Wright defends dumbing down again.

[french frank]

I'm just getting it copied. This may be a breakthrough... In the past RadioCentre (the commercial radio umbrella group) has complained to the Trust and been ignored; Global Radio (owners of Classic FM) have complained - and been ignored; but this is the first time, to my knowledge, that Classic FM has spoken out publicly.

Meanwhile, I have just posted a letter to BBC Complaints reminding them that they 'aimed' to provide replies within '10 working days' and they had now had over 50 working days (excluding Christmas and New Year) to reply to our complaint about the cinema season.

Our complaint pointed out that the interactive aspect of the 'cinema season' breached BBC Editorial Guidelines in copying what Classic FM has been doing for several years (the listeners' Movie Music annual poll); that the R3 evening concert based on that poll separately breached Editorial Guidelines; and that Radio 3 misled listeners who complained by suggesting that the Trust review had a requirement 'obliging' Radio 3 to reach out to 'the widest audience': it doesn't. [I included an apology if they had rplied within the past few days]

On verra....

Response in today's Sunday Telegraph letters from one Darren Henley:

inter alia - "Mr Wright's recent editorial changes move Radio 3 even further away from its previous distinctive position, making it harder than ever for Radio 3 to justify its privileged public funding. The BBC appears intent on moving its network into the space occupied by a commercial radio competitor in a market of only two stations".

Sorry - can't seem to find online copy.

OG

[aka Calum Da Jazbo]

Some saw this a long time ago - there is no stewardship merely a mechanism to spin it out to his golden retirement then in a cost cutting gesture the BBC will offer to relinquish a national channel to a commercial broadcaster and the Americanisation of UK radio is near complete

it is not that organised or purposeful, it is truly worse than that ...

[french frank]

Darren Henley's letter is online here, plus one from a listener.

[Old Grumpy]

Thanks ff - don't know why I didn't find it yesterday - perhaps I just didn't scroll down far enough.

OG

[Serial_Apologist]

I'm just getting it copied. This may be a breakthrough... In the past RadioCentre (the commercial radio umbrella group) has complained to the Trust and been ignored; Global Radio (owners of Classic FM) have complained - and been ignored; but this is the first time, to my knowledge, that Classic FM has spoken out publicly.

Meanwhile, I have just posted a letter to BBC Complaints reminding them that they 'aimed' to provide replies within '10 working days' and they had now had over 50 working days (excluding Christmas and New Year) to reply to our complaint about the cinema season.

Our complaint pointed out that the interactive aspect of the 'cinema season' breached BBC Editorial Guidelines in copying what Classic FM has been doing for several years (the listeners' Movie Music annual poll); that the R3 evening concert based on that poll separately breached Editorial Guidelines; and that Radio 3 misled listeners who complained by suggesting that the Trust review had a requirement 'obliging' Radio 3 to reach out to 'the widest audience': it doesn't. [I included an apology if they had rplied within the past few days]

On verra....

Hats off to you, french frank.

[Don Petter]

DH's points (which I agree with) would be better served if his maths was less exaggerated:

'Classic FM reaches an audience of around 5.5 million people every week, over two and a half times more than its subsidised competitor, Radio 3'

This implies a R3 audience of under 1.6 million, but I thought the latest RAJARs indicated just over 2 million?

(Though the RAJARs have always confused me, with weasel terms like 'reach', so perhaps I'm wrong.)

[french frank]

DH's points (which I agree with) would be better served if his maths was less exaggerated:

'Classic FM reaches an audience of around 5.5 million people every week, over two and a half times more than its subsidised competitor, Radio 3'

This implies a R3 audience of under 1.6 million, but I thought the latest RAJARs indicated just over 2 million?

Depends which way round you do it. 2m x 2 = 4m. 2m x 3 = 6m, so 5.5m is roughly halfway between?

[Rolmill]

DH's points (which I agree with) would be better served if his maths was less exaggerated:

'Classic FM reaches an audience of around 5.5 million people every week, over two and a half times more than its subsidised competitor, Radio 3'

This implies a R3 audience of under 1.6 million, but I thought the latest RAJARs indicated just over 2 million?

(Though the RAJARs have always confused me, with weasel terms like 'reach', so perhaps I'm wrong.)

Well I suspect it is Mr Henley's english which is at fault rather than his maths. Presumably he meant to say "...two and a half times that of ....Radio 3", in which case 5.5mn divided by 2.5 equals 2.2mn, so Mr Henley's comment would be consistent with the latest RAJAR results (just over 2mn). "Two and a half times more than" is a poor way of expressing this, but I think it's clear what he means.

Now if he had said that CFM's audience is 250% higher than R3's, then you would be right, that would imply a R3 audience of just under 1.6mn. But he didn't...

Pedant attack over, I too agree with his comments.

[teamsaint]

Mr Henley seems to assume that CFM and R3 are in a head to head fight for the same audience.
This is surely far from the true picture.

[aka Calum Da Jazbo]

Mr Henley seems to assume that CFM and R3 are in a head to head fight for the same audience.
This is surely far from the true picture.

alas so does RW

[VodkaDilc]

Mr Henley seems to assume that CFM and R3 are in a head to head fight for the same audience.
This is surely far from the true picture.

....but it's heading that way.

[Don Petter]

Well I suspect it is Mr Henley's english which is at fault rather than his maths. Presumably he meant to say "...two and a half times that of ....Radio 3", in which case 5.5mn divided by 2.5 equals 2.2mn, so Mr Henley's comment would be consistent with the latest RAJAR results (just over 2mn). "Two and a half times more than" is a poor way of expressing this, but I think it's clear what he means.

Now if he had said that CFM's audience is 250% higher than R3's, then you would be right, that would imply a R3 audience of just under 1.6mn. But he didn't...

Pedant attack over, I too agree with his comments.

More or higher, I don't think pedantry comes into it. It's either very sloppy (and incorrect) English or deliberate exaggeration, neither of which adds credence to his cause, which is a pity.

[Frances_iom]

More or higher, I don't think pedantry comes into it. It's either very sloppy (and incorrect) English or deliberate exaggeration, neither of which adds credence to his cause, which is a pity.

He is probably an Arts or Mediah 'graduate' - there is little point criticising their grasp of numeracy (just listen to most if not all news broadcasts that mangle % rises etc) - if he came from an advertising background then I assume blatant lying is taught on entry to that trade

[french frank]

Let's face it: most of us are innumerate. I can't see why, if you simply assume that the word 'reaches' has not been repeated at the end of the sentence i.e. is understood, doesn't that make it right?

[Old Grumpy]

Mr Henley seems to assume that CFM and R3 are in a head to head fight for the same audience.
This is surely far from the true picture.

I would interpret his comments as suggesting that RW may be driving Radio 3 that way. I don't think this is Mr Henley's opinion of the (current) R3 audience.

OG