R4 Feedback covers Radio 3 - again

[french frank]

I was interviewed again this morning for Feedback, mainly to do with the Breakfast programme. I'm sorry if I didn't manage too well, but:

1. I only got an email this morning and had to be in the Bristol studio before lunch

2. The presenter said that as no representative from the BBC could be there he would be putting questions on their behalf. I didn't have an opportunity to put the points I had prepared.

3. The presenter was apparently talking to someone called 'Roger' (on the phone?) just before he spoke to me and I heard him say: "Are you sure they're up, because that would be against the trend wouldn't it?'

4. When the interview began I was asked a question about Radio 3's listening figures which had gone up in the past year (I did manage to say that they had gone down first so weren't any higher than before).

5. I was then asked whether I listened to the Breakfast programme myself (Roger Wright knows I gave up listening to it a while back).

6. Roger Wright will get a reply in a separate programme, where he will be able to respond to my comments but I won't be able to respond to his.

Sorry if I didn't do very well ...

[cavatina]

Well, it does seem like you were blindsided in a bit of a set-up-- but considering what a tough game you've been talking about the new schedule lately, it's only natural to expect them to eventually play hardball back at you. You should have seen it coming.

Personally, I don't think you come across at all badly to the types of people who already sympathize, understand, and largely agree with you. It's just that given the way you present yourself, you're not likely to reach anyone who doesn't already "get it", which is why you end up being grossly mis-characterised and written off as an elitist fussbudget when that's nothing to do with your real focus and message.

The University of Bristol Centre for Public Engagement offers advice on where academics can get bespoke public relations training in communicating effectively with the media. What do you have to lose?

I was then asked whether I listened to the Breakfast programme myself

If I were you, I'd force myself to tune in for the whole programme at least once a week and take notes, purely as a public service exercise.

[vinteuil]

FF - how are your teeth? I'm sure grittin' ain't good for 'em....

[aka Calum Da Jazbo]

the hell with the ifs and buts FF just stick it to em as best you can manage .... greatly appreciate your efforts ...

[Nick Armstrong]

You should have seen it coming.

...

... given the way you present yourself ...

What do you have to lose?

If I were you....

So... not judgmental at all then... Unpleasant tone, cav, for one who floats along on a poetical cloud as I thought you did...

FF I've done some of those live / recorded interviews over the years, I always come out thinking it was terrible, whereas normally from the outside it comes across just fine.

Will listen with interest and gratitude at the trouble you take

[mercia]

jeez!! patronising

[Anna]

jeez!! patronising *****

Thank you mercia for posting on my behalf, I feared I would have put it a little more stridently than that!

[Nick Armstrong]

Thank you mercia for posting on my behalf, I feared I would have put it a little more stridently than that!

We all co-posted

[Serial_Apologist]

I was interviewed again this morning for Feedback, mainly to do with the Breakfast programme. I'm sorry if I didn't manage too well, but:

1. I only got an email this morning and had to be in the Bristol studio before lunch

2. The presenter said that as no representative from the BBC could be there he would be putting questions on their behalf. I didn't have an opportunity to put the points I had prepared.

3. The presenter was apparently talking to someone called 'Roger' (on the phone?) just before he spoke to me and I heard him say: "Are you sure they're up, because that would be against the trend wouldn't it?'

4. When the interview began I was asked a question about Radio 3's listening figures which had gone up in the past year (I did manage to say that they had gone down first so weren't any higher than before).

5. I was then asked whether I listened to the Breakfast programme myself (Roger Wright knows I gave up listening to it a while back).

6. Roger Wright will get a reply in a separate programme, where he will be able to respond to my comments but I won't be able to respond to his.

Sorry if I didn't do very well ...

Is the studio at Bristol still the rabbit warren of underground passageways with in numerable card-encoded entrances it was when I was interviewed there back in around 1990? (To keep the revolutionaries out, as a mate of mine put it). With the nearest loo far away? That would be enough to put one off for starters - and in my case definitely was!

Broadcasting House was a doddle, by comparison!

S-A

[cavatina]

Do you really think the best way to address carefully-worded constructive criticism is for everyone to reply en masse with a flurry of irrelevant personal attacks? Is that really all you have to offer?

Talk about the issues or save your breath.

[mangerton]

FF, I'd like to add my thanks to the others'. I shall listen with interest, and I'm sure it will be better than you think, and a lot better than the rest of us could do.

And do please ignore any transatlantic nonsense.

[vinteuil]

Do you really think the best way to address carefully-worded constructive criticism is for everyone to reply en masse with a flurry of irrelevant personal attacks? Is that really all you have to offer?

Talk about the issues or save your breath.

cavatina - perhaps you are not aware how offensive to a British reader some of your patronising comments appear. From your original post here -

You should have seen it coming...

Personally, I don't think you come across at all badly ....

The University of Bristol Centre for Public Engagement offers advice on where academics can get bespoke public relations training in communicating effectively with the media...

If I were you, I'd force myself to tune in for the whole programme at least once a week and take notes, purely as a public service exercise....

Perhaps in New York this is plain speaking. Here, it is plain offensive.

[mangerton]

(Much patronising drivel snipped)

cavatina, you're very fond of posting links to things that you think we should look at. Here's one for you for a change.

http://www.amazon.co.uk/How-Win-Friends-Influence-People/dp/0091906814

Enjoy!!

[Anna]

Do you really think the best way to address carefully-worded constructive criticism is for everyone to reply en masse with a flurry of irrelevant personal attacks? Is that really all you have to offer?

Sorry? Did someone say personal attacks?

It's just that given the way you present yourself, you're not likely to reach anyone who doesn't already "get it", which is why you end up being grossly mis-characterised and written off as an elitist fussbudget

[Serial_Apologist]

Anger management will doubtless again be the explanation. We could all do with a dab of that. But it's the actual content of what is said that really offends, not the manner of its delivery.