Latest RAJARs

[french frank]

IOn the other hand I’ve also made ones for 1p per viewer hour , it’s not a very helpful metric to be honest and it’s not really taken that seriously.

I agree it's not at all helpful, but it was my understanding that cost per user hour was still used in BBC "Value for Money" calculations, as is cost per broadcast hour, reach and "appreciation". When it comes to Radio 3's value for money metrics, the network is at a disadvantage. I used to have figures at my fingertips, but how do you compare a 2-3 hour Shakespeare play on Radio 3 (costing £25,000 per hour, listened to by 80,000 people) with The Archers on Radio 4 (cost £15,000 per hour, listened to by X million people)? The BBC does think that the services which are most 'used' are the best value for money.

[Ein Heldenleben]

I agree it's not at all helpful, but it was my understanding that cost per user hour was still used in BBC "Value for Money" calculations, as is cost per broadcast hour, reach and "appreciation". When it comes to Radio 3's value for money metrics, the network is at a disadvantage. I used to have figures at my fingertips, but how do you compare a 2-3 hour Shakespeare play on Radio 3 (costing £25,000 per hour, listened to by 80,000 people) with The Archers on Radio 4 (cost £15,000 per hour, listened to by X million people)? The BBC does think that the services which are most 'used' are the best value for money.

And that in a nutshell is why the people who make those decisions are so well paid. Actually they’re not.
I think you could probably make a 2 hour Shakespeare Radio drama for less than £25,000 but an opera relay could well be more.I don’t know because those sort of stats are kept quite quiet. TV drama (excluding soaps) pretty much starts at a million pounds an hour these days.

[french frank]

And that in a nutshell is why the people who make those decisions are so well paid. Actually they’re not.
I think you could probably make a 2 hour Shakespeare Radio drama for less than £25,000 but an opera relay could well be more.I don’t know because those sort of stats are kept quite quiet. TV drama (excluding soaps) pretty much starts at a million pounds an hour these days.

I found a 2009 Public Accounts Committee report which said: "Our analysis of drama productions shows that the median cost per hour of drama on Radio 3 is £23,965, 60% higher than that for Radio 4 (£14,969, the cost per hour of The Archers)." From memory I thought an R3 play cost on average about £50,000 in total. The Archers also comes under the heading of "drama".

https://publications.parliament.uk/p...85/9022505.htm (I don't think the discrepancy which they mention affects the main point).

[french frank]

Write-up in the Telegraph (no subscription needed with this link) on "How Britain fell out of love with classical-music radio". This is based on the latest Rajar figures. Some interesting points but much to disagree with on what is 'good' about R3. The editor of Gramophone says 'This Classical Life does very well' (does it?) and that 'There's plenty of erudite discussion on Andrew McGregor's Record Review (is there? Some, I'm sure, but 'plenty'?).

An anonymous former R3 producer says "The station has taken its core audience for granted for years" (hear hear) and even Ivan Hewett, who has been something of a defender of R3, says that 'people feel the network they grew up with has disappeared'.

I would say that the 'heavy' listeners - 'those who consistently tune in throughout the day' - are more 'resilient' precisely because they are less critical of what they're hearing as it's largely background listening anyway. Apart from the mention of the 'core audience' being neglected, they don't make the opposite point that an alternative audience is being relentlessly targeted (though, judging by the most recent figures, they aren't listening either); nor that so many of the new programmes contain little or no classical music (nor is it jazz or world - it's the Unclassified variety of contemporary deemed to appeal to a younger audience with no interest in Radio 3's 'remit' music).

But the conclusion is that the need for classical music radio is still there - station controllers need to find ways to cultivate the audience. But it's the dismal failure of station controllers to that which is the problem.

[cloughie]

Write-up in the Telegraph (no subscription needed with this link) on "How Britain fell out of love with classical-music radio". This is based on the latest Rajar figures. Some interesting points but much to disagree with on what is 'good' about R3. The editor of Gramophone says 'This Classical Life does very well' (does it?) and that 'There's plenty of erudite discussion on Andrew McGregor's Record Review (is there? Some, I'm sure, but 'plenty'?).

An anonymous former R3 producer says "The station has taken its core audience for granted for years" (hear hear) and even Ivan Hewett, who has been something of a defender of R3, says that 'people feel the network they grew up with has disappeared'.

I would say that the 'heavy' listeners - 'those who consistently tune in throughout the day' - are more 'resilient' precisely because they are less critical of what they're hearing as it's largely background listening anyway. Apart from the mention of the 'core audience' being neglected, they don't make the opposite point that an alternative audience is being relentlessly targeted (though, judging by the most recent figures, they aren't listening either); nor that so many of the new programmes contain little or no classical music (nor is it jazz or world - it's the Unclassified variety of contemporary deemed to appeal to a younger audience with no interest in Radio 3's 'remit' music).

But the conclusion is that the need for classical music radio is still there - station controllers need to find ways to cultivate the audience. But it's the dismal failure of station controllers to that which is the problem.

It seems to me that Britain has not fallen out with Classical music it has ( at least the old audience ) has fallen out with Radio 3. Through chasing ratings and a younger audience, this has happened in a way that has thrown away its unique selling points. This has happened also in Local radio which is now under threat of being cut with an unsubtle hatchet. Sharing programmes across the network means it is no longer local as it intends to do daily after 2pm. Again it lost its way by policies which have eroded the local nature - too much interference from the suits ‘up country’ on music policy ( dictation of playlists and removing 50s and 60s music from schedules) and the change to 4 hour stints with single presenters at the height of Covid which has become permanent.

[oddoneout]

Write-up in the Telegraph (no subscription needed with this link) on "How Britain fell out of love with classical-music radio". This is based on the latest Rajar figures. Some interesting points but much to disagree with on what is 'good' about R3. The editor of Gramophone says 'This Classical Life does very well' (does it?) and that 'There's plenty of erudite discussion on Andrew McGregor's Record Review (is there? Some, I'm sure, but 'plenty'?).

An anonymous former R3 producer says "The station has taken its core audience for granted for years" (hear hear) and even Ivan Hewett, who has been something of a defender of R3, says that 'people feel the network they grew up with has disappeared'.

I would say that the 'heavy' listeners - 'those who consistently tune in throughout the day' - are more 'resilient' precisely because they are less critical of what they're hearing as it's largely background listening anyway. Apart from the mention of the 'core audience' being neglected, they don't make the opposite point that an alternative audience is being relentlessly targeted (though, judging by the most recent figures, they aren't listening either); nor that so many of the new programmes contain little or no classical music (nor is it jazz or world - it's the Unclassified variety of contemporary deemed to appeal to a younger audience with no interest in Radio 3's 'remit' music).

But the conclusion is that the need for classical music radio is still there - station controllers need to find ways to cultivate the audience. But it's the dismal failure of station controllers to that which is the problem.

The comments by Deegan about the gender parity and non-white composers issue I would argue with. I don't think that the quotas are putting people off so much as the general deterioration in standard of the R3 output, and that music happens to be a casualty(possibly - I'm not altogether convinced that composers in those target driven groups come in for more dislike than others) of widespread dissatisfaction. Yes, certain names have been given more airtime than some feel is merited, but that's not from devoting large chunks of the evening concert output to those composers. In any case disagreement about the qualities of any given composer's work can arise across the board and have little if anything to do with diversity as far as I can see. Just look at some of the exchanges on this forum.
"Radio audiences hate change.And R3 audiences are more vocal than most". A couple of thoughts. 1.The kind of changes that are made are often not insignificant and may be made with no apparent or good reason as far as the audience is concerned. 2. Are R3 audiences more vocal - do they mount the kind of protest campaigns seen in response to changes on some other stations? Or does he mean more articulate?
"This Classical Lifedoes very well" That's a flabby meaningless statement. What does it do well? Attract a younger audience in significant numbers? Address a need not previously met on R3? Inform and engage the existing audience?

[Serial_Apologist]

We've reached a pretty pass when the one contributor to that Telegraph article I agree with for once is Norman Lebrecht!

[smittims]

Necessity acquaints us with strange bedfellows.

[french frank]

We've reached a pretty pass when the one contributor to that Telegraph article I agree with for once is Norman Lebrecht!

Yes, and I agree Odders - Deegan's comments are those of a "radio data analyst". Post hoc ergo propter hoc conclusions. For 20 years Radio3 has done whatever they thought they needed to do to tempt in people who were put off Radio 3 either because of its content or its style. So, change the content and change the style. If the latest figures are genuinely pointing in the direction R3 is heading (and one quarter's figures can be anomalous), they're ending up pleasing no one. Apart from with individual programmes.

Part of the problem, it seems to me, is that they are trying to attract the very audience which now has a large number of alternative sources for their musical preferences. Attracting them to radio by setting up as competition is surely a lost cause. [The title of the thread should probably be edited!]

[smittims]

A most succinct summary there , ff, and isn't that true of the BBC as a whole? I think they've wasted a lot of money trying to compete with commercial TV in 'sensational drama' when they'd be better doing things only they could do. That's how Radio 3 has been at its best.

[Serial_Apologist]

A most succinct summary there , ff, and isn't that true of the BBC as a whole? I think they've wasted a lot of money trying to compete with commercial TV in 'sensational drama' when they'd be better doing things only they could do. That's how Radio 3 has been at its best.

The giveaway, for me, is when journalists talk of the main attraction to subject choices to be covered is described as "good stories" - in actuality a cover for sensationalist interests concocted to divert the public's attention away from serious concerns - which are in any case misrepresented - and likewise for the arts.

[Old Grumpy]

The giveaway, for me, is when journalists talk of the main attraction to subject choices to be covered is described as "good stories" - in actuality a cover for sensationalist interests concocted to divert the public's attention away from serious concerns - which are in any case misrepresented - and likewise for the arts.

[hmvman]

Write-up in the Telegraph (no subscription needed with this link) on "How Britain fell out of love with classical-music radio". This is based on the latest Rajar figures. Some interesting points but much to disagree with on what is 'good' about R3. The editor of Gramophone says 'This Classical Life does very well' (does it?) and that 'There's plenty of erudite discussion on Andrew McGregor's Record Review (is there? Some, I'm sure, but 'plenty'?).

An anonymous former R3 producer says "The station has taken its core audience for granted for years" (hear hear) and even Ivan Hewett, who has been something of a defender of R3, says that 'people feel the network they grew up with has disappeared'.

I would say that the 'heavy' listeners - 'those who consistently tune in throughout the day' - are more 'resilient' precisely because they are less critical of what they're hearing as it's largely background listening anyway. Apart from the mention of the 'core audience' being neglected, they don't make the opposite point that an alternative audience is being relentlessly targeted (though, judging by the most recent figures, they aren't listening either); nor that so many of the new programmes contain little or no classical music (nor is it jazz or world - it's the Unclassified variety of contemporary deemed to appeal to a younger audience with no interest in Radio 3's 'remit' music).

But the conclusion is that the need for classical music radio is still there - station controllers need to find ways to cultivate the audience. But it's the dismal failure of station controllers to that which is the problem.

Slipped Disc has also picked up on this Telegraph article. One of the comments on the SD piece says that the RAJAR figures don't take into account listeners who use the Sounds app to catch-up with programmes later off-air. Is that true? I do quite a lot my R3 listening via Sounds.

[french frank]

SOne of the comments on the SD piece says that the RAJAR figures don't take into account listeners who use the Sounds app to catch-up with programmes later off-air. Is that true? I do quite a lot my R3 listening via Sounds.

Andrew has probably kept up with this. Rajar now includes internet listening on other devices rather than ordinary radios; and I know they used to publish the 'On Demand' requests. But if they don't include them, that will apply to all radio listening available on catch-up. If you go back to September 2018 (pre-Covid), total listening hours are similar (very slightly higher than Sept 2022), but the main difference is that BBC Radio hours were down last quarter, but commercial listening was up. BBC reach was down a rough 4% and commercial reach up a rough 3%.

If you take the reach in actual numbers, rather than percentages, R1 has dropped quite a bit but R2 only very marginally. I don't keep the figures for all the commercial stations, but I'd guess the drop in R1's figures were balanced by the increases in similar commercial stations, with R2 largely unaffected. R4/4Extra have seen a marked drop. The only direct competitors are R3 and CFM where both have fallen, R3 by almost 12% and CFM by 10% (E&OE ).

If you take the 'rising star' 6Music, that fell by only 2%, so one would still need to explain why R3 listeners were resorting to catch-up listening rather than linear (one might hazard a guess!).

[hmvman]

... so one would still need to explain why R3 listeners were resorting to catch-up listening rather than linear (one might hazard a guess!).

Indeed!

Thanks for the explanation, ff.