Today's Observer

[Guest]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2011/oct/30/bbc-arab-spring-impartiality-enquiry?INTCMP=SRCH

Peter Preston's views on the future of R3 (go to the last two paragraphs - it has more prominence in the real newspaper!)

Not really the suggestion we were hoping for?

[french frank]

Peter Preston's views on the future of R3 (go to the last two paragraphs - it has more prominence in the real newspaper!)

Not really the suggestion we were hoping for?

Typical journalist that doesn't know his subject.

What does it matter how big the drop is if you haven't analysed what it dropped from? If you have an average reach one quarter and drop 5.6% - that's bad. If you have a pretty good reach one quarter and drop back 5.6% to average again, it's a quite different story.

Last quarter, reach 2.052m. By my figures since 1999, reach average is 2.032m, median 2.021m. A large chunk of this recent drop is due to the collapse in the breakfast reach which for reasons I can't fathom (extra promotion somewhere?) shot up in the previous two quarters to unbelievable heights.

Pity there's nowhere to add comments

[amateur51]

Typical journalist that doesn't know his subject....


Pity there's nowhere to add comments

I spotted that, ff. Perhaps a message directly to PP with some judicious facts, if you have the time?

[mercia]

is Radio 3 "the most expensive channel per listener", as stated?

[VodkaDilc]

Typical journalist that doesn't know his subject.
:

That's the thing that surprised me. I don't see PP as a typical journalist, but as an elder statesman of ex-newspaper editors. His views are normally well-considered and thoughtful. Could this be what the average intelligent non-R3 listener might be thinking?

[french frank]

That's the thing that surprised me. I don't see PP as a typical journalist, but as an elder statesman of ex-newspaper editors. His views are normally well-considered and thoughtful. Could this be what the average intelligent non-R3 listener might be thinking?

I'm sure it is - but it is based on misinformation (I've just been out to get the print copy - thanks for the tip-off - but haven't read it yet). He may be intelligent, but it just looks like another example of special pleading for 'what I think is important'. So local radio news is important - well, why not point out that a lot of local radio is pop music and banter?

mercia

is Radio 3 "the most expensive channel per listener", as stated?

Assuming that he meant 'radio station', no it isn't. Nor is it the most expensive in actual money. I would suspect that it isn't the most expensive per listener hour either, given that it's not the most expensive per listener, but would need to check the figures.

The thing is, they move the goalposts. I say it's not the most expensive per listener (I imagine that would be the Gaelic or Welsh language services) and they'll say, Ah, yes, but in terms of, and not counting blah blah blah .... If that's what they mean they should say: It's not actually the most expensive per listener because .... but, in terms of ... Then we get the perspective.

DQF budget projections suggest that in actual money it will have slipped below Radio 1 to be the least expensive of the national network stations. So let's as near as annihilate Radio 3, shall we? At which point for most expensive per listener ... in terms of, and not counting blah blah ... Radio 5Live comes into the frame, between a third and a half the listeners of Radio 2 yet 33% more expensive.

I haven't read Preston's full article yet, but ... 'music'? In the first place far more expensive than 'music' on R3 is drama, by a factor of ... a lot. Plus the whole point about a lot of the musical output is that it isn't readily available elsewhere. If Preston is looking for ways to save money, why not suggest selling off Radio 1 and Radio 2?

[Was this a rant?]

[Osborn]

mercia 'Is radio 3 the most expensive channel per listener as stated?'
Assuming that he meant 'radio station', no it isn't [the most expensive]. Nor is it the most expensive in actual money. I would suspect that it isn't the most expensive per listener hour either, given that it's not the most expensive per listener, but would need to check the figures.

Measured as cost per listener hour it is the most expensive BBC network station by far (by a factor of up to 10x)

[amcluesent]

Lefty Gruadian hack's knee-jerk bias that Radio 3 is 'elitest', therefore unspeakably wicked?

[MrGongGong]

Lefty Gruadian hack's knee-jerk bias that Radio 3 is 'elitest', therefore unspeakably wicked?

why is it "lefty" ?
our cultural institutions (University Music Departments, Symphony Orchestras etc etc ) are under threat from those would it would be difficult to describe as "lefty" ! The current government (and their fellow yellow travellers !) wouldn't know culture if it bit them on the bum , and I doubt they have ever voluntarily read a book or been to a performance ............
The knee jerk defence of "local" radio and TV always seems odd to me , this IS an area where the commercial sector does it much better
what commercial radio station is going to broadcast "The Great Learning" ???

[french frank]

Measured as cost per listener hour it is the most expensive BBC network station by far (by a factor of up to 10x)

Network station, yes - but these are the national, mass audience stations. R3 isn't in the same business.

R3 last year cost £715,000 pw, with an average of 12.5m listener hours. Back of envelope (E&OE) says that's 5.7p per lh.

Asian Network cost £165,000pw, average lh pw were, exactly, acc. to RAJAR, 2.536m = 6.5p per lh. I was actually looking for the figures for BBC Radio nan Gàidheal (annual cost £3.8m, £73,000 pw) which I suspect is the most expensive plh, but RAJAR doesn't seem to record the listening data.

All figs E&OE - corrections welcomed.

The parliamentary select committe has rumbled the fact that the BBC loves the metric 'cost per listener hour' because it disguises the huge sums paid to individual presenters.

[handsomefortune]

MrGongGong;95716]why is it "lefty" ?


i don't think it's 'lefty' either. but it's exactly what BOTH rupert murdoch, and the beeb's pat younge think .... that arts & culture, and therefore the beeb is 'elitist'. imo it's codswallop, relating to greed; and a (short term)? beeb career, in the latter's case.

"defence of "local" radio and TV always seems odd to me , this IS an area where the commercial sector does it much better

defo. agreed mrgonggong - so why the hell duplicate? and, at the expense of something that is genuinely unique - r3?

pp Paying for something necessary is one thing. Paying from habit, oblivious of change, is absolutely another (as local radio news and debate, which can't be replaced, goes silent).

BUT nothing serious or unique, relating to localism, eg public concerns regarding local changes, is represented by beeb local tv/radio. it's longsince considered a conflict of interest, by the beeb! local tv/radio therefore has no function ....and nor will r3 have, if it's dumbed down, and diluted to cfm levels.

Paying from habit, oblivious of change,

as if!

i wish the beeb was oblivious of change, as it might not take such blundering, suicidal risks.....ultimately to its own detriment.

[french frank]

I've whizzed this off to the Observer, but as it will probably not get published I'll post it here instead :

Dear Sir,

Peter Preston in last week’s Observer (How can Radio 3 survive uncut?) appeared to base his opinion on a cursory glance at the latest listening figures and a woeful ignorance of what Radio 3 broadcasts.

The 5.6% fall in reach which he mentions was in the context of some recent high results: two quarters ago the station was within a whisker of achieving a record.

Indeed, this fall seems to be almost entirely due to a collapse in the listening to the controversial ‘Breakfast Show’ – part of BBC management’s misbegotten effort to appeal to Classic FM, Radio 2 and any other listeners except Radio 3's.

Mr Preston goes on to imply that Radio 3 is a ‘24-hour classical music station’. No jazz, then? No world music? No arts discussion? Most egregious omission of all – no drama? In recent weeks the station has offered new productions of Shakespeare, Corneille and Ibsen, as well as contemporary plays. More would be welcome but are not affordable.

The culture-starved devotee of the arts can get as much from an occasional visit to Radio 3 for something unique as someone else gets from daily Chris Evans or the Today programme for weeks on end. On relative cost, according to the BBC’s latest budget projections, Radio 3 will soon slip below Radio 1 to become the least expensive of the network radio stations.

As for the defence of local radio news, what percentage of local radio output is actually news, rather than easy listening and quizzes?

Yours sincerely

french frank

It does make me sound a bit of an apologist for R3, but, hell, I am !

[Stillhomewardbound]

I was thinking at the weekend at the 85% of BBC output that I never access. The soaps, the makeover shows, the floggit things, that nature programmes, the sports, the sports and the sports., so I am not remotely inclined to see myself as part of some overly indulged middle class elite that doesn't pay its way.

[french frank]

I was thinking at the weekend at the 85% of BBC output that I never access. The soaps, the makeover shows, the floggit things, that nature programmes, the sports, the sports and the sports., so I am not remotely inclined to see myself as part of some overly indulged middle class elite that doesn't pay its way.

As I've pointed out before, if each licence fee payer thinks of what his/her fee is spent on, the vast majority of that fee goes on programmes that he/she doesn't either watch or listen to. Radio 3 is peanuts. And those interested in the arts are surely the worst catered for.

[amateur51]

Cracking letter to The Observer, french frank, not the least bit fuddy-duddy at all. Why, it almost made me feel proud of R3! Whereas I'm just deeply saddened at the thought of the Halloween In Tune and the losses that the once-excellent station has suffered

All power to your Peter Preston-poking elbow, french frank!