Latest RAJARs

[antongould]

Stop press: R3 has sickly RAJAR figures this quarter … again (1.908m, from Q-o-Q 1.933m, and Y-o-Y 2.062m). Percentage reach down from the magic 4% to 3% (I'd wondered whether 3.48% would be rounded up to 3.5%, to be rounded up again to the usual 4% - but RAJAR not having any of that nonsense).

Breakfast figures have held up pretty well (636k), and I'll assume Essential Classics has also continued to do well so … since the overall reach has been struggling to reach 2 million for four quarters in a row, what part of the day is losing the listeners? Is the solution to dumb down the rest of R3 to the level of the morning programmes?

[Thought on a use of the term Dumbing Down: it marks the relationship between the content and the supposed audience e.g. popular music could be 'dumbing down' if the audience is expecting classical music, but not if it's on a popular music station. A programme for 10-year-olds is 'dumbing down' if the expected audience consists of adult classical music lovers, but not if the audience is 10-year-olds.]

Is this not a very brave assumption about EC ..... ????

[Old Grumpy]

[Thought on a use of the term Dumbing Down: ]

Is it not also possibly offensive to those who are unable to speak?

I am no card carrying political correctionist, but I would have thought use of this term was frowned on in some quarters

OG

[Lat-Literal]

Stop press: R3 has sickly RAJAR figures this quarter … again (1.908m, from Q-o-Q 1.933m, and Y-o-Y 2.062m). Percentage reach down from the magic 4% to 3% (I'd wondered whether 3.48% would be rounded up to 3.5%, to be rounded up again to the usual 4% - but RAJAR not having any of that nonsense).

Breakfast figures have held up pretty well (636k), and I'll assume Essential Classics has also continued to do well so … since the overall reach has been struggling to reach 2 million for four quarters in a row, what part of the day is losing the listeners? Is the solution to dumb down the rest of R3 to the level of the morning programmes?

[Thought on a use of the term Dumbing Down: it marks the relationship between the content and the supposed audience e.g. popular music could be 'dumbing down' if the audience is expecting classical music, but not if it's on a popular music station. A programme for 10-year-olds is 'dumbing down' if the expected audience consists of adult classical music lovers, but not if the audience is 10-year-olds.]

This bucks the trend which is a drop away in this quarter from news programmes (hooray) with a noticeable decline even for the Today programme and a shift towards music (although that is likely to be musak). The newsroom people - their buildings are surely now enough to fill at least two London postcodes - said that it wasn't a case of like with like as last year there was election excitement. I am not making this up. You might like to check. But we know why Breakfast is doing better than the rest of Radio 3. It is usually on at breakfast time.

[teamsaint]

This bucks the trend which is a drop away in this quarter from news programmes (hooray) with a noticeable decline even for the Today programme and a shift towards music (although that is likely to be musak). The newsroom people - their buildings are surely now enough to fill at least two London postcodes - said that it wasn't a case of like with like as last year there was election excitement. I am not making this up. You might like to check. But we know why Breakfast is doing better than the rest of Radio 3. It is usually on at breakfast time.

Depends what time you have your Breakfast.
Purely guesswork, based on the very non representative forum discussion, but I would guess that evening concerts might be losing audience.

[french frank]

Is this not a very brave assumption about EC ..... ????

I don't think so. The last R3 operative who mentioned the figures (last quarter) - not Lord S - said the programme had had pretty well its highest ever figure, around 800,000. This suggests that R3 is attracting the kind of listener who enjoys Essential Classics (and Breakfast), so what happens to those who don't like that kind of R3 (hint - overall reach is certainly not rising, so new listeners coming means old listeners leaving: one cannot assume a considerably higher mortality rate among R3 listeners than the population as a whole, unless R3 is the cause) ?

[french frank]

Is it not also possibly offensive to those who are unable to speak?

It could be - which I was at some pains to give an explanation as to what 'people' mean by the term. I cannot be held responsible for its widespread use, any more than I am responsible for people saying 'alternate' when they mean 'alternative'. These terms tend to alter with time: I understand 'deaf' is now preferred to 'hearing-impaired', in my young day 'black' was certainly not acceptable for 'coloured people'.

The dictionary definition is: 'to make more simple or less intellectually demanding, especially in order to appeal to a wider audience'. I suppose the idea that something one really enjoys has been made simpler and less intellectually demanding with oneself in mind could also offend. One can't legislate for what people take offence at, though I do tend to put quotes around this term to indicate it would not be my first choice …

[french frank]

This bucks the trend which is a drop away in this quarter from news programmes (hooray) with a noticeable decline even for the Today programme and a shift towards music (although that is likely to be musak). The newsroom people - their buildings are surely now enough to fill at least two London postcodes - said that it wasn't a case of like with like as last year there was election excitement. I am not making this up. You might like to check. But we know why Breakfast is doing better than the rest of Radio 3. It is usually on at breakfast time.

Several points there I would take issue with. These reports usually only take a short term view of the latest figures. The Today programme had its lowest reach for two years, but the latest figure is pretty much what it was for quite a long time before that. And it is an accepted fact that at some times people are more anxious to tune in to the news than at others. It's quite acceptable (to me, anyway) to suggest that the 'news aspect' of people's lives has calmed down since … 2016.

Breakfast is not 'better' than the rest of R3. Essential Classics has been having more listeners, though partly because, being a 3-hour programme, its listening figures are the aggregate number from 9am until midday. And R3 has a smaller percentage of listeners who are rushing off to work first thing and switching off at 8.30 or so.

This quarter is also the one where the recalculated population figures are used. So a programme which had a stable 100k reach for the two consecutive quarters will show a slight drop in Q2 because the reach calculation is based on the higher population figure.

[Old Grumpy]

It could be - which I was at some pains to give an explanation as to what 'people' mean by the term. I cannot be held responsible for its widespread use, any more than I am responsible for people saying 'alternate' when they mean 'alternative'. These terms tend to alter with time: I understand 'deaf' is now preferred to 'hearing-impaired', in my young day 'black' was certainly not acceptable for 'coloured people'.

The dictionary definition is: 'to make more simple or less intellectually demanding, especially in order to appeal to a wider audience'. I suppose the idea that something one really enjoys has been made simpler and less intellectually demanding with oneself in mind could also offend. One can't legislate for what people take offence at, though I do tend to put quotes around this term to indicate it would not be my first choice …

Thank you for taking the trouble to respond, FF. I wasn't getting at you. I was interested to see what responses there would be to my proposition. The term is often used both on and away from these boards, especially in the context of Radio 3 and, indeed, the BBC in general.

OG

[oddoneout]

I don't think so. The last R3 operative who mentioned the figures (last quarter) - not Lord S - said the programme had had pretty well its highest ever figure, around 800,000. This suggests that R3 is attracting the kind of listener who enjoys Essential Classics (and Breakfast), so what happens to those who don't like that kind of R3 (hint - overall reach is certainly not rising, so new listeners coming means old listeners leaving: one cannot assume a considerably higher mortality rate among R3 listeners than the population as a whole, unless R3 is the cause) ?

This has been touched on elsewhere I think in connection with the Breakfast/EC threads, but if established R3 listeners are switching off or choosing not to listen to the morning schedule is it possible that they are not switching back on at other times, or at least not to the same extent, having found alternatives? Once habits are broken or are replaced with others, the effects can spread beyond the original cause of the change.

[french frank]

but if established R3 listeners are switching off or choosing not to listen to the morning schedule is it possible that they are not switching back on at other times,

It is possible with one person I know … R3 was my last radio bolthole, and when I felt it had ceased to cater for me after 20 years, I turned my radio to the wall and … As you suggested, the routine was broken. But I am only one person, after all

[oddoneout]

It is possible with one person I know … R3 was my last radio bolthole, and when I felt it had ceased to cater for me after 20 years, I turned my radio to the wall and … As you suggested, the routine was broken. But I am only one person, after all

One person but not necessarily the only....?

[LMcD]

I've recently returned to 'Breakfast' on Radio 3, having tired of 'Today's Metrocentric obsession with the Westminster village. I have no problem with a wide variety of short musical items at that time of day, and enjoy Petroc's style of presentation, but by 0900, if I'm at home, I'm ready for something a bit more substantial and possibly challenging.
I will sometimes listen to CoTW and the Lunchtime Concert, and often tune in after the evening concert has finished to see what hidden delights have been inserted into the schedule to take us up to 2200. And that's about it, really.

[french frank]

One person but not necessarily the only....?

No. Even just one person confirms the possibility of your hypothesis being correct. And of course, it's not a question of how many people now listen to Breakfast/EC, but how many used to listen in the mornings and now don't listen to R3 at all.

[DracoM]

And somehow I'd take a bet that THOSE figures never get published!

[oddoneout]

No. Even just one person confirms the possibility of your hypothesis being correct. And of course, it's not a question of how many people now listen to Breakfast/EC, but how many used to listen in the mornings and now don't listen to R3 at all.

I think there is a further complication in that even without the effect of the morning schedule on the existing audience there has been a drift away from R3 as alternative sources of music have become easily and widely available. Those with particular musical interests can get their fix as and when they want, without the constraints of R3 schedules, and content decisions. I don't believe this is a straightforward demographic or age related issue either, or if it is then it's the other way round from what popular perception would suggest?
The BBC has a problem whatever the causes it seems to me.