Contacting the BBC

[french frank]

If you want to contact the BBC e.g. to say how much you've appreciated the Sound of Cinema:

Controller of Radio 3, Roger Wright hangs out at:

Broadcasting House
Portland Place
London W1A 1AA

But, for my money, the film music season - like it or hate it - was a gimmick which will be over soon and will benefit Radio 3 longterm (in my opinion) not one whit. Far more important are the recent cuts which will really damage Radio 3's ability to deliver a reasonable, high quality, arts/cultural service. If you have views, write/phone/email about that (too).

The BBC Director-General, Tony Hall, can be contacted via the same address.

The BBC Chairman, Chris Patten, is at:

BBC Trust,
180 Great Portland Street,
London W1W 5QZ

All these gentlemen can be emailed by using the BBC address formula (names as given in the personal form above) firstname.secondname at bbc.co.uk

Here's a useful tip about ringing the BBC (discovered by experience). The number is 03700 100 222 . Note, this puts you through to Capita, the private agency that handles complaints for the BBC (I asked and it was confirmed).

You will be offered two options to leave feedback. If you do nothing, the options will be offered again. If you still do nothing, a voice will say "I'm sorry - we have not been able to detect a response. If you hold on, you will be put through to one of our agents." This at least gets you through to a human being.

[My own experience was of an intelligent, sympathetic 'agent' who listened to what I had to say in a way that suggested that he was well trained to deal with angry rants. The snag was that he probably didn't fully grasp what I was on about. The upside is that your call will be logged - and may well eventually be reported to someone who does understand.]

Up to you

Should of course have said that they are LORD Patten and LORD Hall if you're writing a letter. I used the other names which appear to work as email addresses - not that either of them are likely to see anything personally. They are surrounded by bodyguards

[DracoM]

Fantastically helpful.

bump

[Flay]

[My own experience was of an intelligent, sympathetic 'agent' who listened to what I had to say in a way that suggested that he was well trained to deal with angry rants. The snag was that he probably didn't fully grasp what I was on about. The upside is that your call will be logged - and may well eventually be reported to someone who does understand.]

I had a pleasant conversation when I phoned yesterday. The young man was clearly typing in what I was saying, so I think this should get through to somebody higher up.

[edashtav]

Thank you for this clear and helpful guide.

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

Thank you for this clear and helpful guide.

[doversoul1]

I found this thread most helpful for sorting out, organising and expressing what and how to say. Collective wisdom of the Forum:

What do radio listeners want? on Ideas and theory

http://www.for3.org/forums/showthread.php?9427-What-do-radio-listeners-want

[Old Grumpy]

Very helpful post FF.

[french frank]

Very helpful post FF.

Should of course have said that they are LORD Patten and LORD Hall if you're writing a letter. I used the other names which appear to work as email addresses - not that either of them are likely to see anything personally. They are surrounded by bodyguards

[french frank]

Someone has just forwarded the reply to a complaint to Radio 3 re the recent/current film music saturation:

It says in explanation: "By joining with the rest of the BBC in this short season, attention has helpfully been drawn to Radio 3 across a wide spectrum of BBC audiences who would not be natural listeners to the station. This is a requirement of our Service Licence Review, conducted by the BBC Trust in 2011, which obliges the station to reach out to the widest audience, while maintaining the station's distinctiveness."

1. Why is it 'helpful' to attract the attention of audiences who would not be natural listeners to Radio 3?

2. Ah, we have the answer: "This is a requirement of our Service Licence Review, conducted by the BBC Trust in 2011, which obliges the station to reach out to the widest audience ..."

Hang on a tick. The Trust Review 2011, p 30, §24 says: "We endorse Radio 3’’s broad strategy to look for ways to be more accessible and welcoming. In their submission to this review, BBC management stated their intention to continue with this approach in order to encourage sampling amongst audiences. We believe there is some potential to extend the core audience to those who might appreciate the station’’s distinctive and challenging offer but who are discouraged from listening by their perception that it can at times be inaccessible and daunting. Developing a welcoming tone, particularly in the breakfast and drive-time slots, will encourage these potential listeners to sample the high-quality programming on offer which will in turn increase Radio 3’’s delivery of the public purposes."

So where is the Trust 'requiring' and 'obliging' Radio 3 to do this? Radio 3 cooked up the idea, sent it in to the Trust and the Trust said 'yes, that sounds as if it might work'.

Or have I missed something?

[Zucchini]

If in the first sentence of the reply to the complaint you delete "helpfully" & replace it by "hopefully" & stop there - the explanation would be tenable & truthful.

Yes, as you suggest, the actual statement is an unintelligent muddle.

[french frank]

If in the first sentence of the reply to the complaint you delete "helpfully" & replace it by "hopefully" & stop there - the explanation would be tenable & truthful.

Yes, as you suggest, the actual statement is an unintelligent muddle.

Even more, I'm now looking at a letter written by the review's lead Trustee, David Liddiment, and dated 11 June 2013. The fourth paragraph reads:

"We acknowledge that Radio 3 has changed the nature of some of its daytime programming in the past two years [i.e. since the 2011 Trust review] and that the changes are linked to Radio 3 management's proposals, which we considered in the review of making the stations more accessible to potential new listeners."

So it's balderdash to suggest that they have to do this because the Trust review requires it and obliges them to do so. I can only think that R3 has an ambition to gain a much larger audience. But why would the Controller of Radio 3 want to do that?

[Russ]

Because he thinks that ambition, or a message embodying that ambition, will result in the least amount of grief and interference from the Trust?

Russ

[french frank]

Because he thinks that ambition, or a message embodying that ambition, will result in the least amount of grief and interference from the Trust?

Russ

Well, it's back to that good old tangle of what's the Trust's business and what is management's. I seem to remember the Charter and Agreement mentioned something about what was subject to the Trusts' 'approval' - and the review seemed to be be about exactly that - benevolently approving of what management proposed. There might be a distinction about the strategy and the tactics - the latter being left to the managers. Either way there seems no mention of a 'requirement' nor of an 'obligation' even to reach this 'widest audience' - which means what exactly?

[french frank]

I seem to remember the Charter and Agreement mentioned something about what was subject to the Trusts' 'approval'

Yes, I think it's Functions of the Trust Charter §24 (2) e) 'approving individual strategic or financial proposals where they stand to have significant implications for the fulfilment of the purpose remits [...]'