programme, lots of adverse comments, but of course no feedback, just pleas for emails, tweets and txts from Petroc but there is a bit of a plug for Martin Handley tomorrow and how we will learn what The Bartered Bride means to one particular listener. Can hardly wait <bated breath emoticon> I will also over the weekend compose a letter to feedback.

[Richard Tarleton]

Any chance we could stick to the topic?

I've just read through this thread, then listened to Feedback, ff. I think you did excellently. Your payoff question for RW was worthy of Simon Jenkins on a different subject the other day, if you don't mind the comparison - pithy, direct and challenging

I've been doing radio and television interviews related to my line of work for well over 30 years. I have not had cavatina-style media training, but have learnt to keep it short (as you did), and to ignore the question where necessary and to say what I needed to say (which is what politicians are trained to do). Of course, this only works in the circumstances of a live interview - agree to a pre-recorded one and they can edit you to ribbons. Maybe my only advice would be to stick to the likes of "Today" and PM (if given the opportunity!)

[Osborn]

#80 Serial_Apologina

[doversoul1]

"Shouldn't you be fighting Radio 3's corner to revert it to a serious minority station (with a varied content), pursuing depth rather than breadth, instead of yet another 'distinctive' popular appeal station like Classic FM?"

I think we should include this (the chopped question), or is expression like ‘serious minority station’ problematic?

Incidentally, I thought it was very sharp of you, ff, to point out that we weren’t simply reacting to changes, as the change had been going for four years.

[tony yyy]

I thought ff was excellent on Feedback and made her points perfectly. Personally, I think she'd be quite capable of holding her own against Roger Wright, who's been so unimpressive in the past, but that shouldn't be necessary. The whole point of Feedback is for Roger Bolton to gather listener's views and present them on their behalf. It shouldn't be about who's better at presenting themselves.