3beebies aka Breakfast

[mercia]

It should be specialist and provided by experts, its aim to deepen listeners' knowledge of music, not simply to entertain.

so, a sort of Open University approach - that sounds quite a luxury for a whole radio station to be devoted to.
like, say, giving over the whole of BBC2 to university-level science programmes.

this Utopia sounds comparatively expensive to me (assuming all your specialist experts would want paying) - would you envisage any funding problems? - bearing in mind we are dependent on the goodwill of the ignorant masses, with no interest in classical music (beyond Nessun Dorma etc.), continuing to pay their licence fees.

[doversoul1]

aeolium

then this suggests the R3 management are quite happy for the habitual listeners to switch off for that period.

Not just suggesting but that is what they are actually doing and that is what we (those who have been shouting on this forum) are trying to get through to anybody in Radio3 or BBC who might still have some sense left that this is not what Radir3 should be doing.

then this suggests the R3 management are quite happy for the habitual listeners to switch off for that period.

Ditto. The more we leave, the happier they will be (more room for ‘new' audience)

mercia

this Utopia sounds comparatively expensive to me (assuming all your specialist experts would want paying) - do you envisage a funding problem? - bearing in mind we are dependent on the goodwill of the ignorant masses, with no interest in classical music (beyond Nessun Dorma etc.), continuing to pay their licence fees.

I expect almost all regular Radio3 presenters and the regular reviewers on CD Review (specialists) are paid nothing like those ‘guest’ presenters (not specialists in talking about classical music). Also I’d say Radio One and Two plus BBC TV stations are dependent on my good will although I don’t use their services.

Early Music Show is a very good example of how a classical music programme can be informative as well as entertaining without being remotely like academic exercise. It is perfectly ‘accessible’ to those who have little knowledge of the music (I was one of those not so long ago) but it manages to provide music that is interesting enough to well informed listeners (see the posts on the EMS board). Also TTN. The information given there is just the right amount for the kind of programme that TNN is.

But I do agree with you. The Four Seasons is too familiar to be worth played on Radio3 is a dodgy argument.

[barber olly]

would you be able to give the complete Daphnis your full attention if you were getting ready for work, feeding the cat/kids/chickens, running for the train etc. etc. ?

according to RW, the 6:30 - 9am slot is for people on the move

Maybe not but I'd rather wake up to that than PT's witterings. I think on these boards we know RW is not right about everything. Anyway if you want music on the move and shorter pieces try Classic FM, I've heard iot fits that bill quite well!

[aeolium]

The Four Seasons is too familiar to be worth played on Radio3 is a dodgy argument.

That isn't my argument, doversoul. It is that the playing of short popular pieces, or extracts from longer popular pieces repeatedly on R3 is a problem. The Four Seasons was simply one example (although it's usually just one Season that is played in any one programme) - there are plenty of others, and I'm sure Suffolkcoastal has the detailed figures to support the case. The argument is also that that sort of programming not only apes the programming of CFM - and therefore does not offer a valuable public service that the market does not provide - but alienates those listeners to R3 who want something more demanding (something which you agree seems to be happening).

[Don Petter]

It occurs to me that these people 'on the move' who could only hear short parts of Daphnis would be no worse off than they are now with the short items being offered, while those who were in a position to listen for a longer period would gain. So an advantageous change all round?

[Norfolk Born]

"...happy for the habitual listeners to switch off for that period" ...equally happy if they don't bother to switch back after 'that period' has ended?

[aka Calum Da Jazbo]

there is a competence issue in all this .... the current cadre of staff are not very good at the accessible personality led stuff, and R3 as a popular classics channel is naff; lord knows there was debate about their competence as a serious channel .... since Squealer took charge the station has see sawed and crumbled over the last five or so years

when it comes to jazz NPR leaves them standing; i suspect many other EU stations do the same these days across the spectrum of "serious" music [you know what i mean but i loathe the tag]

[doversoul1]

aeolium

(something which you agree seems to be happening).

You know, that was exactly what I was thinking how you might be thinking. In short, we agree entirely.

My point is/was you cannot win an argument all the while you are saying ‘it doesn’t suit me/I don’t like it.

[Lateralthinking1]

according to RW, the 6:30 - 9am slot is for people on the move

What morning radio then is for people who are not on the move? The modernizing is peculiarly old fashioned. It ignores almost every present day trend - more elderly people, more people who have retired earlier, more students in higher education, more unemployed people, more people doing night work, people taking more holidays, the advent of the 24 hour society (about 20 years ago).

Have they got figures to indicate the percentage of listeners to breakfast radio who aren't on the move? Is this guesswork?
How does he explain the popularity of breakfast television? Are viewers "on the move"? Are the people who read newspapers at the breakfast table "on the move"? How is Sunday's breakfast programme explained? Where is the evidence?

[mercia]

questions for Roge. I've retired from being his spokesperson. It didn't pay enough.

I think I'd find 24-hour "Discovering Music" a bit dry and dusty, but 24-hour "Composer of the Week" quite enjoyable. Mind you that's as much based on the presenters as the content. I find Mr Johnson's voice a bit difficult to listen to, it sounds rather strained (to me), and in need of lubrication.

[aeolium]

My point is/was you cannot win an argument all the while you are saying ‘it doesn’t suit me/I don’t like it.

And I agree with you entirely

On the other hand, if a substantial number of regular listeners to R3 are thinking that quite a lot of the schedule does not suit them, then it is an issue for RW. Also it is slightly surprising that the onus always seems to be on those arguing against R3's schedule changes to prove their case, rather than on the instigator of those changes to argue a case for them, something I can honestly say I have never heard him do.

[french frank]

Also it is slightly surprising that the onus always seems to be on those arguing against R3's schedule changes to prove their case, rather than on the instigator of those changes to argue a case for them, something I can honestly say I have never heard him do.

One question that was asked on Feedback was: 'Where did the demand come from for the (new style of) programming?' - one of many that received no answer, but it's crucial.

So audiences are moved over from other stations (mainly R2, R4 and CFM) to listen to R3. And it's indisputable that certain listeners (how many of them among the 200,000 who never listened to anything but R3?) will move away from R3 as a result.

It's in fact not at all surprising that the onus is put on the 'tiny, tiny minority' to argue their case because they can easily be depicted as too few to matter and that's the only argument management needs. When challenged by individuals to justify their decisions more rigorously, the response is:

1. After one month, write a letter of reply. Anyone above the rank of station controller delegates this job to a junior.

2. Letter to have two parts:

a) We note your [objection/complaint/dissatisfaction/] about [extract a few key words from the original letter].

b) Go on to give out irrelevant information and restate the intention to continue with disputed policy.

3. [Optional] Thank addressee for their interest in the BBC.

.............

[DracoM]

Well, I gritted my teeth and listened to a whole hour of Breakfast this a.m. And, blimey, it is unlikely to be an experience I will be repeating any time soon.

Endless, endless trails and/or music linked to personalities performing later today or later in the week or whenever, tweeted / texted messages, news titbits, totally ludicrous bits of spurious subjects for 'interaction'..........! And in the midst of this vortex of trivia, some fragments of music. Simply ghastly.

I now regularly listen to WQXR from New York early morning, and while there are promos for the station and trails for upcoming concerts, for the most part there are substantial WHOLE works regularly broadcast. News on the hour very briefly. At the moment they are doing a very hard sell to sign up to support / pledge to help run the station given that it is largely listener-supported, but while it can be tedious, that is very far from being their usual fare. The music is the entire raison d'etre for the station.

[aeolium]

It's in fact not at all surprising that the onus is put on the 'tiny, tiny minority' to argue their case because they can easily be depicted as too few to matter and that's the only argument management needs.

ff, I only commented that it was slightly surprising no argument had been forthcoming from the management because in most other areas of public policy it is usual to see the person responsible for policy changes providing a rationale for them (the council changing to fortnightly bin collections, library closures, the BBC's own cuts programme etc). Only on R3 apparently are the policy changes implemented as a fait accompli without any explicit justification.

[french frank]

aeolium, yes I take your point when a comparison is made with other public bodies, but the BBC has never been very good at (even) attempting to justify the policies of its unelected officials.

A listener forwarded to me yesterday the reply he received to his comments about Essential Classics, which amounted to, in his words, 'bugger off' [exact quotation].

Draco - just don't say you weren't warned