RAJAR Q1 2016 - 3-year high for Radio 3

[antongould]

...........As ever, E&OE as I'm doing the calculations on the hoof

As long as it's not Scotty's hoof it should be fine ......

[Sir Velo]

No, because data was collected in a different way so figures aren't comparable. Back in the days when Test Match Special was on R3, and other 'non-R3' things, the reach was 3 million. for example.

To compare with all the comparable Quarter 1 figures (18 years from Q1 1999)) this quarter was 2.2% above the average and 1.2% above the median.
Memory does not serve in this case. Q1 in 2013 was very good (2.163m). Otherwise (see my figures above) this quarter's figures would have looked better (best for 5 years rather than 3).

This is not a dramatic improvement, but it still looks a significant achievement.

As ever, E&OE as I'm doing the calculations on the hoof

mmm..I'm not quite sure what point you're making. Are listening figures the sole criterion for judging radio quality? You seem to be implying that if a slightly larger tiny minority than usual listens to R3 then this is a clear sign that the station has changed for the better, rather than just a blip in the overall trend. As has been remarked before, the sampling methodology contains several manifest failings that mean a swing of 2-3% could just as easily have gone the other way. I take a pinch of salt with anything which requires a "diary" to be kept as a reliable source of evidence!

I think we should all be a bit careful about handing out the plaudits to Alan Davey at this stage. There's still a long way to go.

[french frank]

Another comparison would be the Quarter 1 figures since 2007 which (in my view) was the real lurch downwards with the beginning of Breakfast - and with a further lurch in 2011.

This quarter is up 4.1% on the Quarter 1 average (10 years) since 2007; and up 3.0% on the median. Apart from agreeing with aeolium's quite different points, it wouldn't be fair to expect listening figures to increase in a couple of years to reach what they had been 20 years ago: increases don't work like that. Listeners return - or arrive - gradually. What is another interesting figure (I haven't worked out comparisons here) is the listening hours which show that those who are already listening are tuning in for longer: that is something that can start happening more quickly when schedule/policy changes take place.

All this said, it's not a case for euphoria. One thing that's really annoying about the way the BBC (especially) and the press report RAJAR news, is this kind of statement:

"[Radio 3's] audience is now 2.12 million listeners…" No, it isn't. It was 2.12 million last quarter, but we are now well into Quarter 2 and it may fall/rise this quarter or, more appropriately, by Quarter 1 next year. The RAJAR figures are valuable for indicating trends over longer periods, not isolated quarters.

[DracoM]

[Bryn]

I don't know whether or not this is a true reflection of the situation, but I seem to have been noticing far more promotion of Radio 3 on BBC television of late. Could this, perhaps, be bearing fruit?

[Serial_Apologist]

I don't know whether or not this is a true reflection of the situation, but I seem to have been noticing far more promotion of Radio 3 on BBC television of late. Could this, perhaps, be bearing fruit?

They had a blitz of tacky advertising for the proms last year, didn't they. I really can't bear the latest one, which ends by citing a recorded disco version of a famous classical work as if to justify its (and Radio 3's) prestige. All very ironic. Not.

[EdgeleyRob]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-36320673

Fantastic,fantastic,incredible,fantastic.

[Quarky]

I don't know whether or not this is a true reflection of the situation, but I seem to have been noticing far more promotion of Radio 3 on BBC television of late. Could this, perhaps, be bearing fruit?

Having had some exposure to marketing techniques recently, that may well be so. However that is taking nothing away from Radio 3 management. At least they may have been able to impress their peers in Television.

[french frank]

Having had some exposure to marketing techniques recently, that may well be so. However that is taking nothing away from Radio 3 management. At least they may have been able to impress their peers in Television.

What is interesting (regardless of how the current performance is assessed) is that the hierarchy is now lining up to defend Radio 3 against the detractors who point to small audiences, 'unpopularity', 'waste of licence fee payers' money' and so on. Though I'm not certain it's not just lip service.

If they are doing something more positive across the BBC to boost Radio 3 it's one good sign. But they still need to do a lot more to BUILD an audience for cultural programmes, the arts, classical music given the scale of the organisation. They do that by giving people something to sample on mainstream services. Regular televised recitals, for example. Give the New Generation Artists coverage beyond Radio 3. Grab the new Young Musician and give him some experience - while he's in the news and casual viewers will be interested to hear him again. Television is certainly where the new audience is to be found.

[P. G. Tipps]

As long as it's not Scotty's hoof it should be fine ......

Scotty wisely hoofed off some time ago, but I blame the EU for all these decimal miscalculations, me.

However, I feel french frank may be correct to maintain that a 3.4% increase is 'significant' rather than 'dramatic'.

However I do agree that it certainly does help if some members first manage to get the relevant figures correct before arguing the toss on any 'significance'.

[antongould]

Scotty wisely hoofed off some time ago, but I blame the EU for all these decimal miscalculations, me.

However, I feel french frank may be correct to maintain that a 3.4% increase is 'significant' rather than 'dramatic'.

However I do agree that it certainly does help if some members first manage to get the relevant figures correct before arguing the toss on any 'significance'.

Far be it from me to debate the significance, but I do feel we have possibly a swallow but definitely not a summer. I think Breakfast has improved but agree with whoever said the next area of improvement has to be the 9 to 12 slot. Breakfast has a few fans hereabouts has Essential Classics any?
As to ff's view on where the new audience is to come from - I feel other radio stations and the web/social media are better seams to mine than television .....

[Lat-Literal]

While television was mainly being discussed in the White Paper, the stated need for the BBC to be more distinctive must surely work in R3's favour. As it has already taken tentative steps towards being something other than CFM's rival, increased figures in this quarter are a second bit of good news. It is too soon to say whether this statistically this is a trend. However, contrary to popular perception, becoming distinctive and building an audience are not necessarily incompatible.

[french frank]

As to ff's view on where the new audience is to come from - I feel other radio stations and the web/social media are better seams to mine than television .....

My point would be that peak viewing is during the evening, peak listening is during the morning. As for radio, Radio 2 is thought to be not distinctive enough. For me, the aim should be to get Radio 2 to help build the audience by having 'Classic FM' content as an entrée to Radio 3. Not simply trailers telling their audience what's on Radio 3.

As far as Classic FM is concerned (and it had a bad quarter), if Radio 3's classical music programmes, erm, 'simplify or reduce the intellectual content of (esp. published or broadcast material) in order to appeal to a larger number of people' that's competing (unfairly) with a commercial rival. If Radio 2 has one or two light classical programmes that isn't, as a station, competing because the great majority of its output is MOR pop.

[antongould]

.....As for radio, Radio 2 is thought to be not distinctive enough. For me, the aim should be to get Radio 2 to help build the audience by having 'Classic FM' content as an entrée to Radio 3. Not simply trailers telling their audience what's on Radio 3.

Totally agree ......

[Frances_iom]

I've given up on most of R3 other than evening concert and COTW - elsewhere it seems to me to be pop classics interspersed between trailers which appear to be the main product pushed by the Beeb - even the evening concert seems to be mostly drawn from a restricted repertoire these days. Not sure how R3 is supposed to be distinctive - maybe it is having even more intrusive adverts than CFm.